It's like Al Gore told the choir at Berkeley earlier this year. There is lots of money to be made in the AGW game. When poor folks like Bloomberg, Paulsen, Streich (I can never remember his name), and a long list of hedge fund humanitarians are tussling for a spot at the trough, you know what the real end game was when the money rolled into Paris.
Well, shoot, somebody has to be the first trillionaire. Why not Bill?
And, guess who gets to pay the piper. That's right. P.T. Barnum's favorite mark.
Well, shoot, somebody has to be the first trillionaire. Why not Bill?
And, guess who gets to pay the piper. That's right. P.T. Barnum's favorite mark.
1
The Gates Foundation owns $23 Million or 500,000 shares of Monsanto ...
Do I need to mention what Monsanto's products do to our planet?
Do I need to mention Roundup?
Do I need to mention farmers in India committing suicide because they bought GMO seeds?
Do I need to mention bee hive collapse?
Do I need to mention that seeds and products that Monsanto makes are BANNED in Europe?
Do I need to mention that they don't want GMO labeling?
But alas Monsanto is being taken to court!!!
"OCA, along with IFOAM International Organics, Navdanya, Regeneration International (RI), Millions Against Monsanto and dozens of global food, farming, environmental justice groups announced today (December 6) that they will put Monsanto MON (NYSE) on trial for crimes against nature and humanity, and ecocide, at an international citizens tribunal in the Hague."
Now that's good news!!!
Do I need to mention what Monsanto's products do to our planet?
Do I need to mention Roundup?
Do I need to mention farmers in India committing suicide because they bought GMO seeds?
Do I need to mention bee hive collapse?
Do I need to mention that seeds and products that Monsanto makes are BANNED in Europe?
Do I need to mention that they don't want GMO labeling?
But alas Monsanto is being taken to court!!!
"OCA, along with IFOAM International Organics, Navdanya, Regeneration International (RI), Millions Against Monsanto and dozens of global food, farming, environmental justice groups announced today (December 6) that they will put Monsanto MON (NYSE) on trial for crimes against nature and humanity, and ecocide, at an international citizens tribunal in the Hague."
Now that's good news!!!
1
As much as I respect Mr. Gates, I have many issues with this "tactic" for tackling climate change. Research has been produced by firms like McKinsey concluding that the decarbonization of the energy system will mostly be done with currently existing technology. I agree with Mr. Gates' that R&D budgets of countries vis-à-vis energy have been insufficient, but his refusal to recognize the political forces holding back the potential of policymakers and markets (i.e. Gates' resistance to divest his own holdings from fossil fuel companies, which have been responsible for so much disinformation and lobbying) and his unlimited faith in technological solutions rather than solutions that are easily scalable today just reveal his lack of understanding of the issue. Climate change is more a political issue than it is a technical one.
2
Bill's bucks might be better invested in population control.
1
The National Academy of Engineering has a list of 14 Grand Challenges for Engineering of the 21st century, three of which deal with the demand for energy and climate change---Making Solar Energy Economical; Provide Energy from Fusion; and Develop Carbon Sequestration Methods. The first two of these three challenges are on everyone's list of places to look for transformative development; the third one less so, but is the research interest of one of the committee drawing up the list.
Surprising to this engineer is Developing Technologies for Harvesting Waste Mechanical Energy did not make the list. I wonder if this is something the committee simply missed, or does it reflect an opinion that the fundamental technical obstacle to the required technology development is insurmountable. It is clear that both the natural and manmade worlds are awash in waste mechanical energy.
Surprising to this engineer is Developing Technologies for Harvesting Waste Mechanical Energy did not make the list. I wonder if this is something the committee simply missed, or does it reflect an opinion that the fundamental technical obstacle to the required technology development is insurmountable. It is clear that both the natural and manmade worlds are awash in waste mechanical energy.
2
Mr. McCoy, what is the relative profit potential for recouping waste mechanical energy? In other words, can anyone get filthy rich?
Bill Gates should spin his Rolodex to WARREN BUFFET.
Buffet Own Electric Utilities through MidAmerican Electric that burn mostly COAL hauled from Buffet Mines on Buffet Coal Trains.
Burning Coal for Electric Power is responsible for nearly 40% of the TOTAL CO2 emissions in the U.S. - Replacing Them with CLEAN Energy is the best thing he could do with all that money he say he want to 'Give Away'
Buffet Own Electric Utilities through MidAmerican Electric that burn mostly COAL hauled from Buffet Mines on Buffet Coal Trains.
Burning Coal for Electric Power is responsible for nearly 40% of the TOTAL CO2 emissions in the U.S. - Replacing Them with CLEAN Energy is the best thing he could do with all that money he say he want to 'Give Away'
1
It's so ironic that Gates is telling us that renewable energy isn't ready for prime time, so we should wait for his inventions to save the day.
Is this the same man who sold us Windows 1.0, Office 1.0, MS-DOS 1.0 ??
None of these were ready for serious use when released. They were all released to get Bill Gates' foot in the door so he could accumulate customers to sell his later products to.
Today, he has literally nothing tangible to offer us that will reduce emissions, but he STILL wants us to stick around waiting for his first version 1.0 success.
Is this the same man who sold us Windows 1.0, Office 1.0, MS-DOS 1.0 ??
None of these were ready for serious use when released. They were all released to get Bill Gates' foot in the door so he could accumulate customers to sell his later products to.
Today, he has literally nothing tangible to offer us that will reduce emissions, but he STILL wants us to stick around waiting for his first version 1.0 success.
5
While the effort is nice by Mr. Gates, lets not forget that he has stock in carbon emitting industries. Until he ends his monetary investment in that industry, I can not fully trust him on climate change issues.
3
I think Bill Gates is an amazing individual. First, he isn't afraid of letting governments know that a change needs to happen. Second, he just doesn't talk, but he acts on whatever he puts his mind to. For years, he has prodded government officials for a change and more funds. Finally, people are realizing that this is a big deal, and they are willing to have some skin in the game.
On top of everything, he has invested one billion from his fortune on making this happen. Not just that, in the last 15 years, his foundation has released more than 34 Billion to the help of less fortunate individuals.
His Rolodex of powerful friends will pitch in to get this ball rolling, and once it rolls, the world will be a little bit better. Because at the rate we are going, we will destroy our planet.
On top of everything, he has invested one billion from his fortune on making this happen. Not just that, in the last 15 years, his foundation has released more than 34 Billion to the help of less fortunate individuals.
His Rolodex of powerful friends will pitch in to get this ball rolling, and once it rolls, the world will be a little bit better. Because at the rate we are going, we will destroy our planet.
Don't worry, Will, the Planet will be just fine. At least for another four to five billion years.
I think it would be wise for Bill and Melinda to divest from the Common Core and join with Prime Minister Modi to improve toilet facilities in India. Perhaps Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea could join in this effort.
2
Hopefully, Gates will support any needed solutions, when needed (not knee-jerk immediately), comes from the private sector around the world not from American taxpayers and industry. It worked for his Microsoft, and will if warm weather really, really becomes a problem, not a software "threat."
Http://www.periodictablet.com
Http://www.periodictablet.com
1
It seems like it should be a no-brainer that the goal of finding alternative (and clean) energy sources is sound and good and moral. It both addresses the negative effects on our earth of burning fossil fuels as well as the problems in the middle east by eliminating the rock and the hard place caused by reliance on oil and the associated monetary power structure and conflicts of interest. Every one, governments, private industry and individuals alike, should be behind this — as well as a commitment to alleviating income and educational inequalities, things that inevitably lead to dissatisfaction, hopelessness and radicalization.
1
Bill Gates is a major investor is a nuclear power startup called TerraPower. It is disappointing, though somehow not surprising, that this article fails to mention this. According to TerraPower, nuclear power is sustainable, "safe ... clean."
For how long has this snake oil been on the market? Just a new genius salesman.
One little reactor leak can really expose the hazards of nuclear power.
For how long has this snake oil been on the market? Just a new genius salesman.
One little reactor leak can really expose the hazards of nuclear power.
6
Welcome to democracy in the age of inequality: a government of the tycoons, by the tycoons, for the people ?
6
It sounds good, and I will be open minded for now. I suggest that Mr. Gates and his friend Warren Buffet, look at the consumer driven economy as a major force in destroying the earth and human beings' spirits with low cost wages, poor living conditions, lack of education and health care.
They each own railroads, (Gates, owns part of a Canadian line and Buffet 100% of BNSF) that run primarily on older dirty diesel engines. They are grateful for the Obama decision to stop the pipeline out of Canada to Louisiana, because their railroads and Buffet's rail oil tanker manufacturer will make huge amounts of money as a result. The myth is that rail is clean and safe. It's destroyed communities all across the country with asthma, heart disease, higher cancer rates, shorten lives and keep people in poverty. Babies from in rail yard areas contract asthma within two weeks of birth. This was all documented in a human study at Loma Linda University.
Of course the other consideration is the diesel fuel container ships that are criss crossing the earth to bring all the cheap goods to consumers. The entire system is simply unsustainable. We have to rethink the our way of living and doing business. The good news is that we are trying change, we can use all the technology that is currently available and we can vote people into office who value science, the truth and way forward that puts the earth first, because without the earth, we will have nothing.
They each own railroads, (Gates, owns part of a Canadian line and Buffet 100% of BNSF) that run primarily on older dirty diesel engines. They are grateful for the Obama decision to stop the pipeline out of Canada to Louisiana, because their railroads and Buffet's rail oil tanker manufacturer will make huge amounts of money as a result. The myth is that rail is clean and safe. It's destroyed communities all across the country with asthma, heart disease, higher cancer rates, shorten lives and keep people in poverty. Babies from in rail yard areas contract asthma within two weeks of birth. This was all documented in a human study at Loma Linda University.
Of course the other consideration is the diesel fuel container ships that are criss crossing the earth to bring all the cheap goods to consumers. The entire system is simply unsustainable. We have to rethink the our way of living and doing business. The good news is that we are trying change, we can use all the technology that is currently available and we can vote people into office who value science, the truth and way forward that puts the earth first, because without the earth, we will have nothing.
6
I'd like to see a mass effort made into solar with goals of increasing the efficiency. If they could accomplish a power increase anywhere close to the computing power of the microchip in the technology heyday years, that would be a colossal achievement and a true game changer.
5
Real investment in clean renewable energy development, particularly storage and delivery is more than welcome as we careen headlong into uncharted territory. The regular news of more extreme forms of weather (climate being trends of weather over space and time) must be beginning to get people's attention, those who are not hermetically sealed in a room with nothing but popular websites that carefully exclude any information that might contradict political assertions that nature is not subject to politics.
I hope Bill Gates has not been persuaded that fracking is "clean". It is cleaner than dirty coal, but has so many unaccounted costs, like toxic waste, boom and bust, infrastructure stress left behind, water use, and earthquakes, but that's not good. It is still a large source of emissions, and at this point we can't afford to think we are doing "something" by getting more extreme fossil out of the ground.
I hope Bill Gates has not been persuaded that fracking is "clean". It is cleaner than dirty coal, but has so many unaccounted costs, like toxic waste, boom and bust, infrastructure stress left behind, water use, and earthquakes, but that's not good. It is still a large source of emissions, and at this point we can't afford to think we are doing "something" by getting more extreme fossil out of the ground.
8
If every uranium nuclear plant in the US had a molten-salt and an LFTR reactor installed next to it. We could reuse the nuclear waste and start using thorium to make our electricity at a lower cost. This would triple nuclear energy and eliminate the stockpile of nuclear waste. It wouldn't make more nuclear bombs, but perhaps we have enough of those.
4
It is important that smart and influential people take action and there is no more compelling argument than putting some of your money on the table. While this money is not enough, it is significant - and it has enormous symbol value. What Bill Gates is doing is exemplary citizenship helping to address what is likely the most difficult challenge mankind is facing this century: mitigating climate change by developing new clean energy technologies. There is not quick fix, and answers will only come from large investments into R&D and not from wish-thinking or denial.
3
Yeah, and if Bill and Buddies make a few hundred billion in the bargain, more power to them.
This is a hopeful development. Contrast this to the Koch brothers' effort to hamper efforts at reducing greenhouse gases.
14
As we all have a vested interest in the outcome of Bill Gates's initiative, we should all have the opportunity to contribute. I would not hesitate to "check the box" to make a contribution, on my tax form, if given the choice. If only 15% of the estimated 122 million people who pay taxes in the US give an average of $5, that's nearly $100 million in the first year alone. If we give the populations of those countries who participate in this endeavor the same option, we will have an ample and continuous funding source, which will have the added benefit of not having to depend on the handful of Bill Gates's in the world to provide for the survival of the human race.
10
Gates is doing good, but he will do more good by using his wealth and connections to other vast wealth to fight in the political arena on behalf of candidates who aren't in the pockets of the fossil fuel industry.
16
Even Bill Gates can't do everything. Let him operate where he operates best - which is what he is doing right now.
2
At least in the US the problem is not really a lack of technology but a lack of political will. Today, Germany, Japan and several other advanced countries enjoy our standard of living while using half the energy per capita. If we insulated our houses better, drastically improved public transportation in the US, got rid of all those private jets that Bill Gates and his friends love and applied several other energy conservation measures we could bring our energy consumption down to Germany's level and in the process reduce the amount of carbon emitted. That would be a good start.
12
How is this going to work: Look at the light bulb. The electricity is there, a 50 cent gadget turns it into light, and everybody buys their own lamps, which are cheap. Electricity in the form of energy from the sun (or wind, or tides, or falling water) is already there. An appliance, like a refrigerator or washing machine, can capture that energy, turn it into electricity, use it, and put the surplus into your neighbor's house. All the energy is used, or stored in batteries or hot water. Almost no energy lost in transmission. In most places there is an electric grid already in place to take the surplus door to door, so to speak, or to supply back up power, preferably from renewable sources such as hydro. The whole set up shouldn't cost any more than a refrigerator plus the cost of installation and wiring. The goal: Any household can do it and it's affordable. Once installed, energy from the sun is FREE.
R & D to bring the cost of this down. First scale: What is the most economic scale? Single household or a small group of houses in an array?. Single business or a group of businesses, such as a shopping mall. High rise buildings are a natural collection point for solar on the walls and roof. There are examples of this already in use.
R & D: I.T. to maximize the efficiency of the capture, storage and usage. Pricing to encourage use during peak generation. R&D better solar panels, batteries. Like OS, an $89 solution, but open source; slogan: You can do it.
R & D to bring the cost of this down. First scale: What is the most economic scale? Single household or a small group of houses in an array?. Single business or a group of businesses, such as a shopping mall. High rise buildings are a natural collection point for solar on the walls and roof. There are examples of this already in use.
R & D: I.T. to maximize the efficiency of the capture, storage and usage. Pricing to encourage use during peak generation. R&D better solar panels, batteries. Like OS, an $89 solution, but open source; slogan: You can do it.
2
There is an interaction between the R&D coalition that Mr. Gates is mobilizing and the quandary of cutting emissions from developing countries currently relying on dirty energy sources. For the global population to make the necessary emission cuts and save our planet, it will absolutely require massive humanitarian investment from the G20 (yes, China, India, Brazil, Russia too) in energy research. However, for this research to become effective will require billions more in infrastructure investment.
Case in point: Mongolia has been planning a nuclear power plant for 2020+ and relying on international investment to make it happen. While more than a token project, there will be several coal power plants built in the city of Ulaanbaatar before 2020, pumping out a higher ROI and plenty of smoke over the already smoky city for decades to come.
If we want to build a clean future, not just our R&D, but our private and public investment priorities need to change as well.
Case in point: Mongolia has been planning a nuclear power plant for 2020+ and relying on international investment to make it happen. While more than a token project, there will be several coal power plants built in the city of Ulaanbaatar before 2020, pumping out a higher ROI and plenty of smoke over the already smoky city for decades to come.
If we want to build a clean future, not just our R&D, but our private and public investment priorities need to change as well.
3
Many of us who live in the Seattle area see a certain amount of chutzpah in Bill Gates trying to cast himself as a champion in the fight against climate change. In our region, most of our emissions come from transportation, and no single entity has done more unnecessary harm on that front than Microsoft has by building its Redmond campus out in a far-flung suburb in what used to be a rabbit hutch, where infrastructure has been lacking and commuting by transit is at a natural disadvantage. The legendary traffic jams on State Route 520 and the 520 bridge between Seattle and the Eastside where Microsoft is based are a function of this poor land use choice, or rather of this deliberate choice to exploit weak or nonexistent land-use regulations.
I'm sure that in Bill Gates's mind, there's no incongruity or inconsistency or hypocrisy here. The truth is, there's a whole web of amoral decisions, of decisions that are oblivious of the public good, that Mr. Gates made to get ahead. Good for him. But simply because he has gotten ahead by virtue of his obliviousness of public policy, we're now supposed to take him seriously as a leader on public policy?
I'm sure that in Bill Gates's mind, there's no incongruity or inconsistency or hypocrisy here. The truth is, there's a whole web of amoral decisions, of decisions that are oblivious of the public good, that Mr. Gates made to get ahead. Good for him. But simply because he has gotten ahead by virtue of his obliviousness of public policy, we're now supposed to take him seriously as a leader on public policy?
