Yesterday I wrote a post commenting on news from the IEA that it will take $45 trillion dollars and 40 plus years to get to an energy solution that is desirable. Here is an excerpt of my post:

What the IEA is mostly talking about from an expense perspective is the build out of the infrastructure to begin with. But much of it is built or is unneeded entirely. There isn't a silver bullet in the energy revolution. It is an assortment of smaller technologies and habit changes.

My prediction is that a few changes that seem irrelevant to the scale of the problem will be catalysts to another level of energy utilization. I think it will happen within 10 years and then take another 10 years for the realization of it to peak.

Well, just reading the NY Times today provided further optimism for this stance. The piece is called Nature Gave Him a Blueprint, but Not Overnight Success and it is about a company called Pax Scientific. The company has efficiency solutions that it engineered from understanding how liquid and gas moves (non linear). This company was not growing at the rate it expected, but once its customer's understood the implications the sales have seen a dramatic uptick.

I feel there are at least several small companies like this that are ready to see their potential realized.