I firmly believe the Energy System needs a very systematic and consistent evaluation as we undertake the changes from a fossil-reliant ecosystem into a clean, renewable one, with the overriding obligation to address climate change.

As you consider a change of this magnitude, you recognize how complicated this becomes, and the deeper your thinking becomes, hence why I like thinking through this with the use of mind maps.

I would argue we need a consistent framework to keep working through all the changes that will be undertaken in the next twenty to thirty years to achieve that eventual 2050 net-zero target of decarbonizing the energy system fully;  resulting in a clean, climate-resilient energy transformation.

Within my first post, “Changing the Energy Ecosystem“, I began to lay out the need to change the energy dynamics by redirecting them away from the existing systems and structures.

This is my second post, which continues to build out the new Energy Ecosystem.

This post focuses on the two points of Reforming Business models and the needed Resolutions to take this different thinking forward, then I will take out in the third post, Innovation & Ingenuity, Experimentation & Rapid Pilots,  and Leapfrog Opportunities.

Reforming Business Models and Needed Resolutions required.

So this post focuses on reforming the Business Models within any energy system change and then looking at the necessary resolutions in the impact or implications any new business model will have.

Putting the scale of this Energy Transition into context.

Again, these are my first attempts to systematically redirect or reorder the Energy System. I have viewed the Energy System as an Ecosystem one as it needs to account for a whole system approach. I find so much of today is made up of piecemeal evaluations or activities, lacking that comprehensive view or systematic evaluation before the change is undertaken.

Any evaluation of Energy System change requires an initial view of the six dimensions that will impact or trigger any seismic change. These are 1. Environmental. 2. Economic, 3. Technical, 4. Institutional, 5. Political and 6. Social.  I have left this analysis out in these posts, but these drive the macro case for making the Energy Transition change.

The sheer size of estimated investment in changing the energy system is presently suggested as between $110 trillion to $140 trillion by 2050. For all those involved, their investments in transforming what they have as assets today, how to transition or retire them, and what and where they need to invest in the future in renewable energy sources is a daunting task, full of risk and uncertainties.

A consistent and sustaining evaluation pathway for the Energy System

Changing the energy system must have a systematic redirection, built on an evaluation format that stays sustaining and constant for a pathway that will be lasting twenty-eight years to achieve that eventual 2050 net-zero target of decarbonizing the energy system fully, resulting in a clean, climate-resilient energy transformation.

Building the new from within the existing, we have no other choice.

As we dismantle the existing energy ecosystem, we are building the new one inside; that is the really hard part; it is full of variability and novelty. We only have one planet; we need energy constantly and always on. We are transforming one built out from our reliance on fossil fuel being progressively dismantled to one built on renewables in such a short time span is monumental.

We are replacing proven solutions with nascent ones, perhaps individually demonstrated but not fully connected up in an integrated, designed energy system showing validation and long-term return or resilience.

We do need to get our heads around this to manage what is orderly chaos, thinking through the “known-unknown-unknowable” in our present and future projected world and dealing with all the constraints.

This is why I refer to The Cynefin framework from Dave Snowden through Cognitive Edge. The positioning of Cognitive Edge is “making sense of complexity in order to act.” That trying to make sense of all the constraints involved in changing the Energy systems.

Building upon my opening post

So building from my opening post of “Changing the Energy Ecosystem” where I looked at the triggering points of this: 1. Changing the Energy System, followed by considering new 2. Value Propositions (scenario, synthesise, combinations, synopsis, sketches) and then evaluating the 3. Dealing with the different disruption and dislocation points, and 4. the need for rapid learning and knowledge sharing. We now need to go one step deeper.

I have taken a mind mapping approach to reduce content and allow an individual understanding of each idea and what it triggers. This offers the individual a suggested prescriptive framework and course of possible activation, but “the devil is in your details and circumstances“.

Going one stage further- Reforming Business Models and the Resolutions needed

Reforming the Business Models- opening thoughts

Resolutions needed- initial areas of focus.

 

How can we unplug from a fossil-dependent energy system into a clean, reliable and renewable one that is sustaining and net-zero for greenhouse gas emissions?

 

 

It is the emerging scope of Business Models and Resolutions needed to be found that “informs” the application explored in the next post of 1. Innovation & Ingenuity, 2. Experimentation & pilots, and 3. those Leapfrog opportunities

What needs to be explored, exploited, built out, and deployed based on the business models and the resolutions considered to existing and future needs as outlined briefly in this post and the first post to shape the future of energy in predictable and systematic ways?