Bill Gates' green investments to shift from tackling climate change to mitigating impacts Mouthpieces for an investment fund co-founded by Bill Gates say their teams have decided to refocus strategy on adapting to climate change. Speaking at the Breakthrough Energy Summit in Seattle last week, Eric Toone, of the Gates-backed Breakthrough Energy Ventures investing committee, said it would take too long to shift the …
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
"Because as average global temperatures continue to increase"
Which is better for life and certainly better than global cooling. It is better for food production and the well-being of those already alive (less lethal than the cold).
Add to that how we have advanced mitigation techniques to deal with less attractive climates and that the climate changes naturally so mitigation techniques work against that too and things are looking up.
This post has been deleted by its author
@Def
"Imagine thinking you have all the answers to a subject you are, in fact, completely ignorant about and then posting them on the Internet."
I can just read your comment, its fine.
"Not all life will survive"
And this is new to you? Throughout an entire history of new and old species some of which get wiped out, which is so common we have a word for it- extinction.
"Something like 90% (I don't have the exact numbers to hand) of the world's food supply comes from a dozen crops. Not only are most of these crops extremely susceptible to changes in temperature and typically grow in quite narrow bands around the planet"
Good job we have improved GM methods from the old days, and our advanced technology allows us to mitigate climate effects to make little climates for growing crops where they are not suited to be grown. Yet as climate models are so incapable they cannot predict more or less rain in an area of New York they are effectively useless but there will still be land to grow on regardless.
"extremely vulnerable to extreme weather events such as floods and droughts"
Which makes things difficult for the climate change religion because as much as they wish to attribute every event (fairly normal events too) to climate change the real world just wont obey.
"Extreme temperatures are bad regardless of whether we're talking about extreme heat or extreme cold."
Except only the nutters are talking about extreme. Just as they were certain of global cooling, run away global warming, global warming, climate change... damn why wont the real world obey the models!
"Yes, if we all just stay indoors, we'll be fine."
Because of the rain? Happens every year, for a fair portion of the year here. Gets warmer in summer and colder in winter. Not much has changed.
"Again, you and I will manage just fine, but millions of others don't have the same luxuries we do"
Sounds like the best approach is to improve the wealth of poorer countries. Like China has done by building energy supply and allowing freer markets! Increased growth also being in the so called 'science' as the way to stop the bad things from happening.
"Oh, how stable is your electricity supply?"
Kinda depends on how bad the winter is. The green madness nutters have screwed the energy supply in Europe. As a result they have had to panic and fall back to even worse sources of power generation that is polluting. But they have monuments to a sky god so maybe if they pray a bit more. Are you praying to your green god too?
"At the same time, fossil fuel industries are massively subsidized by taxpayers around the world. Estimates from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) suggest global public subsidies for fossil fuels almost doubled to $700 billion in 2021."
Remember, "free market capitalism" means
"capitalism, also called free market economy or free enterprise economy, economic system, dominant in the Western world since the breakup of feudalism, in which most means of production are privately owned and production is guided and income distributed largely through the operation of markets."
(Britannica.com)
Nice all-private, 'market-driven', stake-claim we have here...
Rules for thee, not for me...
If what you are saying is, we need to abandon this harmful cronyism that misleadingly calls itself capitalism, remove subsidies of all kinds and the anti-capitalist individuals who set them up, and have real capitalism, then I entirely agree with you. A properly free market wouldn't be subsidizing fossil fuels or anything else bad for the environment.
Theoretically, in a maximal market system, all the land on Earth is owned by corporations, so pollution is vandalism and will incur lawsuits. Can't exploit the ecosystem if it's dying off.
The difficulty of our system arises largely because profits are privatized while damage is socialized.
"With no further human influence, natural processes would begin to slowly remove the excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and global temperatures would gradually decline."
Unpopular view, but the temperature record of the Earth in the pre-human period has fluctuated wildly between extremes with no burning of fuel.
I dispute the casual assertion that with no human involvement the trend would be downwards. There are other factors.
> the temperature record of the Earth in the pre-human period has fluctuated wildly
Nice wording, "wildly", let's try to make it seem like those changes happened at anything like the rate we've been measuring the current rise to occur at.
> I dispute the casual assertion that with no human involvement the trend would be downwards.
