{"id":89697,"date":"2021-07-13T15:19:45","date_gmt":"2021-07-13T12:19:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.tehnopol.ee\/?p=89697"},"modified":"2021-10-05T13:36:00","modified_gmt":"2021-10-05T10:36:00","slug":"ragmar-saksing-blueberries-trump-pine-logs-or-how-to-find-balance-in-the-green-economy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.tehnopol.ee\/en\/ragmar-saksing-blueberries-trump-pine-logs-or-how-to-find-balance-in-the-green-economy\/","title":{"rendered":"Ragmar Saksing: blueberries trump pine logs or how to find balance in the green economy"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"
Ragmar, Head of Green Technology at Tehnopol Science and Business Park. PHOTO: Tiit Blaat, Delfi<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

To find new economic models, the question, \u201cbut how has nature solved this problem?\u201d is helpful, writes Ragmar Saksing, Head of Green Technology at Tehnopol Science and Business Park<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s been clear for a relatively long time that current\neconomic and business models are not sustainable from an environmental\nperspective. Nature has posed a challenge to business, which requires one to\nbreak free of existing thought patterns. Entrepreneurs need to look for new\nways to do business responsibly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are two directions in the green economy \u2013 the old\neconomy and the new economy. The old economy plans to adapt, it wants to make a\ngreen turn. This is an economy that began with a major industrial revolution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some have said the Industrial Revolution began in 1908, when\na company led by Henry Ford in America began production of the Ford model T\nautomobile. Since then, the burning of fossil fuels worldwide has led to an\nexponential increase in carbon emissions into the atmosphere. In practice,\nhowever, this means getting rich at the expense of the environment. If we draw\nsomething from the earth\u2019s crust to set it on fire, the atmosphere and the seas\nwill be full of it. There will be a void in the ground and substances that\nshouldn\u2019t be in the sea will end up there.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The new economy is based on balance. The corners of the\nequilibrium triangle are the economy, the environment, and society. If one of\nthem gets over emphasized, the balance is lost and the system collapses. Let us\nalso note that a system with too much or no emphasis on the environment will\nnot survive either. The economy is important, but not essential. The whole is\nalways greater than the sum of the parts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cI believe that \u2026\u201d doesn\u2019t count here. If we\nagree and use the laws of nature as the basis for the functioning of the world,\nwe will think for a moment about how nature has solved the question of balance.\nImagine a chicken that focuses only on laying eggs and doesn\u2019t pay attention to\nraising chicks. Or imagine a tree that focuses only on chlorophyll production\nbut neglects to prevent water evaporation. Of course, it is not necessary to be\na biologist to realize that focusing on a single outcome is not only\ndetrimental to the system, but also undermines long-term survival.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nature understandably doesn\u2019t care what our influential people think, what they believe or do not believe. Nature lives, acts, reacts, fights, suffers, recovers.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Natural systems work differently, are based on diversity and\ndepend mainly on local flows of substances, nutrients, and energy. At the same\ntime, it is ensured that everything necessary can be obtained from several\nsources. It creates a system that allows many basic needs to be met with local\nresources, within the limits of carrying capacity and replacing the unnecessary\n(and toxic) and creating more value from what exists. The new economy follows\nsimilar principles, drawing inspiration from the considerable capacity of\necosystems to create something from seemingly nothing. The old man-made\neconomic systems do not work that way. The focus is usually on only one\nparameter \u2013 profit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To understand that this can in no way be sustainable, I ask some unanswered questions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

  • Why are producers in Asia not dealing with waste here in Europe or vice versa?<\/li>
  • Why is the burning of mineral resources to produce heat and electricity still supported by public funding?<\/li>
  • Why does the old economy always have to be the lowest cost?<\/li>
  • Why are human economic activities and\/or the desire to make a profit still the cause of species extinction?<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n

