Wednesday, September 22, 2010 - 11:25 AM
As you may have heard, mastering clean energy is a big deal these days. Just this week, we see a decent series at the Financial Times, and a fresh cover story in Wired magazine (not online yet) devoted to the transformative potential of the industry, not just for technology and the environment but for the global economy. This is where things get complicated: Every major country wants the prize in order to revive its own flagging economy, and not all of them will necessarily get it.
Car companies themselves can't be expected to bear automatic allegiance to any country -- a point that Carlos Ghosn (above) made clear this week. Ghosn suggested that in order to get into China's market, his company, Nissan, is prepared to hand over any proprietary electric-car technology that Beijing wishes -- a big deal, considering that intellectual property is the Chinese juggernaut's Achilles heel.
Ghosn's precise remarks, reported by The Wall Street Journal's Norihiko Shirouzu, are that "there's no limit to [the] technology we bring to China." His senior deputy for China, Kimiyasu Nakamura, said, "We wouldn't hold back" in sharing technology. "We are going to figure out within that legal framework exact methodologies as to how we could transfer technology here."
What Nakamura was referring to is an anticipated set of rules that China will impose on foreign companies, requiring them to liberate their high-tech blueprints in order to work in the world's fastest-growing large economy. This subject is being discussed in a congressional hearing today, as Juliana Gruenwald writes at the National Journal. Basically, you get to sell your product for a few years, until Chinese companies know enough about it to make it themselves. For those who follow Soviet history, the approach will seem familiar: During the Great Depression, Stalin offered a hand to hard-up Western companies, which built one-off, state-of-the-art steel mills, car plants, dams and railroads under the watchful eye of Soviet managers -- who then copied the plans.
But Ghosn is clearly worried. In December, his company comes out with the Leaf, a $33,000 electric car. It is Nissan's entry into a market that, like other new technologies over the years such as the cell phone and the personal computer, will take time -- a decade or more -- to scale into profitability without subsidies. That's why, while other heads of big companies -- among them, Jeffrey Immelt of General Electric, Jürgen Hambrecht of BASF, and Peter Loescher at Seimens -- wring their hands and shout about China's IP demands, Ghosn is taking the plunge. From China's perspective, the strategy is ingenious. From Ghosn's? We'll see.
Update: Michigan Congressman John Dingell today wrote a letter to China's ambassador to the U.S., requesting that foreign companies not be compeled to share IP in exchange for market access, reports Mike Ramsey at WSJ.
Kiyoshi Ota/Getty Images
Reposting comment from Slightly Optimistic
**This comment, by Slightly Optimistic, was posted inadvertently under an unrelated, previous post. I am pasting here for those interested**
Resource competition gets a mention in this week's report 'Global Governance 2025: at a critical juncture' - from the US National Intelligence Council and the EU's Institute for Security Studies. One scenario at page 27 envisages the OECD's International Energy Agency being replaced by a global International Energy Organisation that includes China, India and Russia as members. There is also the global coordination of funding priorities and security.
However this assumes that leading countries will opt for a multilateral world, not a highly competitive multipolar one. Unlikely! For example the report has a comment from India, a strong supporter of the UN system, that resources are not ripe for multilateral solutions and that India and China will continue their quest for resources.
I would say that you are correct -- there is almost no prospect of the race for resources turning into a friendly altruistic affair.
Hello again, some developments of note. The view from India is a common one, and harks back to national political notions such as 'might makes right' and 'spheres of influence'.
Today 'The Independent' reports - in a leader and in more detail - a momentous meeting this week in Moscow.
>The subject is co-operation in the Arctic, a title which puts the most positive spin on what might more realistically be termed cut-throat competition for a slice of territory believed to be rich in natural resources.
>An opinion piece by the foreign ministers of Russia and Norway was published yesterday in a Canadian newspaper, calling on Arctic countries to solve the problems through dialogue. "We firmly believe that the Arctic can be used to demonstrate just how much peace and collective interests can be served through the implementation of the international rule of law," wrote Jonas Gahr Store and Sergey Lavrov. "Moreover, we believe that the challenges in the Arctic should inspire momentum in international relations, based on co-operation rather than rivalry and confrontation."<
(3)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE