Global Warming About The Money? – AGW Investment Club…

So is Global Warming about the money?

Bill Gates joins $170bn climate change investment club

Clean tech on the list
By Gavin Clarke 13 Dec 2016 at 15:31

Bill Gates is leading a $1bn climate-change venture with a roll-call of tech’s biggest names.

Microsoft’s co-founder has joined Breakthrough Energy, described as investing in “reliable, affordable, zero-carbon energy, food and products for the world.”

The first investment is reported to be in clean tech.

Gates is reported to have told Quartz: “We need affordable and reliable energy that doesn’t emit greenhouse gas to power the future and to get it we need a different model for investing in good ideas and moving them from the lab to the market.”

Well, “only” one $Billion? Well, I guess for Gates it’s just a hobby…

A string of millionaire entrepreneurs and business captains are joining Gates, including Amazon founder and chief executive Jeff Bezos, PayPal and LinkedIn founder-turned VC Reid Hoffman, Sun Microsystems co-founder Vinod Khosla, Alibaba Group chief Jack Ma and the co-founder of SAP, Hasso Plattner.

The group’s net worth clocks in at $170bn.

Oh, $170 Billion net worth for the group. Well, now we’re starting to talk real money. Almost as much as the UN wants Each And Every Year…

All about the money? Sure looks like it.

Subscribe to feed

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in AGW and GIStemp Issues, Economics - Trading - and Money and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Global Warming About The Money? – AGW Investment Club…

  1. John F. Hultquist says:

    Bill still doesn’t get it: “. . . energy that doesn’t emit greenhouse gas . . .

    First he should stop using the phrase “greenhouse gas”, and …
    He should step up and build a nuclear power facility.
    The issue is to build one that does not add H2O to the atmosphere.
    Not that it matters much, but it would cut down on the photos of cooling towers wrongly accused of belching that dirty CO2.

  2. Larry Ledwick says:

    Sounds to me that it is a sales pitch to draw money into projects that they probably already have in mind but they want to give them a smiley face image and build up some buzz.

    At the bottom of the above page they have links that take you to the individual sectors they are going to focus on.

    If I was in their shoes I would already have working papers on various projects and perhaps have already acquired patent rights or licenses to develop certain ideas putting them in the key position to skim (ahem profit) from the development efforts even before the ideas are profitable.

    get a line on an idea that either has great potential or sounds good enough that you can sell it to eager investors even though scientifically it will be a bust, but will look good while you churn money through hit and take your cut as all the money goes down your pipe line.

    If you get lucky you are like General Electric and alternating current generation and will be at the ground floor of industry changing developments. If the projects bust you make like Elon Musk and ride the wave as long as you can keep milking investors and the government before it does a face plant.

    (what makes you say I have become cynical?)

  3. Pouncer says:

    Why can’t Bill invest in a home version of KRUSTY? (Maybe with Thorium rather than Uranium?)
    ” [KRUSTY] is a small, lightweight fission power system capable of providing up to 10 kilowatts of electrical power – enough to run several average households – continuously for at least 10 years. ”

    It seems sort of like computers in WWII. Oh sure, the GOVERNMENT needs a few computers, for code breaking and maybe calculating missile trajectories. But no INDUSTRY has any use for such a thing, and the idea that an individual home might be equipped is laughable. If Bill had the vision to see personal/home computers had potential can’t he see that personal nuclear generators likewise open up new economic territory? AND, that the first-mover’s advantage in that market is a precious opportunity to be seized and never relinquished?

  4. ossqss says:

    It is all about control E.M.. Global Life Style adjustment initiatives is what I see. Money is just the facilitator of such. Much investment in this stuff is based on salesman nameplate numbers, until the capacity factor is disclosed by the ultimate exposed stats.

    There really is no zero carbon energy to speak of. Start up needs such, even Nuke and fully electric vehicles.

    Just sayin….. can you say Shell Game? ;-)

  5. H.R. says:

    @Larry: Minor typo
    “(what makes you say I have become cynical?)”

    Should be
    “(what makes you say I have become cynical a realist?)

  6. philjourdan says:

    Money is the means to the end (it is in most cases, so no big surprise). The end is control of people. And loss of rights and freedoms.

  7. Graeme No.3 says:

    “reliable, affordable, zero-carbon energy, food and products for the world.”
    I am not sure about zero-carbon food; what does it taste like (if at all?).
    But it sure sounds like something that could make a fortune “SLIMMERS – Eat as much as you want and lose weight with our ZERO CARBON food”.

Comments are closed.