Thursday morning’s session at the Papandreou Foundation’s Symi Symposium focused on the "green economy": how to craft economic policy that both internalizes the costs of a carbon-based economy, and creates incentives to move away from carbon-intensive energy sources. The presenters in this session were Joseph Stiglitz, professor of economics at Columbia University and former member of the Clinton administration, and Angelo Consoli, Director, Codeco s.s., European Affairs and Progressive Communication.

Professor Stiglitz’s presentation picked up on a theme that has run throughout the conference: the question of the best economic mechanisms to address climate change. Stiglitz argued (as have others) that a carbon tax is preferable to a cap and trade system (the model embraced by the Kyoto treaty, and much of the business world). Because changes in the market away from fossil fuels will inevitably make those energy sources less expensive, carbon taxes keep their prices high, reflecting the costs imposed on society by carbon emissions. Stiglitz also argued that such taxation responds to another reality: market-based approaches won’t work by itself, and government investments in infrastructure, research, and preparedness will be needed to round out a comprehensive approach to fighting climate change.

Other costs that the developed world likely will face stems from advancing the concepts of energy security and independence. If countries like China and India act in accordance with these concepts, that inevitably means that they’ll be burning more coal — China is already building coal-fired power plants at the rate of one/week. This could be disastrous in terms of climate change, but it points to the need for developing countries to build their energy infrastructure. If countries like China and India have to impede their own development to play a part in a global response to the climate crisis, Stiglitz argued that they should probably be compensated.

All of these question are important for the next round of climate negotiations. Stiglitz noted that in order to bring the developing world into this process, measuring carbon emissions on a per capita basis will be critical, as will a strict enforcement system. His last point: trade sanctions will likely be the most effective means of enforcing adherence to carbon mitigation strategies adopted by the international community.

Consoli’s presentation dealt with a completely different issue: the necessity (his argument) of developing the hydrogen economy in order to address global warming. He argued that one of the major impediments facing the growth of renewable generation technologies is storage, and that by using renewables such as wind and solar power to electrolyze water and create hydrogen, we can overcome that impediment. Consoli noted that the development of such systems, which would be decentralized, also has the benefit of empowering (in every sense of the word) people around the globe without access to electricity, or the capital to create it with current centralized generation technologies. The economic effect of such a transition involves a move from carbon-intensive energy sources, which require high amounts capital, to renewable sources that require high amounts of labor, so renewable production of hydrogen as an energy storage mechanism ends up boosting employment and economic growth.

Consoli presented the EU Parliament’s Written Declaration on energy, and it’s five pillars:

• Efficiency
• Renewables
• CO2 Reduction
• Hydrogen
• Smart Grids

As you might imagine, the questions and responses came quickly and furiously to these presentations, and included thoughts about the political reality of carbon taxation, the idea that such taxes create a right to pollute, the problem of hydrogen generation from "dirty" sources, and the methods by which governments can encourage their citizens to accept changes that could be painful in the short term. As usual, I’m giving a quick and dirty overview here — feel free to ask questions or offer your own responses.

Photo: A view of the Mediterranean

Editor’s note: I started working on this post yesterday, and after writing and writing and writing, I realized it was turning into a David post While I heard a lot of interesting discussion yesterday, I’ll try to stick to an overview of main ideas and questions, and then respond to your comments and questions. Perhaps we can extend the symposium into our own space here…

This morning, I got to attend my first major session at the Papandreou Foundation’s Symi Symposium. Entitled "Energy in Flux: Safe Passage to a Future of Alternatives," the session consisted of three presentations on transitioning to a new energy future, and a lively debate over the challenges and opportunities created by the need to shift energy priorities in the face of global climate change.

Overall, I was delighted by the optimistic tone that ran throughout these presentations (which, in some cases, became points of contention in later open discussion): all three speakers acknowledged the enormity of the environmental challenges we face, and noted that combined efforts of the public and private sectors will be necessary to mobilize the larger public to action. In each presentation, the speaker focused on public involvement (in the roles of consumers and citizens), and made the case that an educated populace will provide the momentum for adoption of clean, renewable energy options. Let me just give a very brief overview of the main points offered by each speaker.

