Can Google help solve climate change?

It's a question that has been bugging me since I attended a workshop at Google's London offices. Here's why.

One of the main barriers to progress on environment and energy is information. It's not that we don't have the fundamental science -- it's that we don't always understand it and, when we do, we don't always trust it.

If we accept climate change as the common term for many complex environmental issues, then public opinion polls are revealing. Back in July, I wrote in a post that:

"According to a poll by Yale University, 71% of Americans believe global warming is happening. Lest you cry the influence of limousine liberals, a Fox News poll has this number even higher, at 82%... The same Fox News poll shows that 79 % of Americans also believe that human activity is either fully or partially responsible climate change."

However:

"The same poll released by Yale also showed that only 48% of the public believes there is a consensus amongst the scientific community on climate change, while 40 % of Americans still believe there is a lot of disagreement. If you account for a sampling error of ± 4%, these numbers are uncomfortably close."

People believe the science, but not the scientists. This is a bit like believing that your house is burning, but not trusting the firemen's advice when they arrive.

Why is that?

There are many reasons, including how easy it is to inject uncertainty into complex science, and how difficult it is for generalist reporters to cover the complexities of climate change under ever increasing market pressures (re. failures) on newspapers.

But part of the reason -- and this is what I'd like to focus on -- is the way environmental messages are communicated from distinct, and often competing, voices with competing messages about long-term abstract threats.

If the question is, how do we get people to not only accept the science, but also the responsibility of climate change, than a potential solution would be a more effective method of disseminating information. It would require a shift from discrete, competing and abstract messages, to compressive, immediately compelling information.

Here's what I mean.

In participating in a Green Workshop at Google's London office two weeks ago, a few of us spoke with Benjamin Kott, Manager of Green Business Operations for Google EMEA.

To frame the discussion, consider Google's stats:

• They have more than 4.5 billion searches each month
• With over 500 million unique visitors each month
• For over 60% of total online market share.

(Note that these did not come from Google, but from outside sources. They may not be accurate, but they suggest the size of Google's audience.)

If one were able to harness the eyes behind these numbers, the potential scale to communicate information about environment and energy exceeds any effort by any NGO, any green marketing campaign. And it could be deployed within Google's existing strategic values and technical framework.

There's no doubt Google is keen. Eric Schmidt, Google's CEO, has been outspoken on this issue. Back in December he spoke alongside NRDC's president, Frances Beineke, and others, on the urgency of significant carbon reductions and the importance of investing in the low-carbon infrastructure to make this possible. See the video here.

And so, to answer the question originally stated, the answer is simple: Yes, Google can help combat climate change. More accurately, they already are.

But how might they extend their position beyond already impressive investments in renewable energy?

I'm going to return to this in my next post in a day or two, and lay out some ideas in detail.

--

For the second in this series on Google and climate change, click here.

(Photo courtesy of Raul Ochoa @ flickr. Used under the Creative Commons lisence.)