Really interesting article! I wonder about how the competitive dynamics will play out in this space. It does seem like there would be huge efficiencies to be gained if competitors could find away to share learnings and aggregated data, but I’m skeptical as to whether this will happen, as this kind of technology could prove a significant competitive advantage for Novartis.
Really interesting business model, and encouraging to hear that kountable has been so successful thus far in making a real impact on the business community in Rwanda. I do wonder whether they will be able to successfully expand to more developed markets, though. I was actually somewhat surprised to hear that the Rwandan government was supportive, and I think this model would almost certainly invite a lot more regulatory scrutiny in places like the U.S., as you mentioned. I think regulatory environment should be one of the most important considerations for kountable as it examines potential markets to enter.
Really interesting post, about an application of digital technology that I hadn’t really heard much about. Of the three concerns mentioned, the one that really jumps out to me is the security issue. The stakes are pretty high when we’re talking about access to a basic need like electricity which many take for granted, and I can understand why the idea that utility systems could be opened up to attack would concern 71% of consumers. Hopefully this is something that Itron can mitigate, but I think the security standards will need to be especially high in this context, given the stakes.
This is incredible technology – I definitely agree that there are a lot of potential markets applications for this. I agree with AJ regarding the privacy issue, though – I’m not terribly offended by satellite images of commodities stockpiles, but I think the line between public and private domains will continue to be blurred in disturbing ways as this technology is used more broadly. I would be interested to see if laws and regulations are starting to catch up to this.
Great post! One thing that I wonder about is how the WSJ plans to handle the potential cannibalization of print subscribers as it continues to intensify its focus on digital. Assuming that the costs to serve a given print customer are higher than for a digital customer, maybe they would actually welcome some cannibalization? I’d be interested to see how the numbers break out, and how close the print business is to no longer making financial sense.
Thanks for the thoughtful post – I think you posed a lot of interesting options that AA could pursue. However I am a bit skeptical of some of the options related to its fleet. I don’t know that optimizing routes would really result in a noticeable change in overall emissions, and I would assume that AA would already have performed this optimization to the best of their abilities, just to try to improve their own profitability. Similarly, I wonder about dynamically adding routes – this seems like it would be very challenging logistically, and also like something that AA would have already implemented if it was feasible. I also think a commenter above made a really great point about not disproportionately punishing the airline industry when in fact it is more efficient than other transportation alternatives. I completely agree that whenever the government imposes regulations, it needs to take an extremely thoughtful and holistic approach to avoid severe unintended consequences.
Really interesting post – it never occurred to me that the shipping industry, by virtue of taking place in international waters, would be in a gray area with respect to the UN climate agreements. I can see how industries like this would greatly exacerbate the already complex task of setting environmental standards and determining which countries and organizations are responsible for bearing the responsibility of those standards, and to what extent. In some ways it makes me very cynical about the prospect of countries ever being able to cooperate on a large enough scale to truly make a notable impact in reversing the effects of climate change (but I hope I’m wrong!)
Great post! It seems insane to me that developers are able to achieve LEED certification on buildings based on plans, rather than the completed buildings themselves. With this system, there seems to be very little incentive to actually comply with LEED requirements in the actual construction of the buildings, especially if any of those requirements are more costly than less environmentally friendly alternatives. I agree that LEED certifications should be subject to review and revocation in the event that completed buildings don’t end up meeting standards.
Very interesting post! What jumps out to me is that emissions standards have essentially forced Cummins to innovate, which is a positive thing for the environment, but also threatens the very existence of the company. It highlights the difficult tension between regulations to address climate change and the burden that those regulations place on companies that are vital parts of the economy. Generally speaking, I perceive the “creative destruction” of obsolete organizations to be a positive thing for the economy in the long term, but in cases like this where obsolescence may be “forced” by regulation, it makes me wonder if regulators and organizations can work better together, such that a company like Cummins is able to innovate for compliance with emissions standards, but within limits that are feasible and do not spell the company’s demise.
Great post Kelly! As a religious coffee drinker, this is quite disturbing for me to read. I thought your post pulled out an interesting contrast between the impact of climate change on Keurig, vs. the impact of Keurig on climate change. I agree that they should focus on developing more sustainable pods, and while I think Maria makes a good point that this may not make much of a difference in the grand scheme of things, I think the fact that climate change is directly threatening their business makes for an interesting dynamic in which Keurig really has “skin in the game” with respect to sustainability goals.