The first presentation focused on consumers’ roles in transitioning to a low-carbon energy infrastructure. Dr. Joseph Stanislaw noted that, traditionally, when we talk about energy, we talk about supply: where does it come from? He argued that a shift in mindset and language towards the services energy provides creates greater opportunity for transitioning towards more sustainable energy options. Consumers don’t want energy created from coal, or from solar power, for that matter: they want the services that reliable energy provides. By focusing on meeting this demand, we can address our contributions to climate change by implementing currently available technologies (particularly conservation technologies) while also working on the next generation of cleantech solutions. Consumers can be empowered to contribute to lower consumption by educating them on the "low hanging fruit" available: CFLs, for example. Finally, Stanislaw noted that the private sector is well ahead of the (US) government in recognizing these opportunities: he specifically discussed Wal-Mart’s sustainability efforts.

The second and third presentations both focused on engaging populations as citizens in transitioning towards cleaner energy technologies. The first, presented by James Fishkin of Stanford University of the two described experiments conducted by Texas utilities in "deliberative democracy": representative groups of customers were brought together in person, and through television, to discuss opportunities to purchase "green" power through their utilities. The sessions served to both educate the people gathered, and to listen to their concerns. These sessions produced amazing results: before these sessions, 52% of these consumers will willing to pay more for green energy; afterwards, 84% expressed willingness. The speaker noted the the increased prices don’t have to be much larger: even a $.25 addition to customers’ monthly bills would generate millions of dollars for increased renewable infrastructures. The success of the Texas experiment has led to other requests to hold such events: they’ve been repeated in Nebraska and Nova Scotia (with similar positive outcomes), and more will be held in Vermont, and as part of the next National Governor’s Association meeting. The third speaker, John Panarenos, provided the results of a similar effort in Europe: when asked, the representative samplingof citizens choose "energy and environment" as the most pressing issues facing the EU. The combination of terms was important — when the word "environment" was presented by itself, it didn’t receive nearly as high numbers.

As you might imagine, other symposium delegates had plenty of questions and even challenges for these speakers. A few points offered:

• The "small steps" position of the first presentation was challenged with the Chinese proverb "You can’t cross a ravine with small steps": ultimately, the enormity of these problems require much bigger responses.
• The market focus (which was not exclusive — he wasn’t arguing for "letting the market fix the problems") of the first speaker’s presentation was also questioned, with at least one respondent noting that we must focus on what scientists say is necessary, rather than what is possible in a consumer market.
• Several respondents also argued for more top-down regulation — in fact, that seemed to be a major point of debate: a focus on grassroots action (which is what I heard coming from these presentations) vs. government regulation.

Needless to say, this session was fascinating and provocative: as the first speaker noted, we can’t separate energy issues from climate change, so these kinds of discussions are necessary. I’ve just given the briefest of overviews here — feel free to offer comments or ask questions…

The evening sessions at the symposium are shorter and a bit less formal. Tuesday’s evening’s focused on a presentation by Kim Alter (Oxford University) on the concept of social entrepreneurship and social enterprise: the hybridizing of business and non-profit models into a unique endeavor that harnesses market forces in innovative ways to address social (and environmental) challenges. As with the morning session, the discussion was lively following the presentation. The concept of social enterprise as a distinct category, rather than another form of non-profit, was a major question for participants in the discussion.

Tomorrow: Excursion day…. with lots of photos from Paros and Antiparos….

We've got a couple of good questions that have shown up in the Discussion Forum over the past day:

1) GO member attacat asks about using biodegradable trash bags/bin liners:

The bin liners that are commonly used are made of synthetic polymers like polyethylene and polypropylene, and these are not considered biodegradable. Eventually, these plastics will break down, but only after being submitted to decades of heat and light.

Green Your Office proposes a new technology called d2w totally degradable plastics. Apparently, these refuse sacks will “degrade turning harmlessly into CO2 and water”. I may be missing something here, but isn’t CO2 one of the main gases that the greenhouse effect has been blamed on? Are biodegradable bin liners actually harmful to the environment as well?

Got an answer to this one? Is the amount of CO2 produced by these products negligible when compared to the impact of plastic?

2) GO member tamilee is likely not the only person with this question:

Where can I find home solar power systems and how they work explained in the simplest terms possible? I'm looking for a solar power for dummies website or book. I have been interested in solar power for decades but whenever I try to learn about it there is so much jargon used I just get lost.

There is a Complete Idiot's Guide to Solar Power to Your Home; the second edition will be released in May. Any thoughts on this book, or other recommendations?

As always, please answer these questions in forum where they were posted…

Today, our friends at Solar Kismet conclude their series on CitizenRE. The first two parts of this series are available here and here.