Despite the fact that we've seen measurable effects in places where human activity has been (temporarily) reduced over the last few years?
… as opposed to the Oilers who *definitely have something to sell*. Suggest you read Daniel Yergin’s excellent ‘The Prize’.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2022/oct/27/shell-profits-double-95bn-european-central-bank-hike-interest-rates-lloyds-profits-slide-business-live
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/aug/14/saudi-aramco-profits-soar-by-90-per-cent-as-energy-prices-rise-oil
The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & Power https://smile.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0096FWEWM/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_6B75AHVBR1EYBTAGVW0B
I hate to bring this to your attention but oil is and will remain important for defence and national security. Just try to figure out an electric powered battle tank recharging its batteries from a solar panel while preparing for combat. Or 400nm autonomy on a full charge for an electric fighter plane. Infantry riding on all-terrain e-bikes ? Not to speak about oil&gas based products for use on a battlefield.
Now which country wants to be the first in weakening their military by giving up fossil energy ?
@AC The UK has something like 400 tanks and 555 fixed winged military aircraft so calling these out as a pollution issue is moot, and typical of a 'big oil' or climate denier (I'm not saying you are but they use similar types of arguments to wind up a certain type of individual).
e-bikes are a peril on the roads and pavements so maybe ideally suited to war.
This whole climate change agenda is being funded and driven by people who have something to sell, like solar panels and wind farms.
Of course. The global warming movement is littered with failed projections. The ice caps are going to melt. It looks like we've already prevented that. Temperatures are due to exceed 5C, 3C, 2C and now 1.5C. It also looks like we're going to prevent that.
So as evidence accumulates, it should be apparent that prevention has already worked. Therefore prevention money is drying up faster than an almond orchard in California. Especially in the current economic climate. The world is due another huge party when the UN's COP gathers to demand we give the UN $100bn a year to 'fight climate change'.
Self-serving scumbags want their slice of that pie, and mitigation/adaptation is a far more secure and long-term revenue stream. We've seen that in the UK where the first act of Goldman Sach's new country manager has been to re-impose a ban on fraccing and new oil/gas projects. So the UK currently has a bit of a problem, having both a shortage of natural gas, and a surplus of LNG tankers waiting to offload.. To the point where gas prices actually went negative a couple of days ago. People (not people in the 'people like us' sense) were actually being paid to take gas and put it.. somewhere.
Normally, when there's an economic crisis caused by supply/demand imbalance, you might want a policy that increases supply. The UK does after all have oil & gas deposits. Increase production, prices fall, voters are happy. But this is unacceptable. It's far more profitable to reduce supply. Which is what our new fsking idiot of a Prime Minister has just done. Then appears to be doubling down by promoting expensive, unreliable, intermittent and mostly Chinese wind & solar. Even though it's 'renewables' that have directly lead to the 'gas crisis' in the first place.
Truss suggested a windfall tax on 'renewables', because they've been happily flogging electricity at extortionate prices, on account of the gas they don't use. So she had to go.
@Jellied Eel
"Which is what our new fsking idiot of a Prime Minister has just done. Then appears to be doubling down by promoting expensive, unreliable, intermittent and mostly Chinese wind & solar. Even though it's 'renewables' that have directly lead to the 'gas crisis' in the first place.
Truss suggested a windfall tax on 'renewables', because they've been happily flogging electricity at extortionate prices, on account of the gas they don't use. So she had to go."
I wonder if we will look back after the hysteria and conclude she was on to something. Or at least recognise the damage of business as usual.
I wonder if we will look back after the hysteria and conclude she was on to something. Or at least recognise the damage of business as usual.
I hope so, but look how long it took us to transition away from the Age of Sail to the Age of Steam. Our useless idiots still don't seem to understand why we don't still use wind power to drive ships, grind corn, power textile mills etc etc. Some day, our neo-luddites may go "ohhhhh". At least with Gates he's done something slightly useful by putting some money into SMRs.
Having inflicted low-level misery on millions* for so long, you have to applaud Mr. Bill for trying to do some good with his ill-gotten gains. Well done Sir!
*Windows etc being as useless as it was/is causing annoyance and suffering, which is low-level compared to say not having food or clean water.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