12
??? The Microsoft campus was built years before climate change showed up on Gates screen.
Instead of Gates spending a billion dollars of his own money on finding new ways to fight global warming you want to spend half of it redoing the Microsoft campus?
Your glass is not half full or a quarter full - it's a eighth full. If you're concerned about climate change I suggest that acknowledging Gates for what he is doing now instead of focusing on what he did twenty years ago would probably make more sense.
Instead of Gates spending a billion dollars of his own money on finding new ways to fight global warming you want to spend half of it redoing the Microsoft campus?
Your glass is not half full or a quarter full - it's a eighth full. If you're concerned about climate change I suggest that acknowledging Gates for what he is doing now instead of focusing on what he did twenty years ago would probably make more sense.
Mitch, I don't think their HQ siting issue was an evil scheme.
Keep in mind that the 1986 HQ decision was part and parcel of the trend nationwide for large corporations to flee cities - often encouraged by outlying suburbs salivating over increasing their tax bases, while ignoring the terrible impact these moves made on transportation?
The corporate campus was aided by white flight and resulted in longer commute times for employees and further damage to cities at a time many were struggling.
So don't blame Bill - incongruities happen all the time. Are we to expect that everything you've ever done is based on "what's the right thing to do here?" I couldn't make that claim.
And read up on what the Gates foundation has been accomplishing. He could have just taken the money and run, so he deserves some credit for decisions made since the mid-1980s.
Keep in mind that the 1986 HQ decision was part and parcel of the trend nationwide for large corporations to flee cities - often encouraged by outlying suburbs salivating over increasing their tax bases, while ignoring the terrible impact these moves made on transportation?
The corporate campus was aided by white flight and resulted in longer commute times for employees and further damage to cities at a time many were struggling.
So don't blame Bill - incongruities happen all the time. Are we to expect that everything you've ever done is based on "what's the right thing to do here?" I couldn't make that claim.
And read up on what the Gates foundation has been accomplishing. He could have just taken the money and run, so he deserves some credit for decisions made since the mid-1980s.
2
Mitch, with electric vehicles and safe, carbon-free nuclear energy that's a non-issue.
1
I emphatically disagree that nuclear energy should be an important part of energy supplies. Chernobyl and Fukushima have been catastrophes of the highest magnitude, and will result in the early deaths of at least hundreds of thousands of people. You can say that Chernobyl was the result of substandard nuclear reactors, but Fukushima used GE reactors. The Fukushima radiation leaks are still not stopped and are still poisoning the Pacific ocean and the northern part of Japan's largest island including Tokyo, though the media is ignoring this story. Nuclear accidents are rare, but when they occur they are horrific. I do not trust that new types of nuclear reactors will be safe. We were told that the old reactors were safe.
11
I agree, there is no solution for nuclear waste that is not harmful. From the mining of uranium to the nuclear waste, nuclear energy is not the solution to climate change. It allows the status quo in energy use to continue, ignores Conservation and has problems from the beginning to the end use.
The key word in the article is "clean" - when billionaires and governments use that term it usually includes nuclear power. It's a nightmare to think of the richest men in the world pushing nuclear power. Anything Gates touches, like the mosquito netting that is being used for fishing nets, like the Common Core intervention in K-12 education and now nuclear power is a nightmare.
The key word in the article is "clean" - when billionaires and governments use that term it usually includes nuclear power. It's a nightmare to think of the richest men in the world pushing nuclear power. Anything Gates touches, like the mosquito netting that is being used for fishing nets, like the Common Core intervention in K-12 education and now nuclear power is a nightmare.
2
MTMurray, thousands of tons of nuclear waste have been stored at nuclear plants for over half a century. It has harmed no one (it would be stored more safely at Yucca Mountain, were it not for misinformed antinuclear activism).
Considering the 13,000 premature American deaths attributable to airborne waste from burning coal every year, your outrage is misdirected.
Considering the 13,000 premature American deaths attributable to airborne waste from burning coal every year, your outrage is misdirected.
In a democracy, what right does this un elected, un accountable person, one man, have to reshape our world ?
imo, he is worse then Trump: Gates is, in effect a dictator, telling the rest of us what to do.
And, if we judge him by the quality of his software, the results of his efforts in other areas won't be good; it is not widely appreciated, but MS software isn't that good
imo, he is worse then Trump: Gates is, in effect a dictator, telling the rest of us what to do.
And, if we judge him by the quality of his software, the results of his efforts in other areas won't be good; it is not widely appreciated, but MS software isn't that good
6
The Koch Brothers are reshaping our world. They just hide the money through opaque foundations while they do it.
And where in the article about funding R&D is Bill telling you what to do?
And where in the article about funding R&D is Bill telling you what to do?
1
Exactly, Ezra Abrams. It disturbs me to see Bill Gates, unelected and sitting on mountains of cash, standing surrounded by a bunch of world leaders. In my opinion, the fact that he has so much sway is evidence that our tax system is not doing its job.
Remember the plan to eliminate malaria in central Africa? Melissa funded a program in which thousands of mosquito nets were distributed free of charge.
Sounds great, doesn't it? Problem was the nets were, and are, being used for fishing instead. The tightness of the weave prevents the smallest fish from escaping and replenishing the fish population. What does she say? Whoops?
And then there is the plan (I'm not kidding here, I wish I were) to fill our upper atmosphere with sulphur to block the sun's rays for a couple of years and thereby lower the increased temperatures of our dear Earth.
When will we ever learn that greed, unabated and rampant, is all it takes to amass huge fortunes. To assume intelligence in these undertakings is an enormous mistake.
Sounds great, doesn't it? Problem was the nets were, and are, being used for fishing instead. The tightness of the weave prevents the smallest fish from escaping and replenishing the fish population. What does she say? Whoops?
And then there is the plan (I'm not kidding here, I wish I were) to fill our upper atmosphere with sulphur to block the sun's rays for a couple of years and thereby lower the increased temperatures of our dear Earth.
When will we ever learn that greed, unabated and rampant, is all it takes to amass huge fortunes. To assume intelligence in these undertakings is an enormous mistake.
7
Funny that you complain about "greed, unabated and rampant" and use as an example the giving away of life-saving mosquito nets.
The problem with the poor needing to simultaneously feed themselves and not catch malaria is a tough one. So what's your idea for a mosquito net that can't be used for other purposes by the poor people who are forced to use pretty much anything they own for multiple purposes?
By the way, small fish don't replenish fish stocks. Mature fish capable of creating or fertilizing eggs replenish fish stocks. Overfishing is a problem, but if the fishers tossed back the largest, mature fish and ate the small ones, they'd ensure an ongoing supply.
The problem with the poor needing to simultaneously feed themselves and not catch malaria is a tough one. So what's your idea for a mosquito net that can't be used for other purposes by the poor people who are forced to use pretty much anything they own for multiple purposes?
By the way, small fish don't replenish fish stocks. Mature fish capable of creating or fertilizing eggs replenish fish stocks. Overfishing is a problem, but if the fishers tossed back the largest, mature fish and ate the small ones, they'd ensure an ongoing supply.
1
Firstly, I commend Mr. Gates efforts and hope the world's leaders will follow suit. We are already in climate change, it's not something down the road and a lot of what's to come is already in motion. At this point, we're just trying to avoid complete calamity. So, rather that put all efforts into tech fixes on things like energy, we should be looking into ways to mitigate the effects of climate change. How do we save those cities that are facing rising oceans, preserve our soil that is drying up, save the many species that are being lost and prevent civil war over limited resources? High tech solutions are often for those at the top, the ones that have the money and education to go for gadgets over lifestyle changes. Many of the solutions to climate change are low tech, namely consuming less. There is so much to accomplish, with so little time. I wish Mr. Gates Godspeed in his quest and hope we all do our part in circumventing what appears to be the end of the world as we know it (with a nod to REM).
2
If I read between the lines what Mr. Gates is searching for is a new, cheap energy source ( I think he referred to it as an energy miracle) that will allow us to keep living like we are. When what we really need to do is live differently-far, far differently- using an order of magnitude less energy to do it. So far all we are doing and proposing is changing from coal to natural gas, changing our light bulbs and driving a fuel efficient car. And continuing on with our current lifestyles. This will never do it. Not by half.
4
Money does not give you smarts. Think Donald Trump.
4
Okay rich guys, ante up. None of my income needs to go to a carbon tax, especially for sending over the third world countries. Countries that have had the same opportunities as we have, been populated for centuries longer, and sat in their grass huts or slums and eked out an existence.
If only the me-first, narcissist Trumps of the world were so humanitarian.
3
I would like to think that I would be as enlightened as Bill Gates if I had his fortunes - both is material wealth and his wealth of native intelligence and upbringing.
I hope he keeps levering everyone of his dollars for all of our benefits. Thank you Mr. Gates.