The most common response from CitizenRE supporters¹ is that since no money changes hands, no harm is done, even if CitizenRE doesn’t deliver any or is delayed in delivering their promised solar systems or manufacturing plants. “Who cares if CitizenRE fails? At least they tried.”

This is a really limited point of view… At least some of the misgivings about CitizenRE are their isolated, and often naive, approach to transforming the industry. There are a string of stakeholders involved in the development of the evolving solar industry. Other solar businesses, non-profit organizations, investors, the government, and policy makers played an important part in the successful growth of the solar industry to date, and into the future.

CitizenRE could be an amazing success or a total failure. There’s not a lot of information to judge them on, other than what they tell us. I would define their short-term success (the next two years) as building a manufacturing plant and setting up 1,000 or more rental systems. If they can do these two things, which are astronomically lower than their own projections, they will have accomplished something significant. Based on a) their current progress, b) their lack of focus, and c) the high number of “moon shots,” I personally think the delays will continue and the actual accomplishments will be limited.

However, it might be constructive to look at the question of CitizenRE’s impact on the various stakeholders. How does their success or failure affect everyone? In the interest of space, I’ve limited my discussion to four main stakeholders:

Consumers: This is the first stakeholder everyone thinks about, and includes both commercial and residential sectors². Since part 2 was published, I’ve struggled with the passion of the debate on both sides, trying to understand why this company in particular has resulted in such a strong reaction. I think the existing industry is most sensitive to disaffecting residential consumers, and CitizenRE’s apparently hollow marketing effort targeted them first and foremost (September 2007 installation timelines have now been extended into 2008 and beyond). The proverbial black-eye looms potentially large.

No money has changed hands, but goodwill has…CitizenRE’s failure isn’t just one less installation to any one consumer. It is their (and their friends’ and families’) future interest in supporting the technology or additional federal and state policies. CitizenRE’s failure will also create stereotypes in a lot of minds about the viability of solar who never “signed up,” even as the industry changes (You wouldn’t believe the number of people who still cite the solar hot water debacles of the 1980’s.). CitizenRE’s success provides obvious consumer benefits, insurance against electricity price increases, and potentially on a scale and in a sector no one thought was possible.

Interestingly, I don’t see everyone everywhere adopting this rental model, though. Why? Risk and reward. As electricity prices increase and solar prices decrease, you get a greater return from owning a system. Owning a system is an investment rather than an insurance policy.

Installers: Installers represent the market segment who could see the most direct financial repercussions from CitizenRE’s failure by putting their potential customers in a holding pattern. Most of CitizenRE customers may never have purchased their own solar system in the next 6 months…many over the next 2 years. But if 100,000 people “sign-up,” 100,000 “wait and see,” and 10% of those would have considered purchasing a system over the next two years. Thus, 20,000 potential sales were turned away. CitizenRE has now acknowledged this potential and when customers sign up, they are given a greater amount of disclosure about the possibility of delivery delays; it remains to be seen how this issue will play out.

CitizenRE’s success will put some people out of business, but frankly, that’s capitalism. It could also represent a new set of opportunities for existing or new installer businesses. An important part of moving forward is the training and use of certified installers, which CitizenRE has not appeared to immediately address (which is not surprising given all that’s on their plate)³ .

Investors: Investors themselves are probably the market segment that I have the least bit of personal concern over…They need to perform due diligence in determining where to invest their money. But a colossal failure, by CitizenRE or any other major solar endeavor, could create a chill in the ability of future technology and ventures to raise similar capital. Renewable energy is the current investor darling. Everyone is falling over themselves to push money into CleanTech investments, reminiscent of the dot com frenzy. Will an over-exuberance over poorly-thought out companies cause a similar industry correction? CitizenRE’s apparent colossal nature, and the results it does or doesn’t accomplish, makes its current and future peers highly scrutinized targets.

Policy Makers: Solar is a subsidy-driven industry. So is wind energy, coal, petroleum, and natural gas. It is politically much easier to offer carrots than it is to take them away. I guarantee that policy makers are starting to hear about CitizenRE, but their degree of understanding is often limited. “If this company can do free solar, why do you need this tax credit? Rebates? Portfolio standard?” “Why should we start or extend our incentives if they all go to CitizenRE?” CitizenRE needs these incentives as much as anyone else. They aren’t exempt from solar economics, even with their purported vertical integration cost savings. The perception of market readiness can be easily muddied, and their model isn’t terribly repeatable, given the billions of dollars at hand that are needed to get started.

