Add new comment

Clean Tech is too vague and besides the "trough of dillusionnent," I think it has a reputation for being insignificant - for investors and for the myriad of problems that need solutions. Energy Tech, AG Tech, Water Tech, may begin to make sense, but would likely suffer the same fate.

I believe our collective thinking is way too incremental and we celebrate innovation, instead of seeking invention. Many of these industries need to be RE-invented, like agriculture, energy, education and healthcare. Despite a full decade of clean tech investing or "green" tech, we really haven't made any measurable difference in saving our problems. As an example, our Healthcare Industry is currently about $3 trillion annually, yet actual healthcare delivered is only $1.5 trillion (50%). At least on the surface we are wasting at least $1 trillion. Recent government reforms have the uninspiring goal of "bending the cost curve" and do nothing to make the industry more effective and efficient. The only way to save our healthcare system is to replace it with a new one. I'm working with a group to do that and avoiding the traditional trap of feel-good innovations that don't make a significant difference.

I appreciate your column and wonder if the search for a new name might make it obvious that a focus on re-creating our inefficient industries need big change, rather than small steps.

I'm working with dozens of people and organizations to create America 2.0, a collection of seven solutions that solve our problems with economically-viable solutions that make a significant difference and create 12 million non-subsidized jobs. If we don't figure out how to re-create several of our industries AND create a significant number of jobs, all the imagined "innovation" won't make a difference.

I can be reached at