I hope he keeps levering everyone of his dollars for all of our benefits. Thank you Mr. Gates.
2
I happen to agree with Gates' point of view here, but this is a very dangerous trend.No one elected Gates. His position amongst world leaders is 100% bought and paid for. He is no one's representative. Why is this dangerous? He could stand for anything; he is not an expert in anything except earning a lot of money for himself. I disagree, for instance, with his hugely uninformed stance on education reform, but he has equal power there again because of his money.
If it's ok for people to have enormous political power though they are unelected & not beholden to anyone, we set a precedent for *anyone* to have clout no matter what their views. The name for this is oligarchy. It is in fact pure oligarchy. The fact that the media doesn't call him out, that he is literally standing at Mr Obama's right hand side, is a damning indictment of the meteoric rise in power of the oligarchic class in our supposedly democratic nation.
If it's ok for people to have enormous political power though they are unelected & not beholden to anyone, we set a precedent for *anyone* to have clout no matter what their views. The name for this is oligarchy. It is in fact pure oligarchy. The fact that the media doesn't call him out, that he is literally standing at Mr Obama's right hand side, is a damning indictment of the meteoric rise in power of the oligarchic class in our supposedly democratic nation.
6
If only Bill and Melinda Gates had shifted their priorities toward clean energy to help all of us, especially the global poor, a couple of decades ago.
3
maybe gates should back up and start in his own commercial back yard. my GE clock radio from 1968 works perfectly. yet when i had to upgrade a perfectly good os from microsoft i had to throw out: read: drive a 36 mile roundtrip to best buy to recycle an excellent epson scanner/printer.
let him start by realizing every d'd tech 'innovation' is not that and wastes an incredible amount of plastic and other parts.
let him start by realizing every d'd tech 'innovation' is not that and wastes an incredible amount of plastic and other parts.
6
I had a desktop computer with Windows XP. Loved it, then Microsoft announced it would stop supporting it. So I had to get Windows 8, but my computer wouldn't "support" it, even though it had lots of RAM. So I had to buy an entire new computer. I had the software changed to "mimic" Windows 7. Thanks a lot, Mr. Gates!
1
just as powerful people use scaled numbers to enhance their own ever increasing value, they carefully choose their paths to 'solve' the very problems they have indirectly caused. massive increase in energy use to supply an ever increasing demand base of users, now hooked on the progress and convenience of 'progress itself', is as a waterfall that spills over the edge to a certain gravity pull, with no return to equilibrium, zero sum, except from the solar engine that began all our life, the sun. on a human time scale, we want rapid extraction of million years of stored solar energy (in all fuels, fossil and ocean cycles), to create a world that we now expect as 'a given', each child expects their own car, radio, iPhone, room, bathroom and bus, to support them without a thought of how that has become extant. the rate of our energy use far exceeds the natural replenishment rate provided on the life scale of planet earth, even as we multiply the efficiency of every fuel available. can we now convert some new resource for human exploitation? much as a nuclear fission reaction, that needs a critical mass, humans have exceeded that mass and now consume and leave debris and waste behind for generations to come. having accumulated a numeric monetary power structure, that allows them the casual life of doing ever less, even as they grow to their inevitable old demise. batteries? the earth is our greatest 'battery' that is now being depleted faster than it is being replenished!
3
Someone had told me US East Coast is where the power is, Silicon Valley & Seattle may all be about Computer innovatioons. Bill Gates being the Richest man Learnt the Lesson during the Netscape-IE Monopoly Judicial Hearings. Since then he has been advocating all these World Issues.
Sure Earth needs clean energy, but more importantly it needs to reduce consumption. Present Privilged Life, Growth and Sustainability is just not preservable even for the First World.
Sun is God, next to that Chemical Energy is God in sustainiing Life.
Sure Earth needs clean energy, but more importantly it needs to reduce consumption. Present Privilged Life, Growth and Sustainability is just not preservable even for the First World.
Sun is God, next to that Chemical Energy is God in sustainiing Life.
1
It would be far better, in principle, if this kind of effort were undertaken at the behest of elected representatives using taxes collected from multi-billionaires, such as Gates. But given our dysfunctional Congress and the know-nothing, corrupt, climate-change deniers in the pocket of Big Oil and Big Coal that we regularly elect and re-elect, one has to rethink reliance on philanthropy and thank God for Bill Gates.
2
Gates put money into research on new kinds of nuclear reactors. That is the real story here. Just a couple days age the NYT had a story about nuclear energy plant construction. I looks like there is a new push that direction.
1
Bill Gates is worth what, $50 billion. Why does he not invest his money in actually producing a clean energy source such as cutting age wind turbines or electric generation through solar power. Talk is cheap. Develop, create and produce ( hopefully in the U.S.) products that people can use instead of fossil fuels.
15
Sue, it doesn't get cleaner than nuclear energy, which generates ten times the carbon-free electricity of "cutting age" wind turbines and solar power combined. What's more, it doesn't check out after the sun goes down or the wind stops blowing.
Talk is indeed cheap. How much $$ have you put in?
2
Gates has not been interested in revolutionary new science before this. A large new organization is likely to move much too slowly.
What is needed is a reasonable number of Angel investors.
Example: Fuel-free engines that can run 24/7 on solar energy. A converted Ford engine proved it possible. See aesopinstitute.org
What is needed is a reasonable number of Angel investors.
Example: Fuel-free engines that can run 24/7 on solar energy. A converted Ford engine proved it possible. See aesopinstitute.org
1
And at home Ted Cruz and a republican congress have declared jihad against the climate and Paris climate talks. Anything they can do to undermine President Obama.
11
It is good that Bill Gates wants to take some of his fortune to support clean renewable energy (as long as he doesn't support fracking, which is another form of extreme fossil with a variety of uncounted liabilities). One might think that a less unequal distribution of wealth might be better for everyone, but if it is concentrated in the hands of one man, it is good that he is becoming aware of the dangers to all of humanity that are pressing upon us all.
Slightly off topic, but in the service of knowing what is being done to obscure that information, people might find this interesting. Admiral Titley held ground against a bunch of unskeptical "skeptics" including the guy who compared Distinguished Scientist Mike Mann to molester Sandusky. They repeat all the discredited information from the fossil-supported universe in support.
http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings?ID=CA2ABC55-B1E...
Quite disgusting. The self-righteousness with which the four invited witnesses (only Admiral Titley was invited from the reality-based world, the rest were unskeptical "skeptics") is nauseating.
Slightly off topic, but in the service of knowing what is being done to obscure that information, people might find this interesting. Admiral Titley held ground against a bunch of unskeptical "skeptics" including the guy who compared Distinguished Scientist Mike Mann to molester Sandusky. They repeat all the discredited information from the fossil-supported universe in support.
http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings?ID=CA2ABC55-B1E...
Quite disgusting. The self-righteousness with which the four invited witnesses (only Admiral Titley was invited from the reality-based world, the rest were unskeptical "skeptics") is nauseating.
Why is this man not on track to win his second Nobel Peace Prize?
2
On the other hand there are the Kochs working to ban or penalize photovoltaic systems and eliminate the EPA because it cuts into their refinery and coal profits.
However enlightened Mr. & Mrs. Gates are, there are other billionaires who are not. The article's photo illustrates it is not just the United States that is sliding into oligarchy.
However enlightened Mr. & Mrs. Gates are, there are other billionaires who are not. The article's photo illustrates it is not just the United States that is sliding into oligarchy.
12
It's reassuring that the world's richest man recognizes that only nuclear energy can permit us to avoid the worst effects of climate change - after Bernie Sanders announced his regressive, 1970s-era crusade to do away with it.
1
The World Health Organization estimates that between 2030 and 2050 about 250,000 people will die from climate change per year.
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs266/en/
Mr. Gates is right to push us toward solving this. Given the inertia that has gripped this issue for 20+ years we need him to help coordinate the world's leaders.
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs266/en/
Mr. Gates is right to push us toward solving this. Given the inertia that has gripped this issue for 20+ years we need him to help coordinate the world's leaders.
5
Bill Gates is right: The world needs a huge R&D investment in energy sources that don't emit greenhouse gases. Joe Romm is right: The technologies born of the giant R&D investment won't be on board – much less dominant – in time to stave off climate-change-induced tragedies. In the meantime, while the R&D teams beaver away, we'll need to a) save energy and b) do our best to displace carbon-intensive energy sources and bring online the getting-more-efficient-every-day renewables already available. Terrible human sufferings – from flood, famine and consequent unrest – will duly appear on our screens, and we'll only sometimes be able to reckon how much of the suffering can be attributed to climate change. That scenario will evoke both apathy and industry. Let's hope the industrious carry the day.