There is the distinct possibility that this flurry of excitement is all for naught. CitizenRE may fade from sight this year, or in five years, and do absolutely nothing. I’m really suspicious about the solvency of their business plan and their ability to execute it. I really don’t appreciate that they’ve created a hollow frenzy in retail consumers before their supply chain and installation structure had any framework. I think they need to focus on doing one or two things well, rather than talking about everything. Or they could prove me entirely wrong…

No matter your opinion, they aren’t going away, and we’ve reached something of a debate impasse. Consumers can read the opinions, largely based on conjecture and one-sided information, and make up their own minds. But until CitizenRE takes concrete and public steps toward their goals or releases verifiable information, not a lot of additional constructive debate can occur (if any of it has thus far been constructive in the first place).

Notes:

1. Interestingly, the most passionate and often argumentative stances don’t appear to come from CitizenRE itself, but from EcoPreneurs and seemingly average consumers. CitizenRE itself has made belated efforts to acknowledge the significance of the existing industry and their desire to respect and integrate within it. However, CitizenRE’s involvement in major solar organizations has been non-existent, even if they are “members” (having registered as the “Citizens Electric Corporation”).
2. If CitizenRE is a business interested in profitability, and that low-hanging fruit represents the best opportunity for stable profits and capturing the best market before a competitor, their major focus on the residential retrofit market is the least profitable approach. CitizenRE is essentially leasing roof space, which is not a particularly limited commodity. Why deal with 100 consumers, contracts, and installations when you can deal with one? Why not work to maximize your most profitable sectors before your competitors do? The most obvious answer is the ready political support that would come from involving average consumers in changing state or national policies. But with bills to pay, can a fledgling company afford this route?
3. The North American Board of Certified Energy Practioners (www.nabcep.org) is a highly recommended pathway for certification.

When most people hear the word "solar," they automatically think "expensive." Gary Reysa, the publisher of BuildItSolar.com, has demonstrated again and again that this doesn't have to be the case; with the right (easily-available) materials and a little time and elbow grease, almost anyone can add useful, valuable solar features to their home or other building.

Gary's $350 Solar Heater plan has gotten quite a bit of play both on- and off-line — I was one of a number of bloggers to write about it, and Home Power magazine and Mother Earth News have also featured the project. That's not surprising — for a really small investment in time and money, Gary now has a clean, green heater for his workshop. Keep in mind that he lives in Montana, too; if this works for him there, it will likely work for you, too.

Materials

Please note: I've included the dimensions from Gary's plan, but you'll probably need to adjust them. As he notes in the article from Home Power, you'll want to have as big a wall space as possible.

• 10 Suntuf corrugated polycarbonate panels, 2 x 8 ft.
• Black window screen, 4 x 70 ft.
• Lower sill & studs, 2 x 6s, 68 ft.
• Paint, caulk, lag screws, etc.
• Upper sill, 2 x 8s, 22 ft.
• Glazing 1 x 1 in. supports, 130 ft.
• Suntuf “wiggle” closure strips, 40 ft.
• 200 Screws with EPDM washers

Build Your Solar Heater

Gary's the pro here, so rather than trying to excerpt or edit his instructions, I'll let him take over… from the Mother Earth News and Home Power articles:

It took me about three, eight-hour days to build and install the collector. Follow these suggestions and you may be able to do it in less time!

