There is one man who has made, and continues to make, a profound impact on my life.  I have yet to meet him but living in my newly adopted home state of California, he influences decisions I make at work as an energy manager and at home when I buy gas, turn on the lights or pay my gardener.  I can call him by name: Governor Moonbeam.  Edmund Gerald “Jerry” Brown is the outgoing leader of one of the largest economies on earth (6^th, if you don’t account for the high cost of living).  As Governor of California for the fourth time, Jerry has a unique place in contemporary history as both the politician that doesn’t go away, and a man with a clear social mission.  For 40 years, Jerry Brown has not only served California, but his social activism and environmental awareness has been a steadfast reminder of what real American inclusion and idealism is. As a younger politician he was often ridiculed for being idealistic.  Today, this idealism would still be considered forward thinking and inclusive.  As an illustration of the context in which he leads, during the 1980 gubernatorial election, he ran on a platform of “protect the earth, serve the people and explore the universe.”

Brown was born into a political family.  His father had also been California Governor, and Jerry was educated at socially liberal institutions University of California Berkeley, and Yale. Before graduating college, Jerry entered training to become a priest.   This laid the groundwork for considerable social awareness and an understanding of how politics works.  He was a man built for politics, entering adulthood in the 1960’s—a time of liberal thinking and questioning in a liberal part of America.  These experiences formed Jerry Brown’s opinions and beliefs and serve as confirmation to the authentic leader he became.

Why is Jerry Brown a sustainability leader?  We can observe his most recent foray on the international stage at the climate conference in Bonn.  Directly opposing America’s withdrawal from the Paris Accord decided by Donald Trump, Brown lead a delegation of American governors and mayors to Bonn, to demonstrate their dedication to SDGs.  Taking a stand on climate issues is not new to Brown, nor is he ever been afraid to speak out in opposition to another popular politician.  Today, he is a liberal elder statesman who had many battles.  Some he has won, others he lost.  Never afraid to contribute, and willing to move from high political office to one of lower standing at the local level, he also never tires of the fight for social justice or environmentalism.  So, to serve the public has been his life’s work, and he has been a progressive, activist leader.  Like many sustainability leaders, he exhibits a keen mind for financial responsibility, and is a fiscal conservative.

Brown has aligned himself with other progressive leaders such as Cesar Chavez and Bernie Sanders.  He was the first to appoint a gay judge, and appointed women and minorities to posts in the 1970s, when few were represented in political positions.  He remains a vocal supporter to women’s rights and continues to align himself with the plight of migrant workers and ‘Dreamers’ (those brought illegally to America as children and who have no official status in the U.S.).  He has been a vocal opponent to the Trump administration’s anti-immigrant policies, signing a bill into law which makes California a ‘sanctuary state’ for its 2.3 million illegal immigrants.  The law means that police cannot ask people about their immigration status and prohibits law enforcement from participating in any federal immigration actions.  He worked to create accountability in politics in the 1970’s and opposed the death penalty.  The combination of fiscal conservative and progressive social leader means that Jerry Brown must be savvy and collaborative in how he executes his large scale environmental vision as well.  He suffered a defeat when he wanted to re-route water from Sacramento to Southern California in 1982 but persisted and succeeded in 2013 with his environmental vision for California, which called for a power grid with 50% of its energy deriving from renewables.  This is especially important for southern California, which gets most of its energy from the hydroelectric power produced in the pacific north west.  Distributed renewables reduce the amount of transmission line losses in place over the long distances currently traveled, because renewables can be placed in the desert of southern California close to large consumption hubs like Los Angeles and San Diego.

Jerry Brown is a template for many Americans who want to feel enabled to action.  He envisions a world of social and political equality, equitable distribution of wealth and a clean environment.  He acts in accordance with those beliefs, and uses his popularity, notoriety and position to achieve sweeping reforms and enacting aggressive and progressive environmental programs.  However, he is often unfairly criticized for not doing enough in the cause of climate change.  California’s export of fossil fuels, and the economic impact they have on the state’s economy, has not escaped his critics outside the U.S. Brown, however, understands the context in which he operates, and can effect change.  Oil drilling in California accounts for many unskilled and semi-skilled laborers, and much downstream tax revenue.  Ceasing drilling operations completely and suddenly would leave a large gap in revenue and employment for Californians that no other industry can quickly ease.  Therefore, it is important that any transition happen with care paid to the people and companies most effected.  So, to be Jerry Brown is to have a thick skin, a determined nature, an inquiring mind and endurance.

I am as energized today as I was when I worked on his presidential campaign in the early 1990’s.  I see myself at the podium, shouting down with righteousness in support of social justice and environmental protection.  I can be secure in the fact that win or loose the battle, like Brown I will keep trying to make the world sustainable for future generations and should not let one defeat end a noble task.

What a great idea– let’s all transition to a low carbon economy.  It is a noble goal, and what some expert believes is the only real solution to a more sustainable world.

I must say that I think the goal is enormous, and particularly difficult (if not unrealistic) to assume that the US Defense Department will be able to become ‘carbon free’ any time soon.  The noble effort has been underway for many years, extending as far back as the G.H-W. Bush administration.  The beauty of these long term and slow rolling efforts is that small changes made by DoD can result in large positive results. For example, typical DoD energy programs actively work to replace legacy systems with more energy efficient ones.  Lighting projects (or light-replacement projects) are the low hanging fruit of our sustainability programs.  Need a new vehicle?  Consider an electric or LPG vehicle.  The list goes on…

The real challenge for DoD’s efforts is nothing less than Presidential.  That’s right.  When, after last November’s election,  the then Commander-in-Chief-elect called for a list of anyone who attended climate change conferences, a shudder ran down our collective backs.  Similar to a Red Scare tactic, the intimidation factor was clear: we would be in his cross hairs over the coming four years.