11
Conn, we could stop carbon in its tracks by 2050 if we built one new nuclear per week globally, using the tech we have right now. Impossible? That's the rate they were being built in 1983 - briefly. We're just 34 years too late.
Methane heating + Global Warming, according to Arctic News, can begin eliminating human life within 8-16 years. If correct, we must aim to achieve a seemingly impossible 90% reduction in the burning of fossil fuels within 5 years. Bombers were built every 59 minutes 24/7 by Ford during WWII. A similar effort is needed now for production of breakthrough technologies.
New science makes possible engines that will run 24/7 on atmospheric heat. This is a huge untapped solar energy resource, larger than all Earth's fossil fuel potential. A Ford engine was converted to run without fuel.
AESOP is converting a small Briggs & Stratton engine and a Mitsubishi V6 to Fuel-Free operation. Both will run 24/7 if desired and can spin generators. See aesopinstitute.org
The science involved, like Cold Fusion, is hard to believe. Trolls publish rants containing lies and distortions accusing AESOP of fraud and dishonesty. Converted engines validated by independent laboratories will speak louder than words. Moving such revolutionary technologies, based on controversial new science, forward fast enough to make a difference, is the real challenge. Are Angels the missing ingredient?
New science makes possible engines that will run 24/7 on atmospheric heat. This is a huge untapped solar energy resource, larger than all Earth's fossil fuel potential. A Ford engine was converted to run without fuel.
AESOP is converting a small Briggs & Stratton engine and a Mitsubishi V6 to Fuel-Free operation. Both will run 24/7 if desired and can spin generators. See aesopinstitute.org
The science involved, like Cold Fusion, is hard to believe. Trolls publish rants containing lies and distortions accusing AESOP of fraud and dishonesty. Converted engines validated by independent laboratories will speak louder than words. Moving such revolutionary technologies, based on controversial new science, forward fast enough to make a difference, is the real challenge. Are Angels the missing ingredient?
What an amazing thing it is that Bill and Melinda Gates decided a number of years ago to focus their professional lives towards helping the world’s poorest people lift themselves out of hunger and poverty, harnessing advances in science and technology to save lives in developing countries, improving U.S. high school and postsecondary education, and building strategic relationships and promote policies that will help advance this work. Their dedication towards achieving these worthwhile goals provides inspiration to leaders in business, technology, and government. Best wishes Bill and Melinda as you help us move forward as a society.
3
Here is my problem with technology development:
Imagine I purchase a prius-leaf or other very high mileage vehicle. Over the year, i do indeed reduce my emission from driving. However, at the same time I save money. the big question is, what do i do with that money? maybe i bundle my family into a plane and fly to Denver and go skiing for a week.
Now, has the technology actually reduced my carbon footprint?
Over all the centuries of technology, we have improved the efficiency of almost all or our technology based products while still increasing our overall carbon footprint.
My take on this is that I wouldn't be too sure that a market driven conversion to more efficient technologies will reduce our carbon footprint very much at all, though it may slow the growth somewhat
Imagine I purchase a prius-leaf or other very high mileage vehicle. Over the year, i do indeed reduce my emission from driving. However, at the same time I save money. the big question is, what do i do with that money? maybe i bundle my family into a plane and fly to Denver and go skiing for a week.
Now, has the technology actually reduced my carbon footprint?
Over all the centuries of technology, we have improved the efficiency of almost all or our technology based products while still increasing our overall carbon footprint.
My take on this is that I wouldn't be too sure that a market driven conversion to more efficient technologies will reduce our carbon footprint very much at all, though it may slow the growth somewhat
4
Private electric cars will do nothing to save the huge swaths of land paved over by parking lots and asphalt for Auto Addiction, the 30,000 lives lost to Auto Addiction, the increasing obesity shown to be 90% correlated with hours spent sitting and driving, the huge material resources to run over 300 Million cars.
The fuel is only a part of the issue with private car Auto Addiction.
30% of Americans who cannot drive are shut out of mobility by Auto Addiction ramming through the requirement to drive everywhere instead of supplying safe, clean, electrically powered Green public transit.
Instead of starting with private electric cars we should be running our already electrified Rail systems, or public electric shuttles or buses. But if you look on TV or any daily newspaper you will find 1 out of 6 Ads for private cars and whole sections of the paper devoted to Autos. It makes way more money for Capitalists to force people to pay $9300 for a private car instead of providing public transit. This is why the GM Trolley conspiracy of GM, Chevron, Firestone and others systematically dismantled the US existing very extensive trolley and Rail systems in favor of Auto Addiction sprawl.
The fuel is only a part of the issue with private car Auto Addiction.
30% of Americans who cannot drive are shut out of mobility by Auto Addiction ramming through the requirement to drive everywhere instead of supplying safe, clean, electrically powered Green public transit.
Instead of starting with private electric cars we should be running our already electrified Rail systems, or public electric shuttles or buses. But if you look on TV or any daily newspaper you will find 1 out of 6 Ads for private cars and whole sections of the paper devoted to Autos. It makes way more money for Capitalists to force people to pay $9300 for a private car instead of providing public transit. This is why the GM Trolley conspiracy of GM, Chevron, Firestone and others systematically dismantled the US existing very extensive trolley and Rail systems in favor of Auto Addiction sprawl.
2
Bob, with LED bulbs using one-tenth the electricity of incandescents, my neighbors adorn their property with ten times as many holiday lights. "Jevon's Paradox" is real - so increasing efficiency won't cut it. We need to focus on eliminating fossil fuels completely from our energy diet.
2
If your Prius saves enough on gas to pay to fly your family from NH to Colorado for a ski weekend, you were using too much gas in the first place.
1
When Myopics are leading the Blind.
Limiting global warming to two degree Celsius is possible only by one and only one counteraction, which is in accord with the the laws of physics. The atmosphere of Planet Earth must be cleansed and must be returned to a much earlier composition.
Slowing or even halting greenhouse gas emissions will not limit global temperatures to merely a 2 degree Celsius rise. Instead, global temperatures will continue their rise and may not even slow perceptively. It remains impossible to predict future temperature rises.
At the start of the Industrial Revolution, energy sciences were in their very early states. Nobody could have predicted the dire consequences of emitting huge amounts of carbon dioxide at first and of other, industrial pollutants a century later.
In 2015, energy sciences have progressed to a point, at which many of past damages can be reversed or repaired.
However, limiting global warming to 2 degree Celsius is the wrong target for future efforts. Instead, the well intentioned efforts of world leaders, world economists, and of disproportionately powerful billionaires must be focused on the correct targets.
The atmosphere of Planet Earth
• Must be cleansed to historic concentrations,
• Production of substitutes for carbon-neutral engine fuels must be invented, and
• Carbon-free generation of electricity must become viable.
This trio of scientifically and technologically doable targets can become reality with proper guidance.
Limiting global warming to two degree Celsius is possible only by one and only one counteraction, which is in accord with the the laws of physics. The atmosphere of Planet Earth must be cleansed and must be returned to a much earlier composition.
Slowing or even halting greenhouse gas emissions will not limit global temperatures to merely a 2 degree Celsius rise. Instead, global temperatures will continue their rise and may not even slow perceptively. It remains impossible to predict future temperature rises.
At the start of the Industrial Revolution, energy sciences were in their very early states. Nobody could have predicted the dire consequences of emitting huge amounts of carbon dioxide at first and of other, industrial pollutants a century later.
In 2015, energy sciences have progressed to a point, at which many of past damages can be reversed or repaired.
However, limiting global warming to 2 degree Celsius is the wrong target for future efforts. Instead, the well intentioned efforts of world leaders, world economists, and of disproportionately powerful billionaires must be focused on the correct targets.
The atmosphere of Planet Earth
• Must be cleansed to historic concentrations,
• Production of substitutes for carbon-neutral engine fuels must be invented, and
• Carbon-free generation of electricity must become viable.
This trio of scientifically and technologically doable targets can become reality with proper guidance.
3
The need for action on climate change and pollution is timely. You can't wait for capitalism to change its bad behavior before we do something. So Bill Gates played the game and won, big. Now he has the knowledge, skills, resources, and connections to work the system for something that is both good for all of us, and potentially a windfall opportunity for a startup and its investors. That's the system. That's how it works. And that's what it's going to take for the humans to fix these problems on the global scale. Big Oil will be replaced with Big Clean Energy.
9
How has Bill Gates not won the Nobel Prize?
2
Hurray for Bill Gates! I know plenty of wealthy people who only spend their money on themselves. They don't give a dime to anyone. This is truly an act of altruism. Thank you!
13
Where are all the complaints about a rich guy using his money to influence public policy? Bill is wrong when he advocates tax policy favorable to Microsoft, but he is a hero when he supports the progressive view of climate change.