1. First, measure your building’s south wall to determine what changes you will have to make to the collector design. Pay particular attention to the vertical height available and to stud spacing. Next, lay out the vent locations. They should be offset enough from the wall studs to allow the verticals to be lag-bolted from inside the building. Mark the vent locations on the inside and outside of the building to ensure no conflicts exist. After you are certain the layout is correct, take a deep breath, and cut all of the vents.
2. For the frame, cut the top sill long enough to lap over the end verticals by at least 1 inch (2.5 cm). Bevel the back of the top sill so that it slopes about 10 degrees when fitted against the siding. Next, cut all the verticals, noting that the two end verticals are longer because they extend below the lower sill. The tops of the verticals must be cut to match the slope of the top sill. Gang the verticals together and cut the notches for the two, 1- by 1-inch horizontal glazing supports.
3. Prime and paint everything. Although you do not need to repaint the siding under the collector, painting it a dark color will improve the collector’s efficiency slightly. Keep in mind that a muted version of this color will show through the collector screen, so be sure it meets your aesthetic sensibilities. After the paint has cured, mount all of the verticals to the siding. Take care to keep everything level, plumb, and straight—this will save you a lot of four-letter words later. I fastened the verticals to the wall sheathing and siding from the inside using lag bolts. If your siding is not strong enough for this, consider mounting the verticals from the outside, using lag screws through the verticals and into the wall studs.
4. Next, attach the top and bottom sills. Use flashing above the top sill if desired. Then, seal the collector frame with silicone caulk. Mount the battens that will support the screen absorber. Staple the window screen onto the battens. You can fold the edges of the screen to make it fit in the slightly less than 48-inch (122 cm) bay widths.
5. Make five 4- by 8-foot (1.2 x 2.4 m) glazing panels by joining pairs of the 26-inch-wide by 8-foot-long corrugated panels. Overlap the panels by one corrugation, and apply a light bead of silicone between the overlapped sheets. Fasten the overlapped corrugations to a 1- by 1-inch wood strip using screws with EPDM washers.
6. Install the horizontal 1- by 1-inch glazing support strips to the collector frame. The surface of the strips should sit flush with the surface of the collector’s frame when installed in the notches of the 2 by 6s. Do any cleanup, caulking, or other work you need to do inside the collector frame now! You won’t be able to get to the inside after the glazing is applied.
7. Next, mount the glazing panels. Install the “wiggle” closure strips, which fill in the contours of the corrugations, on the top and bottom sills. Run caulk beads on the first set of verticals and mount the first glazing panel section. (You’ll quickly find out how square your frame is.) Fasten the panel sections to the frame using screws with EPDM washers. Install the rest of the sections in the same way. Overlap each new section over the last section by one corrugation, using a bead of caulk in the overlap. Make the flapper valves for the ten inside top vents. I used two thicknesses of plastic garbage bag for each flapper. Before attaching the flapper, attach 1/2-inch hardware cloth over each vent. Then, staple the flappers along the top edge of the vent, just above the vent opening.

That's it! Want to find out more about the science behind this, or the performance of the unit. Check out the article.

Today’s guest post comes from our friends at Solar Kismet. You can find Part 1 of this series here.

The three most common reactions from many CitizenRE supporters when questioned about unrealistic goals is to:

1. Dismiss any questioning as being a solar industry conspiracy against the new competition. However, three other solar companies already offer a similar rental model, and you would be hard pressed to find any serious debate on their integrity.
2. Chastise the existing industry as having accomplished little and not having a real vision for the revolutionary ideas, even though the industry has grown at a rate of 40% annually over the last decade. Thousands of people work in the solar industry, many of whom have no vested financial interest in any one company, and a sizable portion are skeptical of CitizenRE’s claims.
3. Explain what CitizenRE isn’t rather than answering the substantive questions about what it is and can reasonably accomplish.

Ultimately, the skepticism of CitizenRE is founded in overstated plans that have relatively little supporting documentation, other than “trust us.” CitizenRE’s goals are ambitious to say the least:

• World’s Largest Solar Manufacturing Plant - Last June, Nanosolar (a company started in 2001 and backed by the Google founders) announced the construction of a 430 megawatt solar manufacturing facility, the world’s largest. Nanosolar’s new thin film technology was met with cautious optimism: as one industry insider put it, announcing and producing are two different things. CitizenRE states it intends to develop an even larger 500 megawatt solar manufacturing plant that will use a new combination of lower-quality silicon material. Originally slated to begin production in early 2007, the CitizenRE website now states a production goal of early 2008. In a recent interview, Sharp Solar, one of the world’s largest solar companies, indicated they have manufacturing lead times of 18-24 months under the best circumstances, which would further push CitizenRE’s new plant into 2009. The proposed plant is not on the radar of any solar news or industry analysts and CitizenRE has still not announced a location.
• New Solar Technology - CitizenRE’s new solar manufacturing plant will use a lower-purity silicon in the production of the solar panels, in hopes of lowering costs. All things being equal, this will result in a lower-efficiency solar panel. The new technology has no commercial track record. Furthermore, silicon supplies are tight, impacting multinational corporations like Sharp and Kyocera. CitizenRE will also need to deal with this tighter market.
• New Inverter Manufacturing Plant - Solar panels produce DC power, like batteries. Inverters convert the DC power into grid-compatible AC power. CitizenRE also intends to build their own inverter manufacturing plant.
• Third-Party Solar System Ownership - Three companies already offer “third-party ownership,” where a solar company owns and operates the solar system installed on a customer’s building. CitizenRE is similarly proposing to operate the third-party ownership model on residential homes, a scale over 200 times smaller. The also plan to do business in 30 or more states than existing companies currently operate. Industry analysts indicate that they cannot run any realistic scenarios where such a venture could be profitable.
• 100,000 Installations per Year - There are currently about 35,000 solar systems in the United States, with approximately 30,000 (PDF) of these coming in the last six years. CitizenRE originally had a stated goal of 100,000 installations per year, which has since been scaled back to a reported 25,000 per year.
• 2025 Vision - By 2025, CitizenRE has a vision to operate 25% of net electricity generation (presumably in the U.S.), 20% of peak capacity (also presumably in the U.S.), 330,000 megawatts of solar manufacturing capacity, and over 1 million megawatts of installed capacity. It is truly unclear how these are in the realm of reality. They will need to build 660 of their 500 megawatts plants in the next 18 years - that’s thirty-eight plants per year. And the first one has been delayed at least one year.

