Can Cleantech Produce "Ten Googles"?

Beacon Power energy storage, is clean techology. A new power grid, a new America. With smaller energy cells supporting smaller energy grids we can finally get away from coal and fossil fuels. We just have to think smaller, it woun't make America smaller, just much cleaner.

Get away from coal . . . at what cost? The U.S. pollutes far less than any other country per GDP. When you are are heavily industrialized nation such as we are, it takes energy to move that economy. If you increase the cost of energy, we'll just get goods from other countries. Unless we regulate even more, and restrict imports, then consumer cost will just go up. But hell if your for growing government . . . . it is the way to go. This is by far the stupidest thing coming out of this administration. "Clean energy" is so OVERRATED

Ryan M, Please. You have to back up your statements with some facts. How much is "far less"? If you meant "per capita" instead of "per GDP", then your statement is patently false. Germany emits approximately 1/2 of what the US does per capita, and most other European countries are in that ballpark as well. If you in fact meant per GDP, then please reference the source of your information that shows the US ranked against other countries in this manner; that would be an interesting statistic and I have never seen it before. And your source has to be other than "I heard Rush say it".

Hard to import energy...unless you talk about oil. And we know how oil is just a horn of plenty. "clean" energy has more possiblities for domestic production than just coal alone. Besides coal alone is insufficient for energy needs. Diversification of energy is more stable and will create more jobs than just coal. If you want to restrict imports and regulate more...you are growing government. Unless you are in control Ryan.

Sorry Mr. Koshla...but there really is no problem (and therefore no opportunity) with cement and glass and plastic. And lightbulbs and engines and fuels are already being improved and refined by large multinational companies like GE, Esso/Shell, Honda/Toyota/Mercedes etc. I fear that your investments may prove to be futile.

What about personal energy? Everyone in the US should bw aware of this by now. I really think Arctic Zero is going to take off. www.myarcticzero.com

Clean tech overrated? It is critical in preventing further war and human suffering as we compete for limited resources, not to mention sea level rise from burning fossil fuel.

Sorry, but as of now coal is the way to go. I agree we should be working on cleaner ways but look at Spain. Their entire power infrastructure is a joke. They released their own study and had to admit that going "Green" has cost them 100K jobs not counting the businesses that have left the country because of the cost of electricity and that between 2000-2008 their CO2 emissions have increased 50%. Having green energy that no one can afford is not the way to go.

We are the Saudi Arabia of coal. We need to clean up our current coal plants and build more "clean" coal powered plants. We mine coal here, we have more than any country in the world, and all that money from mining and creating electricity stays in the US. Sounds like a win-win situation.

Just want to point out German buys a lot of excess electric power from the French who is 80% clean, non-polutting nuclear power. The green energy folks just don't seem to understand power consumption in USA is roughly 20% household, 40% commerical and 40% industrial use. Within all the talk of putting solar panels on roof tops, you are only addressing 20% of the total problem. People forgot you need massive cheap, reliable source of energy to maufacture goods or you can have China make all the things for you. France copy the US reactor designs and make good use of it. Rest of the world is moving ahead with nuclear power except the US because this country is hijacked by the lefties. China is building one coal fired plant a week and US is sticking its head in the sand. By the way, the French is reproceesing their spent fuel, so where is the waste??

Sarah Lacy is pretty cute. I do agree with Vinod that many "environmentalist" are just English majors with no clue on how to get to a solution.

Mr. Khosla gives an interview that is mostly sales pitch. So he has invested in a portfolio of 30 clean, green technologies. Many of these would seem to be competing technologies. Diversification and hedging aren't one in the same. Recognizing the importance of the doubling effect, he says that solar cell efficiency will soon double. From current levels, that could theoretically happen twice. I would like to see some who, where and when regarding this prediction. That would be investment news.

I'm having trouble understanding why we can't make electricity with 100% clean alternative energy sources, and deliver that to hydrogen fueling stations. There is enough wind, geothermal, tidal and solar to make it happen. Yes, it's all more expensive that carbon based products and the infrastructure has to be built out, but there's no environmental downside. You have to make sacrifices to do anything right.

What are these cleantechs? I'd like to invest in some. If we truely want change, we might want to look with a differnt eye.

Fossil fuels are an out-moded hunter gatherer mentality that does not scale, are terribly inefficient to find, extract, and burn, pollute every corner of the world, and destroy the world's ecosystems. As we moved from being hunter-gatherers to farmers about 10,000 years ago, we can now do the same with energy. Solar, wind, geothermal, etc. can be farmed at a small fraction of the $16 trillion infrastructure that was put in place for fossil fuels. For under $1 trillion we can have energy independence and security forever, while generating and reinventing hundreds of industries. This is exciting!

Vinod Khosla is another leading edge thinker and investor who says we are "reinventing the infrastructure of society." The need to do so was caused by the collapse of the global financial systems. Sarah Lacy asks where the opportunities to make money are in the "new reality," suggesting that new technology will rebuild old economic paradigms. No one seems to think that established economic paradigms are kaput and the "new reality" will redefine distribution of wealth, sustainability, and self-esteem. After all, one's idea of self-worth is what provides substance to "infrastructure." Infrastructure cannot be reinvented without rebuilding foundations. Technology is a tool. It simplifies living, or provides entertainment. But having access to technology does not, in-and-of-itself, enhance self-esteem unless "owning" it is not assumed. Then it becomes a totem of personal worth. For example, how many people would feel good about themselves because they can ride a bullet train from SF to LA? Not many. How many people would feel good about themselves making the same trip in a Lamborghini? Quite a few. But the bullet train may actually be the greater technological achievement. So, what gives? Easy. Owning the Lamborghini implies exclusivity. It sits one apart from the crowd. So, perhaps "reinventing the infrastructure of society" should involve redefining what it means to be different and what is required to be held in esteem.

@geepafin53012... why does RyanM have to prove to you his fact (which you clearly would like to interpret in a way other than what he said)? Are you too lazy to just google it yourself? http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/env_pol_car_dio_fro_fos_fue_200_pergdp-fossil-fuels-2000-per-gdp p.s. that took me 27 seconds.

Hydrogen fuel cells will be America's future energy source years from now. Forget about wasting billions of dollars on worthless wind and solar technology that will be replaced eventually by fuel cells. In the meantime drill, baby, drill!

I agree with that Nuclear Power is the way to go for large scale energy production. It is clean (no CO2 or other pollution produced) and it doesn't require any carbon-based fuel (coal, natural gas, deisel oil) to produce. France is a good example and role model for nuclear power.

--LegalizeMe Clean coal is a political term. The process of creating energy from coal creates CO2, you can't clean a chemical reaction... -- I agree above that there needs to be a diversification of energy supply and relaying on cheap energy now ( coal in cost, oil due to cost to change energy infrastructure for a new source) will only intensify the costs for the future when supply runs low... I agree with the Author from the point that low cost renewable energy will be the modern economic revolution much of what computers have done since the '70's. If you have money to make home run bets, then you stand the chance to make huge returns, and this author seems to have that kind of money.... For everyone else, you have to ask yourself "Is there something better I could be doing with my money now?" For myself paying down my debt and short-terming the market works for now, and hopefully in the future I will be in a position to invest in possible home run companies like Clean Tech