    These are understandably complex questions and we cannot\nfind a single answer here. However, I think the main reason stems from old\neconomic models, ignorance, and the spread of half-truths. An influential\nperson\u2019s phrase \u201cI believe \u2026\u201d doesn\u2019t count here. The facts matter.\nIf we consider nature to be superior, then nature understandably doesn\u2019t care\nwhat our influential people think, what they believe or do not believe. Nature\nlives, acts, reacts, fights, suffers, recovers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    An Estonian forest\nexample<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Man-made environmental problems are complex. I like to\ncompare them to cooked spaghetti. Of course, we would like the problems to be\neasy to compartmentalize and, figuratively speaking, to be lifted from one pile\nto another \u2013 like a pack of uncooked spaghetti. Unfortunately, this is not the\ncase. These spaghetti are cooked through, mixed, and contain various sauces,\nspices. If we pull from one end, we never know exactly what is happening on the\nother end. Nature does not turn over the soil like a human being does. In\nnature, earthworms, insects, fungi, bacteria stimulate and disturb the soil.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    I will provide an example of this complexity: the Estonian\nforest. A forest is a complete organism, with an order of a thousand other\nspecies associated with each tree species. A forest is treated as a resource\nand its value is measured in logs. At the same time, it is generally known that\nthe composition of clear-cut forest soil changes, UV radiation reaches the\nground, and the plants that were characteristic of the area no longer grow\nthere.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Nature does not turn over the soil like a human being. In\nnature, earthworms, insects, fungi, bacteria stimulate and disturb the soil.\nBut if the structure of the soil has changed and these changes no longer exist,\nthe forest will not recover in this way. The natural richness of the cleared\nforest is restored at a maximum speed of 100 meters per year. It\u2019s a kilometer\nof forest in 10 years, 10 kilometers of forest in 100 years, and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    I am not saying that the forest must not be cut down. Of\ncourse you can and must. But not in a way that is not in line with producing\noffspring.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Blueberries trump\npine logs<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Let\u2019s do one calculation that illustrates a bit the\nprinciples of the new economy. Let\u2019s compare the price of pine logs and\nblueberries. I based my calculations on average orders of magnitude, and did\nnot take into account the cost of picking blueberries, cutting pine logs, or\nthe growing times of both. This calculation does not claim to be the ultimate\ntruth, but it perfectly illustrates what has been said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    As a result of the calculation made for the paper corner, I\nfound that in the worst case, when selling blueberries and logs at wholesale\nprices, the difference is \u20ac500 versus \u20ac225 per hectare per year in favor of\nblueberries. At best, when it comes to selling blueberries and logs, the\ndifference is \u20ac2,600 versus \u20ac320 a year per hectare in favor of blueberries. We\nshould declare blueberries the winner and start planning new economic and\nbusiness models, where we pick blueberries, get moderate logs, and grow the\nforest in a way typical of the place!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Nature\u2019s perfect\nengineers<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    The question: \u201cBut how has nature solved this\nproblem?\u201d helps to find new economic models. From this question, in fact,\narises the whole branch of science called biomimicry (bios \u2013 life; and mimesis\n\u2013 imitation). This new discipline seeks the best design ideas in nature and\ntries to solve human problems by imitating them. 70,000 years of human history\nis understandably too little an experience to think, \u201cThat\u2019s what we\u2019ve\nbeen doing all along.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The basic idea of \u200b\u200bbiomimicry is that nature has millions\nof years of experience and has already solved many of the problems we are\ncurrently facing. Insects, animals, plants, and microbes are perfect engineers\nbecause they have found solutions for themselves that work on our planet, that\nfit here and, most importantly, that can withstand pressure. There are examples\nin industrial design, architecture, medicine, transport as well as in dealing\nwith environmental toxins.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    In our green technology team at Tehnopol, we know that there\nare already business opportunities that generate revenue properly and that will\nimprove the environment and society! That\u2019s why we also offer a test environment\nfor such companies in our campus to test their own solutions. We know that\nbusiness can be done in such a way that waste is not stored and no one suffers\nfrom scarcity. Nature has done this for 3.8 billion years, 70,000 years of\nhuman history is understandably too little to think, \u201cThat\u2019s what we\u2019ve\nbeen doing all along.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    You could start, for example, by analyzing the supply chain\nin your field. How does the factory where we buy our raw materials work, are\nthey balanced? If not, look for an alternative. And there must be no obstacle\nhere that production will become more expensive as a result. This means being\nhonest with the business environment, because inequalities in the green economy\nwill end sooner or later. Later, it will be just several times more expensive.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    To find new economic models, the question, \u201cbut how has nature solved this problem?\u201d is helpful, writes Ragmar Saksing, Head of Green Technology at Tehnopol Science and Business Park. It\u2019s been clear for a relatively long time that current economic and business models are not sustainable from an environmental perspective. Nature has posed a challenge […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":31,"featured_media":89426,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"_s2mail":"yes","footnotes":""},"categories":[17],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-89697","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.tehnopol.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/89697","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.tehnopol.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.tehnopol.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.tehnopol.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/31"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.tehnopol.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=89697"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.tehnopol.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/89697\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":92783,"href":"https:\/\/www.tehnopol.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/89697\/revisions\/92783"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.tehnopol.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/89426"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.tehnopol.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=89697"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.tehnopol.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=89697"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.tehnopol.ee\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=89697"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}