The left is only opposed to money in politics when it is being spent against them.
The left is only opposed to money in politics when it is being spent against them.
1
Gates, Jobs and the others should pay their fair share of taxes before lecturing us on sustainability.
7
The "intellectual architect"? How so? Is he a scientist? So, he invests some of his own (seemingly limitless) funds into renewable energy initiatives and that gives him entrée into our government? Then once he's weaseled his way into the inner sanctum he dictates how government funds are spent, and makes sure our taxpayer funds are directed to his private projects? The middle class will ultimately pay the price, as we have with the planned obsolescence built into this egomaniac's windows products. I may not fully understand how this works, but I find the concept of billionaires brokering deals with world governments appalling.
12
I'd be happy if we could just get rid of the maddeningly ubiquitous backpack-style gas-and-oil-powered leafblowers. Lawn tidying is helping to ruin our planet, not to mention the air we breathe and our hearing. My neighborhood resounds with noise from these machines at all times of year, and residents are at the mercy of paid landscapers, as my city's noise ordinance specifically exempts lawn maintenance equipment. Why wait for leaves to fall to the ground to pollute the air and deny others the peaceful enjoyment of their own property? Who cares whether someone has guests, is recovering from surgery or otherwise ill, or is trying to host a child's birthday party? So what if the area wildlife and outdoor pets are terrified, as evidenced by high-pitched "danger" noises each time a landscapers' truck pulls up to the curb? Obviously the landscapers' rights are more important than those of anyone or anything else. In any case, one can just "get used to" noises reminiscent of those emanating from a body shop, at 80+ decibels for hours on end, right?
Sorry about the rant, but I'm skeptical that effective change on a broader scale can be achieved when we cannot even control idiotic behavior within our own neighborhood. What it comes down to is that too many activities now known to be harmful have been grandfathered and are thus given a pass, particularly if they are the sort of things that men like to do.That most noise and air pollution cannot be seen doesn't mean it's not harmful.
Sorry about the rant, but I'm skeptical that effective change on a broader scale can be achieved when we cannot even control idiotic behavior within our own neighborhood. What it comes down to is that too many activities now known to be harmful have been grandfathered and are thus given a pass, particularly if they are the sort of things that men like to do.That most noise and air pollution cannot be seen doesn't mean it's not harmful.
23
When it comes to suburban lawn care you might have added the ridiculous use of pesticides and fertilizer.
3
Great point. I arrive at my desk compromised on a daily basis after walking through a gauntlet of fumes emitted by leaf blowers outside my fancy suburban office building.
2
Most people do not need gas lawn mowers either!
I have used a manual push lawn mower for years- it costs nothing, makes very little noise, generates no pollution! So long as the grass does not get too high
a manual push mower works fine.
These are the solutions we need not more high tech whizbang junk
I have used a manual push lawn mower for years- it costs nothing, makes very little noise, generates no pollution! So long as the grass does not get too high
a manual push mower works fine.
These are the solutions we need not more high tech whizbang junk
2
Bill & Melinda Gates are literally putting their own money on the table as a down-payment on a clean, sustainable world - their efforts should be applauded by all, AND emulated by all of the other Billionaires out there.
15
B & M are putting their money into their own company TerraPower a nuclear power company. They still have no answers to the waste created by uranium mining and the waste left from nuclear power plants but they are pushing ahead with their billions to create a nuclear power renaissance. Because M & M Gates do not believe in conservation or changing our life styles one iota. They want us to keep on living our polluting life styles because they think that their billion$ invested in their choice of "clean" energy will allow our status quo to continue.
There is boatloads of money to be made in climate related technology. Mr. Gates is very aware of this, but he is also smart enough to connect the dots and realize the consequences of doing nothing. Investing money to make money for the good of humanity seems like a better solution than waiting for worldwide governments to lead. Governments are slow to react and outstanding leadership is almost non existent. The main focus of government is spending our money. Coming up with expedient or intelligent solutions to serious issues, and yes making money belongs to the private sector.
3
Well and good, and very comfortable to the status quo of neoliberalism, which among other defining characteristics since its start under Thatcher and Reagan, is stamped with great private hi-tech fortunes, and public private partnerships, the famous P cubed. Some of us remember democracy, way back when, although this era seems more notable for the private corporate capture of all the public regulatory agencies, which failed en masse to prevent the real estate derivatives bubble from building and imploding in 2008-2009. Marked also by the grand revolving door between private thrones and public seats supposedly responsible for the common economic & environmental good. Joe Romm is saying: R&D is fine but we are in a losing race to keep temperature rise and CO2 emissions at the targets we are not meeting. Not even close. Deploy solar now.
These pledges from business celebrities remind me of the bond drives during World War II, but where are the full employment policies and rationing which engaged the whole population? Even Bernie Sanders, plugging FDR's Second Bill of Rights, the first being the Right to a job, couldn't make the linkage to a green CCC, despite his emphasis on that great FDR speech from 1944 and fighting global warming.
In Maryland, even the head of our Climate Commission was horrified at my suggestion that all public schools go solar, my solution to legislative. stalemate...oh no, it has to be voluntary he said. Moral equivalent of war? Hardly.
These pledges from business celebrities remind me of the bond drives during World War II, but where are the full employment policies and rationing which engaged the whole population? Even Bernie Sanders, plugging FDR's Second Bill of Rights, the first being the Right to a job, couldn't make the linkage to a green CCC, despite his emphasis on that great FDR speech from 1944 and fighting global warming.
In Maryland, even the head of our Climate Commission was horrified at my suggestion that all public schools go solar, my solution to legislative. stalemate...oh no, it has to be voluntary he said. Moral equivalent of war? Hardly.
17
Yes, if there were a truly integrated national electrical grid and solar were widely adopted it would go a long way toward reducing our carbon emissions. New technologies may well emerge but solar is here now and it's very cheap contrary to the usual disinformation. Also battery costs are becoming much less expensive so off peak storage will be more viable. Solar can be done cheaply now without further R&D, just do it.
3
I applaud these rich guys for wanting to do the right thing. Surely it beats the approach taken by the Kock brothers and their ilk.
However, the problem with entrepreneurs is that they see everything as a business with investment and payoffs... in this case decades later. We don't have additional decades to waste.
If I had tens of billions of dollars, I would outbid coal companies for mining rights and leave the coal in the ground, or buy coal companies outright and shutter them. I would invest in transmission lines to enable movement of solar and wind power from where the resource is strong to where the demand is strong, and I would develop utility-scale solar and wind power production to use those lines. I would invest in electric vehicle charging stations to help spur the transition to an electric fleet. These efforts would substantially reduce CO2 from electricity and transportation, the two main sources of emissions.
No moonshot required, and we could start today.
However, the problem with entrepreneurs is that they see everything as a business with investment and payoffs... in this case decades later. We don't have additional decades to waste.
If I had tens of billions of dollars, I would outbid coal companies for mining rights and leave the coal in the ground, or buy coal companies outright and shutter them. I would invest in transmission lines to enable movement of solar and wind power from where the resource is strong to where the demand is strong, and I would develop utility-scale solar and wind power production to use those lines. I would invest in electric vehicle charging stations to help spur the transition to an electric fleet. These efforts would substantially reduce CO2 from electricity and transportation, the two main sources of emissions.
No moonshot required, and we could start today.
2
We can move to electric transportation within a few years which will also save lives and huge swaths of paved over green space. How? By doing what the US elite did from 1942-45 promoting Green Transit Rail, Trolleys and buses over Auto Addiction. In just 3 years intercity train and bus ridership quadrupled, trolley and local transit ridership also quadrupled while drivers were ostracized.
We need Green Transit not private electric vehicle Auto Addiction which kills 30,000 per year, takes 10 times the land of Rail, requires a football field of asphalt for every 5 cars and also incurs huge hidden expenses for traffic cops, traffic courts, ambulances, emergency rooms all paid for with our general tax dollars. A Brookings study found that ALREADY with our anemic public transit that 70% of Americans in the top 100 Metro areas are only 3/4ths mile from a transit stop! But our Rail and LightRail systems potential is wasted by lack of frequent service. All over the US on NJ Transit, SunRail, MARC, there is not even hourly train service on existing tracks, no weekend service whatsoever, service which ends at 7 PM. There is frequently no local/express service which can greatly increase transit speed over distances. There are no sidewalks, no connecting shuttles, no coordination with buses.
We should restore the operating system for existing public transit and pay for it out of an increased Federal gasoline tax as existed for decades until Reagan. Then we could run the trains!
