Anthony Pratt, one of the country’s three richest men, rarely ventures into the public arena. As head of one of the country’s biggest private companies, he has no need to. But this week he agreed to speak at the Forbes Global CEO conference, privileged company indeed, on the topic of the 'green economy'.

The green economy is a relatively new subject to such talk-fests – which is progress of sorts – but it still tends to be tacked on at the end of the day, when even the attention spans of multi-billionaires wander and delegate numbers are thin on the ground. And in the media room, reporters are packing up or on the phone to news editors to discuss how to cover the story of the day, which, somewhat inevitably, is from the preceding session and the incredibly bullish forecasts for Australia’s bulk commodities and just about anything else that China wants to buy.

There’s no doubt that’s a big story, but it’s not necessarily good news, as Peter Seligmann, the chairman and CEO of Conservation International, pointed out to the audience. He said the biggest challenge for the world is to find some way of doubling its output of energy, food and water, while deforestation rates reach record levels and stocks of certain fish species plunge by up to 90 per cent. “We are in that place where there are a lot of shifts taking place, a lot of stress,” said Seligmann. “You just can’t say stop. We need to think creatively, how to redesign the way the economic engine works. This is the moment to get it right. This is the era of green economy.”

That is an unsettling concept for lots of people, because 'green economy' and 'sustainability' are taken by many to mean the end of economic growth. The key message from Anthony Pratt, though, and it is an important one, is that there needn't be a trade-off between the environment and a growing economy. It simply will take industries to think differently about their business and their opportunities.

His industry is a case in point. Paper manufacturing is a energy-intensive business, usually associated with the felling of trees and the generation of a lot of waste. But Pratt says Visy now sees more opportunities in avoiding waste – and landfill costs – by recycling it to make more paper, or to provide an energy source.

Every tonne of landfill voided avoids two tonnes of greenhouse emissions – and increasing fees. The company now sources one third of its energy from biomass plants powered by its own waste. The goal is to generate all of its energy from its own waste and effectively implement a closed loop system. “These things are relevant because there will be carbon taxes and landfill fees are going up, so in that sense clean energy is going to be a compelling business,” Pratt said. “We think there are tremendous opportunities in the sustainability space."

This approach was also creating more opportunities. By focusing on recycling, Visy was able to establish a paper mill in New York, the largest manufacturing investment of its kind in the city, by recycling from landfill. “We’ve created a lot of green collar jobs – more than 3000 in the US and 5,000 in Australia,” Pratt said. "We don’t do anything environmental that doesn’t cut costs. Technology has got a lot to do with it.”

Rising energy costs and environmental imposts are clearly exercising the minds of large corporates, and Pratt believes there are immense opportunities in cutting energy use. He pointed to the experience of DuPont, which has saved an estimated $2-$3 billion by becoming more energy efficient. Pratt said most business people underestimate the potential of cost savings.

He also noted the impact of leadership from the very largest companies, such as WalMart, which decided to target a 5 per cent reduction in packaging in products in its stores. Visy responded by investing in technology that reduces the amount of paper used to make boxes. In turn, major customers such as Heinz and Kraft Foods put in orders for lighter packaging. It became a virtuous circle.

Such initiatives are small, but important, steps. As Seligmann said, nations – unlike individuals – do not account for the value of natural resources that are used. There is no annual assessment of the natural wealth of nations. “So we've got to get that right. We have got to value assets correctly. It's being talked about marginally, but has not been addressed.

“As companies, we have to ask ourselves how do we reduce risk. As financial institutions, if we are lending money to that company, we have to assess the risk that is being faced by poor environmental performance. We don’t do that very well either.

“Even more fundamentally, we do not have honest pricing that relates to environmental services. We think of water as being free, clean air as being free, abundant fisheries as being free. We do not account for them.

“Ocean fisheries are collapsing, in some countries they are being totally wiped out. But what is not known – for political reasons – is that the amount of subsidies for those fishing industries is equal to the value of fish being caught. When you begin to think about how to get the green economy together, you have got to get honest pricing on commodities that we think of as being free.”

Dr Zhengrong Shi, the Australian-educated founder and head of the Chinese solar giant Suntech, had a different take on the opportunities in green investment, and the rivalry that now exists between the US and China to dominate the sector. “We need to have a green economy,” he said, and borrowing a quote from the former Chinese supreme leader Deng Xiao Ping, he declared: “Who cares if it is a white cat or a black cat that catches the mouse. Whichever one catches the mouse is a good cat.”