No Pressure, But...

The “Network Connection” has been quiet of late. I’m embarrassed to note that August is blank. If you’ve been wondering what I’d say next, so have I. Sometimes it takes an outside event to put thoughts in perspective.

Two weeks ago, I attended a conference in Baltimore, put on by the Air and Waste Management Association (A&WMA), on “Harmonizing Greenhouse Gas Reporting.” I heard a lot of presentations I didn’t much understand. Thankfully a lot of smart people are figuring out how to count greenhouse gasses—heck, I can’t even see ‘em! What was also clear was that there is a lot of “whistling past the graveyard” going on when it comes to data management. The audience in Baltimore was industry, lobbyists, and all levels of government (along with our friends at The Climate Registry (TCR) and other NGOs). They all knew that a large number of governments and NGOs will be collecting data and that:

• Each will define their own business processes, and have the authority to enforce them.
• They will respectfully disagree on many aspects of their programs, like certification and QA.
• The universe of reporters will partially but not completely overlap—a Venn diagram I can’t begin to draw.

And they are all hoping that someone will overlay on this a totally rational and simple “report once—use many” solution. Chet Wayland (EPA-OAQPS) and I talked about the work that we’ve been doing (and plan to do) with EPA and The Climate Registry. I didn’t hear anyone else even hint at how this might all work out. The few data issues raised were things like units of measure that we were working on 10 years ago. In fact the message was “we expect someone to make this simple”. By the end of the conference, it was more clear than ever that the “someone” in question is us-the Network.

Molly O’Neill said in 2008 (Nashville user meeting) that Greenhouse Gasses could be the “tipping point” issue for the Network. I can tell you now that no one else seems poised to step up and bring this all together. Today, I’m surer than ever that we will get up to the plate. If you haven’t heard, we’ve been working with EPA, TCR, select states and others to figure out how this might be managed. The Consolidated Emissions Reporting Schema (CERS) is one fruit of this effort. EPA has repeatedly reiterated its intent to collaborate with states and NGOs on data management, and to make the Network central to the solution.

So we’re going to get a chance! My first thought: Back in project management school, step one would be to get everyone involved to develop a unified business process. That is not going to happen. Prognosis: Failure. Solution: Run away!!

My second thought: We can do this. It looks a lot like projects we've already completed. With a bit of effort, I know we can put together a team and project that can get this done. The Exchange Network grew up on irreconcilable differences. The states and EPA didn't come together in the first place to do the easy stuff. Rule one is that everyone can be special. Network partners agree to respect differences. When participation is voluntary, the rules have to change. If anyone loses, they walk, and we all fail.

In my job, I spend a fair bit of time thinking about what makes the Network worth keeping (since that makes me potentially worth keeping). Technology? The Node is a pretty routine set of nearly obsolete technologies. It works for us, but it isn’t special in any way. It works precisely because we all agree to make it work. We have even developed a set of practices that help us exploit commonality and accomodate differences. If we can do anything that others can’t, it is to find solutions without losers.

For greenhouse gasses, we’ll have figure out how to respect at least 3 fundamentally different approaches to counting, and figure out where all the reporters overlap. If we do things right, we’ll let anyone who has to report emissions report them just once. We’ll make sure that everyone involved gets the data they need. And we’ll make sure that “nobody gets rolled” to make it happen. Probably impossible. Sounds like fun!