Thursday, February 22, 2007

Electricity Generation Requires a New Way to Talk and Listen

We could save the Universe if we just learned how to talk to each other. In 2002 Adam Kahane wrote a wonderful article called "Changing the World by Changing How We Talk and Listen". Mr. Kahane lays out a compelling argument for why so many of our most complicated world problems never get solved. Not only do they never get solved, but some problems never seem to change. The vitriolic arguments use the same words and phrases over and over again until all sides are red in the face with frustration. While his article draws from his experience mediating factions during the Guatamala’s peace vision, his principles apply well to any area of conflict. He clearly shows why frustration grows and how to resolve it.

Today frustration is growing in the great debate about how to power our modern society. And, this debate is now officially mainstream as of last night. Last night I saw a REMAX Real Estate television commercial with a sharp looking couple cheerfully telling their wonderful REMAX real estate agent that they wanted a home powered by solar and wind energy and maybe even bio- gases. Then the mythical wife wrinkles her nose as pictures of dairy cows swirl by while she says, "Well, maybe not methane gas".

Living technicolor proof that what Carl Sagan said long ago is true now more than ever. "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology."

One solution may be to follow Adam Kahane’s prescription for talking and listening. He claims that there are "four distinct conversational modes". Every discussion, whether it focuses on how to stop the genocide of pregnant women stacked like cord wood in a mass grave or how to create electric energy reliability without green house gases, must go through each of these four distinct conversational modes. These modes are "Downloading, Debating, Reflective Dialogue and Generative Dialogue". No long term solutions to any serious problems have ever occurred without the stake holders or effected players getting together and working through all four of these modes in order. You can’t skip any of the steps and you can’t change the order of the progression without destroying trust. And trust, is the foundation of any problem’s solution. It can only be obtained if each mode is played out in order.

Today the electric industry, environmental groups, and your average electricity customer are stuck somewhere between Downloading and Debating. Downloading occurs when stakeholders repeat facts about their solution over and over again. They list the reasons their special solution is the only answer to the problem and they repeatedly dismiss anyone else’s solution as unrealistic. In our current debate, this is why utility executives fight tooth and toe nail against renewable portfolio standards and why environmental groups continually deride, coal, nuclear and large hydro power projects. Downloading keeps everyone stuck in a constant shouting match about potential solutions while one side accuses the other side of not understanding the real problem and not have the sense or vision to propose a real world solution. While we must go through this part of the discussion, Downloading offers nothing new. All sides get stuck in their own self confidence believing they have the solution while belittling other solutions. We don’t need more facts about fuels. We need to go beyond downloading facts to come up with a radical new solution. This is not an argument to wait until technology saves us with a magic energy pill. It is a plea for us to get the objective facts on the table and move to the next step.

Downloading "facts" as both sides see it, sets up the second mode of communication - Debating. Here we see more of what "is" but offer no new solutions to the problem. We talk about more coal or add the concept of clean coal. We talk about more solar and add Concentrating Solar Power. We throw acronyms around like CSP and IGCC. The discussion logjams into talking heads and dueling experts with the consumer shaking their heads in disgust as they head for the fridge for another cold beer. Debating fosters winners and losers, without getting to the real understanding of other solutions or the role of all solutions in solving the problem. This won’t happen until debating ends and understanding begins to dawn on all of the players.

This is where Reflective dialogue comes into play. It’s the light bulb going on when the person realizes," Oh yeah, I see now that a photovoltaic system will not meet my energy needs if I continue to demand this level of power". Or, it’s the utility executive that really begins to see that some of his customers are bailing from central station grids, changing their life styles to allow small scale wind and solar systems to meet their energy needs. Its making realistic assessments about the role of energy conservation. Its getting into each other’s heads and gaining empathy for the real world situation that the other person is coming from. Reflective Dialogue will not produce the answers to the puzzle, but it will set up the trust and understanding that is vital to getting to what Steven Covey calls the "Third Alternative". That is the solution that makes everyone pretty happy without making anyone feel terribly mad. It makes all stake holders winners because through Reflective dialogue they finally understand why that crazy SOB thinks the way that they think. It begins to give validity to multiple solutions and sets the foundation for the next mode of dialogue, Generative Dialogue.

According to Kahane, Generative Dialogue produces a "deeper unity of purpose". The big light bulb finally gets lit in each and every stake holder and every one realizes that the only way to stop the atrocities of war or save the world from energy related side effects , or power civilization without destroying it, is to come together and work together on that "Third Alternative" . The alternative that makes every stake holder look like a hero to their constituents. It’s the solution that allows everyone to go home with their heads held high taking rightful credit for solving the problem without sacrificing their sense of what is right.

This is where we as a nation and a world need to go when it comes to deciding our energy future. When history is written describing how this generation met the challenges of our time and produced a workable and healthy energy solution to power the future, the record will show that we went through each of these "four distinct conversational modes".

We must keep this conversation going until we can all collectively make it through all four modes. As the Guatemalans found during their peace initiative, the stakes are way too high to do anything else. Does this mean that all we have to do is go through the four steps and like the addict finishing the twelve step rehabilitation program all problems are solved? Of course not. There will be good days and bad days. There will still be debates and downloading, setbacks and discouragement. Clearly, the methods being used to solve the problem today are not working. Its time to try something different. "Insanity is repeating the same behavior and expecting a different result," said Werner Erhart.

It is time to stop the insanity.

No comments: