Hans De Keulenaer's Library tagged future →  View Popular

To help us prepare for the future energy marketplace, each year
ExxonMobil develops The Outlook for Energy, a broad in-depth look at the
long-term global trends for energy demand and supply, and their impact on carbon
dioxide (CO₂) emissions.

The Outlook for Energy is the result of a rigorous ongoing assessment
process that includes a detailed analysis of approximately 100 countries, 15
demand sectors and 20 fuel types. It is underpinned by economic and population
projections as well as our expectations for energy-efficiency gains from the
deployment of advanced technologies and adoption of better energy-management
practices. Building on many decades of experience, ExxonMobil conducts this
analysis utilizing in-house expertise and modeling tools as well as input from a
wide variety of third-party organizations, such as the International Energy
Agency and the U.S. Department of Energy. The results of this comprehensive
study provide a foundation for ExxonMobil's business planning.

ExxonMobil shares The Outlook for Energy publicly to help build
understanding of the world's energy needs and challenges. This year's report
focuses on energy demand to the year 2030. It examines key drivers of rising
demand and the way this demand will be met by the various available energy
sources, including fossil fuels, nuclear power and renewable energies, and it
provides insight into the challenge of meeting growing energy needs while
mitigating global CO₂ emissions.

Every senior executive knows that business decisions are seldom better than the information behind them. Yet although it is usually lower-level employees who interact directly with the customer, decision makers rarely ask them how, for example, new products will fare. Leaders therefore deprive themselves of information that could enrich their analysis and reduce the risk of ivory tower decision making.

Some executives understand that valuable information lies scattered around the organization but don’t know how to retrieve it. Others don’t even try, perhaps for hierarchical reasons or because they suspect they might get answers colored by the desire to second their real or assumed viewpoint.

The most popular post I’ve written to date is a review of prediction market software. Today’s post is going to be the same, but for idea/innovation software (henceforth referred to as innovation software).

Trying to even find and identify all the different types of innovation software is difficult because of the different ways people and companies think about innovation. Prediction markets are straightforward; they’re futures markets, so the software is largely the interface between the user and the order book on the database. That is not at all so for innovation software. Different people think about innovation in different ways, which I referred to in a previous post.

The list below is likely not complete, but I believe it does pick up the major players.

Perry shared many lessons learned, and chose to focus people’s attention on the pitfalls of PMs (in addition to their power).





1. Implementation can take a long time. It’s a change management process.
2. Asking the wrong questions can be a killer, but often the right questions emerge after trading begins.
3. Poor incentive structures is the #1 killer, according to Perry.
4. Don’t suppress the reputational incentives associated with PMs.
5. Be explicit and transparent about how traders will be compensated.

Global oil peak has the potential to shake if not destroy the
foundations of global industrial economy and culture. Climate change
has the potential to rearrange the biosphere more radically than the
last ice age. Each limits the effective options for responses to the
other.

The strategies for mitigating the adverse effects and/or
adapting to the consequences of Climate Change have mostly been
considered and discussed in isolation from those relevant to Peak
Oil. While awareness of Peak Oil, or at least energy crisis, is
increasing, understanding of how these two problems might interact to
generate quite different futures, is still at an early state.

It does not happen often that I agree with the American Enterprise Institute but Steven Hayward’s analysis of the “real cost of tackling climate change” in the Wall Street Journal of 28 April is spot on: an 80% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 will have dramatic implications for our way of life.

Hayward has at least the courage (which cannot be said for our politicians) to tell the public what this 80% cut will mean for citizens’ daily lives. In not one political document have I ever seen a serious impact assessment of the 80% target. The fear of being the bearer of bad news is one which characterises all policymakers (even the ones who know that the climate crisis will hit hard).

The Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development has released its 2008 Environmental Outlook.

Without new policies, the world risks irreversibly damaging the environment and the natural resource base needed to support economic growth and well-being, according to the report. But the Outlook finds that tackling climate change, biodiversity loss, water scarcity and the health impacts of pollution is both achievable and affordable.

So good news overall. We’re getting much better tools and more interest, while we can continue to experiment and learn. But with increasing competition, we’ll have to work even harder to deserve and retain reader attention through relevant quality content.

Do you agree, or better, disagree? I’d love to hear from you on your views where (business) blogging is going.