We need Green Transit not private electric vehicle Auto Addiction which kills 30,000 per year, takes 10 times the land of Rail, requires a football field of asphalt for every 5 cars and also incurs huge hidden expenses for traffic cops, traffic courts, ambulances, emergency rooms all paid for with our general tax dollars. A Brookings study found that ALREADY with our anemic public transit that 70% of Americans in the top 100 Metro areas are only 3/4ths mile from a transit stop! But our Rail and LightRail systems potential is wasted by lack of frequent service. All over the US on NJ Transit, SunRail, MARC, there is not even hourly train service on existing tracks, no weekend service whatsoever, service which ends at 7 PM. There is frequently no local/express service which can greatly increase transit speed over distances. There are no sidewalks, no connecting shuttles, no coordination with buses.
We should restore the operating system for existing public transit and pay for it out of an increased Federal gasoline tax as existed for decades until Reagan. Then we could run the trains!
2
Over the years the Koch Brothers have donated over a billion and a half bucks to a variety of causes: public television, environmental concerns, cancer research and education just to name a few.
2
For years I've enthusiastically applauded Mr. Gates' efforts on climate change, education and offering even brief access to health care (or at least inoculations) for those in third world countries. He is but one example of a very successful person using his incredible wealth to better the world around him.
But what does it say about us and the governments that "serve us" when the politicians we elect need the prodding of the world's richest in order to do what's logical and reasonable?
I guess money does talk. And thank god, in this instance, it's saying the right thing.
But what does it say about us and the governments that "serve us" when the politicians we elect need the prodding of the world's richest in order to do what's logical and reasonable?
I guess money does talk. And thank god, in this instance, it's saying the right thing.
4
Batteries with multiple times the power density of the current ones are the key to stopping global warming. Producing power cleanly is not as big a problem. Once we have better batteries everything else will fall into place. We need some more basic science funding.
12
What is wrong with the idea of using that clean electrical energy to generate hydrogen gas which can be burned cleanly converting back to water.
I wish I knew what you seem to know. I've heard that batteries are the key before & wonder why? I'm guessing that what you are saying is that the sun isn't always shining or the wind isn't always blowing so we need batteries to store the excess energy when it is shining or blowing... But we are nowhere near the capacity of creating solar power or wind power to worry about how to store the excess. When we do get to that point, could we simply pump water to a higher location and "store" the energy there until we need it & then create electricity using turbines when we do need it?
Coincidentally, the $80 billion fortune that makes Mr. Gates uniquely able to impact climate change, is the exact amount of the contract to build the Air Force's next stealth bomber. If we as a country were really committed to impacting climate change, we would be investing our tax dollars in similar amounts to what we are spending on bombers.
38
Ever wonder why we can come up with 1.8 Trillion yes Trillion dollars to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan but the whole world can not come up with $100 Billion to save the planet when we are less than a decade from point of no return for parts of the world vis a vis global warming?
57
So Bill Gates is "investing $1 billion of his own money." I couldn't help but think how much of that should have been paid in taxes, to employees here and overseas, to patent holders who were strong armed, to mitigate his company's environmental impact? Now he comes forth unironically as a "savior". No, this is a power-mad venture, like everything else these folks do, Zuckerberg, Bezos, the whole lot. They can't turn it off.
It used to be that climate change was going to be solved by ordinary people everywhere doing the right thing - if everybody just took these steps we could change the world. Maybe that was wrong, and it clearly failed. But the power of the people was considered. Like it was a democracy. But now all of us together don't have the power of a Bill Gates. And climate change can be solved by buying things from these few companies he and his friends control. This approach could very well fail too, but at least we'll see without obfuscation who's really ruling the world.
It used to be that climate change was going to be solved by ordinary people everywhere doing the right thing - if everybody just took these steps we could change the world. Maybe that was wrong, and it clearly failed. But the power of the people was considered. Like it was a democracy. But now all of us together don't have the power of a Bill Gates. And climate change can be solved by buying things from these few companies he and his friends control. This approach could very well fail too, but at least we'll see without obfuscation who's really ruling the world.
12
A double edged sword here. Bringing government and major private sector wealth together on the task is good. The downside however is the very real phenomenon of motivating the rest of humanity to sit on the sidelines waiting for the panacea "free electricity" technology that might come from this collaboration--20 or 30 years in the future.
Available right now is energy efficiency technology, wind and solar electricity generating technology and even battery technology that is cheaper than legacy fossil fuel sources if the accounting is done correctly.
The Gates and company contribution would be much more valuable if it included a parallel, full-throated embrace of the good work under way right now to replace CO2 energy with solar and wind. Right now it's 10cents/kWh for wind and solar delivered to the consumer's plug and probably 20cents/kWh from the fossil fuel grid if the environmental externalities are included.
Available right now is energy efficiency technology, wind and solar electricity generating technology and even battery technology that is cheaper than legacy fossil fuel sources if the accounting is done correctly.
The Gates and company contribution would be much more valuable if it included a parallel, full-throated embrace of the good work under way right now to replace CO2 energy with solar and wind. Right now it's 10cents/kWh for wind and solar delivered to the consumer's plug and probably 20cents/kWh from the fossil fuel grid if the environmental externalities are included.
2
The externalities of fossil fuels and especially coal are rarely mentioned and poorly understood by the public or the media. If those costs were priced into what we pay for fossil fuels it would be well over 20cents/kwh. The main stream media bears a huge responsibility in not reporting this kind of information to the general public. Not to mention the politicians who are in thrall to old energy industries.
1
Good to see the President standing next to his oligarch. Easy to see who controls who. Still if he can save the planet, it's a small price to pay. On the other hand, think what America could do if he had paid taxes on that hoard.
7
we do not need glamorous techno fixes for the problems caused by infinite growth and mindless materialism. Lester Brown from Worldwatch and then Earth Island Institute pointed out in his "Plan B" book years ago that we know the answers to our problems with Peak resources and Climate change -
we need to stop the endless Wars costing trillions of dollars while destroying people's lives, infrastructure and housing, we need to redesign cities for people not for cars, we need to conserve resources first, we need to reduce mindless private material consumption and support shared public libraries, parks, schools, art, post offices and especially public transit.
We do not need more whizbang no value added electric can openers, huge riding lawn mowers, electric paper towel dispensers or electronic junk such as that peddled by Mr Gates to last a few years before winding up on the scrap heap with toxic materials. Gates is along with 90% of economists futilely searching for some techno magic bullet to continue our gluttonous life of material waste for those dwindling few still able to afford it instead of changing to a shared sustainable life supporting community as advocated by Naomi Klein. The techno delusionists are like the obese person who keeps thinking there is some magic pill to lose weight while continuing to overeat, sit watching TV and then sit driving to within a few feet of everywhere instead of walking or taking Green Transit. Exponential material growth is impossible
we need to stop the endless Wars costing trillions of dollars while destroying people's lives, infrastructure and housing, we need to redesign cities for people not for cars, we need to conserve resources first, we need to reduce mindless private material consumption and support shared public libraries, parks, schools, art, post offices and especially public transit.
We do not need more whizbang no value added electric can openers, huge riding lawn mowers, electric paper towel dispensers or electronic junk such as that peddled by Mr Gates to last a few years before winding up on the scrap heap with toxic materials. Gates is along with 90% of economists futilely searching for some techno magic bullet to continue our gluttonous life of material waste for those dwindling few still able to afford it instead of changing to a shared sustainable life supporting community as advocated by Naomi Klein. The techno delusionists are like the obese person who keeps thinking there is some magic pill to lose weight while continuing to overeat, sit watching TV and then sit driving to within a few feet of everywhere instead of walking or taking Green Transit. Exponential material growth is impossible
19
orbit7er, forget riding lawn mowers. If the residents of developing countries get half of the modern conveniences you and I take for granted every day, the climate is in big trouble.
Bill: a coalition on clean coal could use your help.
This venture sounds less destructive than Gates' public school assault, but are we so bereft of character and resources that predatory billionaires who employ armies of accountants and lawyers to avoid taxes are now deemed the best hope for humanity?
Maybe it's assumed Gates can't be bought and is therefore virtuous -- like a certain Republican candidate much in the news these days?
Are ignorance and vanity really harmless, when coupled with such wealth and lack of restraint?
Maybe it's assumed Gates can't be bought and is therefore virtuous -- like a certain Republican candidate much in the news these days?
Are ignorance and vanity really harmless, when coupled with such wealth and lack of restraint?
7
If Bill Gates does for Climate Change what he has done to public education, the planet is in big trouble.
If Bill Gates does for Climate Change what he has done to American workers by calling for more and more H1B visas (which saturates the market for engineers and scientists and drives down wages), the planet is in big trouble.
Will he have current workers in the Climate Change field train their replacements brought in from overseas before they are fired?
This man is rich, nothing more. He is not any smarter than the rest of us. He uses his money to buy the opportunity to do things his way. After seeing the state of public education after his involvement, only the uninformed would celebrate this announcement.
If Bill Gates does for Climate Change what he has done to American workers by calling for more and more H1B visas (which saturates the market for engineers and scientists and drives down wages), the planet is in big trouble.
Will he have current workers in the Climate Change field train their replacements brought in from overseas before they are fired?
This man is rich, nothing more. He is not any smarter than the rest of us. He uses his money to buy the opportunity to do things his way. After seeing the state of public education after his involvement, only the uninformed would celebrate this announcement.
33
Well he lied a great deal about the virtues of Windows over IBM PS/2. Of course it made lots of money for him. But IBM PS/2, with multithreading and proper memory management was far less likely to lock up while you were using it, and when it did, only the thread of the app that locked up was lost, not all your work and all your data - so PS/2 was a full decade ahead Windows. For the next decade the widspread use of Windows by hundreds of millions of people meant hundreds of millions of productive man hours lost every time Windows locked up.
In essence Gates by winning the operating system wars was stuffing his pocket while chocking productivity around the globe.
Okay, to most people this is a transparent issue, but it still sticks in my crawl.
In essence Gates by winning the operating system wars was stuffing his pocket while chocking productivity around the globe.
Okay, to most people this is a transparent issue, but it still sticks in my crawl.
Honeybee, it sounds like you bit into some sour grapes.
2
Couldn't agree more.
The fastest way to cut CO2 is to stop the uncontrolled burning that is going on around the globe. The peat fires in indonesia put out more CO2 that the whole United States, as do the underground coal fires in China (I haven't found any figures for the fires in the U.S.). There are new ways (through very small drilled holes) to fight these coal fires. From burning down the Amazon to inefficient cooking fires in third world countries ('rocket stoves' can fix that), we are ruining our biosphere in more ways than burning fossil fuels. We have to think outside the box---and we have to do it NOW.
5
Gates needs to spend on advertising the problem in this country. Unfortunately, here, it's a partisan political problem. Republicans deny climate change and they control the flow of legislation and they support and are supported by the fossil fuel industry. So, unless that Rolodex has Jim Inhofe's and Lamar Smith's numbers (and their donors), success will be limited.
Kudos to President Obama, and kudos to Mr. Gates. In the late 1950s American rockets were blowing up on the launchpads. By 1969 Americans were walking on the moon. We did that with an enormous government/industry/academia collaboration, (with lots of money behind it) and we can make that kind of progress again. This kind of "Apollo program" for clean energy is what we have long needed. So glad to see it's finally happening!
Glad to hear that Mr. Gates is taking on climate change. Hopefully his billions can be also be put to use promoting birth-control worldwide. Otherwise, all the alternative energy innovations will be cancelled out.
1
Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg for president and Vice president on an independent ticket.
Obviously they are much much smarter than any of the candidates and are by far better American citizens as well.
Of course they are much to smart to ever take the posts even if offered and even if they did take the job Republicans would make their lives as miserable as possible.
Obviously they are much much smarter than any of the candidates and are by far better American citizens as well.
Of course they are much to smart to ever take the posts even if offered and even if they did take the job Republicans would make their lives as miserable as possible.
The divine right of money. This planet does not even belong to humanity as a whole, let alone to the relative handful of bandits who appropriate for themselves virtually all of the wealth the global econony creates.
Money is nothing, means nothibg, and justifies nothing. In fact, the rules according to which money operates underlie not only global warming but poverty and war. These problems need to be solved by an informed humanity as a whole not a few thieves turned Santa Claus.
Step one is to eliminate the flaw in capitalism that creates billionaires in the first place: tbe divine right of money.
Money is nothing, means nothibg, and justifies nothing. In fact, the rules according to which money operates underlie not only global warming but poverty and war. These problems need to be solved by an informed humanity as a whole not a few thieves turned Santa Claus.
Step one is to eliminate the flaw in capitalism that creates billionaires in the first place: tbe divine right of money.
42
I'm not sure why you are referring to this man as a thief. He spent the majority of his formative years teaching himself software and computer technology while the rest of us were out partying and fooling around, and he built his business from the ground up, from nothing. That business, in-turn, enabled many tens of thousands of other businesses and was directly responsible for the creation of thousands of "middle-class millionaires" (engineers who would have otherwise worked at mediocre automotive and aerospace jobs for lower-middle class salaries) due to the extreme usefulness of its products. Yes, he became a billionaire as a result of these efforts...a billionaire who just so happens to be giving away all of his money to help us.
But I guess some people have to find fault in anything.
But I guess some people have to find fault in anything.
7
The problem is not billionaires, it is externalities.
1
Anonymous:
I didn't realize that working 60 hours a week is "partying."
Look. There is something fundamentally wrong with the architecture of an economic system that creates billions of poor people, beggars governments, disempowers democracies and everything that entails, and creates a few thousand billionaires.
I am sure Mr. Gates is well-meaning and a nice person, but billioniaires -- and, worse, corporations as at this year's COP, having the ears of government while millions of others eat tear gas -- is not the way you save, let alone govern, the human race.
I didn't realize that working 60 hours a week is "partying."
Look. There is something fundamentally wrong with the architecture of an economic system that creates billions of poor people, beggars governments, disempowers democracies and everything that entails, and creates a few thousand billionaires.
I am sure Mr. Gates is well-meaning and a nice person, but billioniaires -- and, worse, corporations as at this year's COP, having the ears of government while millions of others eat tear gas -- is not the way you save, let alone govern, the human race.
Great that this group will require governments to be part of this. Sanctions against governments don't always work. Rewarding positive government behaviorior on this and other issues such as human rights makes more sense.
19
Mr. Bill Gates is most serious about getting the world do something most healthy to turn the tide of climate change. This is a huge opportunity for developing economies the world over to appreciate creating better and safer energy sources to driving their economies forward. Ghana must immediately explore generating power from wind vanes and direct from the sun rays that shoot at and on the country with little or no let for electricity production. Where are the Ghanaian scientists? Where are the Ghanaian scholars? We should be able to create safer technologies that mitigate the danger of climate change. Please do something worthwhile about the contents of what academic institutions are currently working on. Is President Mahama listening?
12
While Donald Trump and the rest of the Republican clown car are running around screaming "the sky is falling" brilliant billionaires like Bill Gates and friends are trying to save the sky and make sure the rest of humanity has a livable world to exist in. At the other end of the spectrum we have billionaires like the Ken Griffin and the Koch brothers in a recent NY Times article using their billions to rig the political game so that they can have their taxes lowered and put political puppets in power who will do their bidding with no concern for the rest of the world. Funny how extremes of wealth bring out the best or worst in people.
80
Ron, it probably seems that way. More likely, it's the power they wield which make the best/worst billionaires newsworthy.
1
Finally, some good news to start my morning. These are the people who should really lead us. Always thinking of a better way and believing in the science that spurs their imagination to create a better world for all.
22
Are you serious? Who elected Bill Gates? When did he even run for office? By what expertise does he claim to be of help here?
6
As someone whose career as a software engineer coincided with the birth and rise of Microsoft, I can tell you that the company was NOT the innovator you suggest. Rather, they slowed the pace of progress by a decade or so to ensure that with each incremental step, MS maintained backward compatibility and thus kept its user base. That is, the progress was slowed to keep market share. You can't blame them for this, given the rules of the game, but please don't make Gates out as a great innovator. For years, MS was taking ideas for Windows from Apple, and Apple took some of its ideas from Xerox Parc (windows, mouse) before that.
5
What's in it for Mr. Gates? A new tax shelter? A new revenue stream?
14
You would never understand.
1
If it works, who cares?
1
What's in it for Mr. Gates is the ability to tell his grandkids that they can grow up in a world where they aren't threaten by rising sea levels, more frequent and destructive storms, stifling draughts, increasing pollution and respiratory disease, etc. Climate change is nonpartisan, you don't have to be leftwing progressive or conservative nut job to want to solve it. All citizens should take a leaf out of Mr. Gate's book and do more to address climate change because if we want to endlessly argue about all the other issue from funding Planned Parenthood to allowing refugees to gun control to economic development, we first need to solve this one.
3
Is the R&D really necessary or should we listen to some really smart guys who have already figured out the technology and just need political will to support and quickly implement their ideas.
Amory Lovins of The Rocky Mountain Institute has identified energy efficiency as the low hanging fruit.
Mark Jacobson of Stanford University has developed a 100% clean renewable energy plan for all 50 of the United States as well as a 100% plan for all major countries using existing technology.
Elon Musk continues to thumb his nose at conventional wisdom and is developing electric vehicles, improving efficiency of solar panels and developing scalable batteries to store clean renewble energy.
So do we really need to go back to the drawing board and develop new technology or is this just a ploy to sponsor Gates beloved third generation nuclear energy.