6 ms·
Look up breakthrough energy. He's investing a lot into climate.
by leesec 4y ago
Look up breakthrough energy. He's investing a lot into climate.
- t_mann 4y agoOk, thanks, I didn't know about that. 2B is a very decent amount of money. But it sounds more a VC that invests in highly risky, but ultimately profitable ventures. Carbon capture doesn't even feature in their wikipedia description (It invests in a variety of startup companies that are attempting to commercialize new concepts such as nuclear fusion, large-capacity batteries to store renewable energy, and microbe-generated biofuels). My point is, if you're already willing to donate in the billions, why not use that money to literally pay people to find ways to capture the most amount of carbon, regardless of whether that's ever going to be profitable? 2 billion, let alone 50, will pay a lot of smart people's salaries plus expensive equipment for quite some time.
- leesec 4y agoI mean dive deeper, they are funding carbon capture and currently no carbon capture anywhere close to profitability.
- 11101010001100 4y agoThe ROI on this donation to stanford will be very similar to investing in carbon capture technology. I'll let you estimate that ROI.
- t_mann 4y agoMy point is, see it as a donation, not an investment. You probably won't get richer by funding carbon capture, but you also won't get richer from having your name on a building on the Stanford campus.
- 11101010001100 4y agoTake a look at the current carbon capture tech and the potential carbon capture rates from existing technologies. We are orders of magnitudes off from what is needed. You will require a fusion (something Gates is already invested in) level advance to achieve meaningful carbon capture. 1B isn't nearly enough.
- t_mann 4y agoOk, 1B isn't going to go very far there, but that's why I mentioned the Gates Foundation. That sort of money (50B+) could get us somewhere, and might inspire guys like John Doerr to chip in some more as well.