In spite of two  Executive Orders, a National Strategic Plan and many lesser directives, DJT wants to throw the clock back, recinding decades worth of instutionalized progress which not only contributes to reducing the government’s environmental impact, but also make good practical sense.  Energy use reduction goals also reduce our reliance on foreign oil – that’s good national defense.  Water use reduction is also in our national interest as it becomes a more precious commodity.

We have also begun to look at how we help others live more sustainably.  Our huanitarian assistance programs are another key to reducing our footprint and those whom we assist, as we work towards using updated technology and systems to creating lasting outcomes.  This tranistion will continue, as both civilians and military are inspired by the prospects of making humanitarian assistance even better.  State of the art technology and thinking are tools for us to reach these goals.

So, when DoD aims for a low carbon economy, what it is doing is looking long term, and to effect as many people as possible, both within the ranks and outside the organization.  Four years is nothing to be worried about.

My current job is as a Community Planner for the government, although my education is in physics and engineering.   Like many middle career professionals, I have a toolkit of proficiencies, talents and expertise.  I also have many interests, responsibilities and aspirations.  These adjectives create more than one nexus.  Most recently, that has occurred for me through an opportunity at work in energy management.

Energy management may seem to fall directly into the silo of engineering.  It is true that to be a successful energy manager for the government, you need to have training as an engineer or have untapped talent as a technician that you have miraculously discovered which demonstrates a clear ability to understand engineering problems and develop solutions independently.  Then, you need very particular training in HVAC and electrical systems, so that you can accomplish energy savings systems alterations with meaningful, quantifiable results.

Seeing an opportunity for enrichment and to make a positive impact at work, I asked for, and received, the technical and management training to run the energy management program at the installation.

Training and permission were not the challenges, but the groundwork to address the challenges.  Or so I thought.   There were an unexpected challenges that were interpersonal, communal, and organizational to address.

The current energy manager, Tracy, is not really an energy manager.  Nor is she an engineer, have technical ability or the desire to have such.  Tracy’s motivation in taking over the duties of Energy Manager (before I arrived) stemmed from a desire to capture more job titles and responsibilities in order to request a pay increase.  It is also, in her mind, a way of securing her position in the workforce when the US Government closes our installation. With additional duties, she thinks, it will position her to move over to another US base, and displace another employee with fewer responsibilities.  We have had many conversations on this topic, so I am certain of these motivations.

While it is understandable that someone would want to secure their position and future employment, it is irresponsible for this particular situation to remain intact.  Since the 1973 Energy Crisis in the U.S. the consumption and pollution caused by the burning of fossil fuels has been a focus of the U.S. government.  On April 18, 1977, President Jimmy Carter gave a speech (text of speech captured on PBS.org) outlining 10 principles to guide the future of U.S. energy policy. This policy position begot a series of executive orders, the establishment of the Dept. of Energy and the infusion of best practices within government agencies to reduce the amount of energy consumed by the Federal Government.

I remember the energy crisis of the 1970’s, and have lived most of my life in an America where reducing energy consumption has become the norm.  We insulate our homes to reduce energy consumption (and reduce our fuel bill).  We consider how many miles per gallon we can achieve with our cars.  We turn off the lights when we leave a room, or use natural lighting as much as possible.  It has, essentially, permeated all aspects of our lives, and triggers automatic responses which are considered good habits. The habit is not predicated on who is responsible for paying the fuel bill.

This is in opposition to the culture I have encountered here in the U.K. at work.  The guilt resides with both U.K. nationals who work for us, and some of the U.S. leaders who have chosen not to make energy savings a priority.

I cannot explain any personal discomfort over the push and pull that some decision makers at my workplace face with regard to allowing operations to contradict habits that are well ingrained in our culture.  I know that I have heartburn after every advocacy I make in support of a robust energy management program on the installation.  It is a matter of conscience for us to continue a pattern of energy savings and to look for new opportunities to create savings.

     Why has this changed if I am in the U.K., and what can I do about it?

It became clear to me that in order to run an energy program I needed a few things:

1. Agreement and support from leadership that energy savings directly impacts the success of our missions.
2. Responsibility for collecting and reporting data to higher headquarters on a schedule.  This creates accountability throughout the chain of command for timely response and accurate information.
3. Access to tools to monitor consumption.
4. Ability to communicate energy program goals to the entire installation.

These are obvious tools, but not currently in place.  The precursor to all of this requires a much more subtle  approach, and is difficult because it impacts a person’s career and perceived value to the organization.  That is, the current Energy Manager must understand and accept that she is no longer the Energy Manager.  Communicating change within an organization is very difficult when it is perceived as a punishment or a failure.  In this case, the person did not fail– our leadership failed when it assigned technical duties to someone who is not capable of carrying them out.  The organization continues to fail because she is not capable of any energy management tasks beyond billing customers for their energy use.  Compounding the problem, she manages the requests for construction projects for our organization.  Because she does not understand the mandates from government, and the opportunities available through system replacement or upgrade, long term energy savings projects do not get funded.

I took these concerns to my supervisor, who in turn, went to his boss.  Our mutual boss decided to replace her with me in order to reach our energy goals effectively.

While this puts a competent person in place to manage the program, it also missed some crucial landmarks along the way.  No one told her that she was no longer managing the program.  While the deputy reported to headquarters that I was in place, he never told her that she was relieved of the requirements, and told me, “no one cares about it (energy) anyway.”

Moving forward, I have three communication issues to deal with.

1. I must engage and not alienate my coworker, so we can be productive.
2. I must convince the deputy that the government is still watching and does care.
3.  I must establish a program that reminds our installation that we have a mandate to conserve energy.

These are actions that I am capable of accomplishing.  These changes will require much effort — and the engineering has not even begun.