Why There'll Probably Be No "Green Bubble"

Investors have been concerned about a "green bubble" from speculation in environmentally-friendly firms all year. Some even suggest that the bubble has already burst, at least in terms of support from politicians and the public. The most common bubble-beware argument suggests venture capitalists will repeat their dot-com mistakes and throw billions away at the green version of Pets.com.
But there are plenty of reasons why the dot-com/green-tech analogy doesn't quite hold up.

For one, many investors have been, and still are, quite skeptical about whether the green revolution is real. Also, there have been no significant land grabs yet (with the possible exception of managing "smart" electric grids due to new regulations) brought on by advances as significant as the web browser, wireless internet or smart phones.

Furthermore, venture capitalists are playing it safe since there are so many possible ways to solve environmental problems and few established platforms from which to build upon. In the green sector, patents and proven revenue sources matter more to funders than fancy ideas, brands and buzz, according to Bryan Korba, managing partner at Y Street Ventures, an investment firm with green interests. And finally, the attitude seems to be that the green revolution will be a slow one that could take decades. There are no green "get rich quick schemes" similar to flipping domain addresses.

However I could see a green bubble arising if the government meddles too much in the marketplace. Consider the competition for the first mass-produced electric car between Fisker and Elon Musk's Telsa Motors. The federal government has backed both of them up with roughly half a billion bucks at this point. Having your government pick the winners is sketchy but having the government pick everyone? That kind of guarantee is a recipe for disaster.