If any ONE of these things was announced by an unknown company, the idea would be met with serious skepticism. Frankly, if many of these things were announced by an established company, there would be skepticism. But the combination of industry-changing goals, all with serious learning curves, really brings into question CitizenRE’s basis of understanding. Could five established companies accomplish these goals, let alone one unknown?

CitizenRE’s business structure and start-up methodology also raise questions. As a multi-level marketing company, CitizenRE has recruited over 5,000 “ecopreneurs” who are not company employees, but rather associated with the company and will potentially receive a payment based on signing up other customers. Typically MLMs involve emotional sales pitches, sold from person to person, and can be associated with devolving into pyramid schemes, where a few top leaders make money by exploiting the lower ranks.

In CitizenRE’s case, money isn’t exchanging hands, which is frequently cited as a reason CitizenRE can’t be a scam. Instead, an equally powerful motivator is being used, one that drives the environmental movement: hope. CitizenRE is essentially promising THE energy, environmental and economic solution all rolled into one. It’s a powerful emotional driver that has resulted in the viral spread of CitizenRE’s ecopreneurs and potential customers, many of whom are no doubt one in the same, and whom may not understand the nuances of what they are selling or purchasing. Perhaps the promise of a future solar system is reason enough to participate, in leiu of immediate payment. Since ecopreneurs will ultimately be compensated (PDF) based on the number of systems they refer, misinformation and excessive hype has been the common marketing strategy. The company has since disapproved of such tactics, and ordered associates to stop using such tactics.

In addition to the sales force and resulting customers, CitizenRE will also need to train and recruit hundreds, if not thousands, of site inspectors and installers across the country. Not all homes will be suitable and every installation is unique, with the permitting and interconnecting process varying by each locality and electric company. Imagine trying to process 25,000 permits for a backyard deck, a common permitting request, in a few thousand cities. Now imagine doing so with a technology of which the inspectors are only vaguely aware. As permits delay things, installation quality will likely suffer in the name of making up speed and efficacy. And once the installation is complete, the system needs to be inspected for safety with the electric grid. Delays are inevitable at nearly every level of the sales and installation chain.

Ultimately, one wonders why they did it this way - marketing heavy and delivering lightly. Why not start building the manufacturing plant, which in order to raise money from investors or loans from banks, would have to show fiscal solvency in and of itself? Prove that idea. Why not start installing tens, and then hundreds of systems in the California first, the best market for solar systems, and build some industry experience and credibility? Prove that idea. Why not focus on doing one thing well before doing all things hypothetically? I am amazed at how far the hypothetical has taken this company.

Instead, CitizenRE has promised it all to everyone. There is basically nothing they haven’t decided they can do bigger and better than the existing solar industry, as if forging new paths is only a matter of an idea. But ideas are cheap and CitizenRE needs to hit grand slam after grand slam in order to come close to their vision. The shifting time frames and requests for patience have already started, and it is only a matter of time before various parts of the plan fall apart. The best businesses do one of two things - “promise and deliver” or “underpromise and overdeliver.” It’s kind of ironic that the industry is now abuzz about CitizenRE, a brand new company that hasn’t delivered anything…only promised.

Next Time: What effect might CitizenRE’s improbable success have on the industry? What about failure? (part 3 of 3)