I like new things. Many of my friends and colleagues do as well. Some of us are very familiar with “early adopter tax”, the high price of paying for a new release product or program in spite of the knowledge that delaying the purchase would save money. I got to thinking about early-adoption a little while ago, and came to somewhat of an epiphany: nothing to do with shiny gadgets or cool software, either…

Some months ago I was in an IRC channel with a group of folks in the team I was working with at the time. The conversation had come around to green electricity, what deals our respective electricity companies were offering, and whether we were “doing the right thing” and selecting green energy.

I was a nay-sayer. “It’s a scam,” I railed. “Why should I pay extra for green power when the electricity companies know they should be doing that anyway?” The conversation turned to subsidies for installing solar power systems, and soon after that we actually got back to work.

Months later I recalled that conversation while listening to a podcast. The presenter was discussing climate change and the need for urgent action, whatever the cost. Which is when it hit me: green energy and it’s friends are like an early-adopter tax for a sustainable future.

In the early 90s, I remember models of the IBM ThinkPad would cost A$12k and more. Twelve THOUSAND dollars! Over time however, the developments in the technology have led to such remarkable improvements that a modern laptop can be had for a fraction of that amount, and projects like OLPC becoming viable. None of it wold have happened, however, if early-adopters had not backed the IBMs, Compaqs, and Toshibas (and the Osbornes before that, bless them) and supported the idea.

In 1978, when Mercedes-Benz first fitted ABS to the S-Class[1], I expect they would have wanted to make it at least an option on all their vehicles. That they didn’t, when the cost of doing so would have been astronomical, ensured that they were able to viably continue research and development on the technology and bring the cost down over time. Together with other car makers who progressively did the same, they ensured that even a modern $10k car can have access to such technology, but again it wouldn’t have happened if not for those S-Class buyers validating the idea and stumping-up the cash.

I’ve realised that businesses don’t have a conscience, and that the current economic model cannot reward a company for “knowing what it should be doing”. In quite a real way, companies need their customers to be their conscience by supporting those products that make a contribution to society, and rejecting products that are damaging or harmful. Longer-term, those companies that “get it” will thrive while those that don’t will fail.

So my consideration on things like green electricity changed to, simply, “can we afford to?”. Knowing that in around three months I’ll be meeting my second child (all going well), and becoming maudlin about the state of the world that a new person is being brought into (as new parents sometimes are wont to do), perhaps the question should be “can we afford NOT to?”…

[1] Other manufacturers fitted ABS systems to cars earlier than 1978, but they seemed to be one-off decisions that were inconsistently implemented or met with commercial failure. Mercedes-Benz, once the decision was made, stuck with it.

Tags: green, observation