3 ms·

PSA to the hardware engineers on here -- Y Combinator is actively looking for founders starting climate tech companies: https://www.ycombinator.com/rfs#climate

PSA to the hardware engineers on here -- Y Combinator is actively looking for founders starting climate tech companies: https://www.ycombinator.com/rfs#climate-tech https://www.ycombinator.com/rfs#climate-tech

BillFranklin 2y ago
Also well worth reading -- https://www.institute.global/insights/climate-and-energy/reimagining-the-uks-net-zero-strategy https://www.institute.global/insights/climate-and-energy/rei... Tl;dr = Climate change is best addressed by producing technology that makes things more efficient and/or that helps the developing world decarbonise. If anyone is working on something gamechanging please hit me up -- I'm happy to help out on the dev / infra side pro bono.
lucianbr 2y ago
> The financial opportunity of building in this space is massive: an estimated $3-10 trillion in EBITDA will be up for grabs. Recent legislation will also significantly accelerate the existing market trends. Yeah, I don't think these will be part of the solution. We're not going to get out of this by making more money. Trying to make more money is how we got here. I recently read some opinions about carbon credits for example, and boy does it look like it's just a scam to take money from governments into private pockets, while at best doing greenwashing.
- BillFranklin 2y ago
  > We're not going to get out of this by making more money. I absolutely think we are going to get out of this by making money. The incentives preventing action on climate change are not moral/ethical, but economic. Countries and individuals use fossil fuels because they are cheaper, and are unwilling to make decisions that put them in a worse position relative to others. While de-growth naively sounds appealing, the results are horrendous – countries with approx. the same GDP that they had 20 years ago are not places you would want to move to. You might also point to the ozone layer issue in the late 80s and argue an accord will fix our current problem, but fossil fuels are far more fundamental to our way of life than CFCs were.

BillFranklin 2y ago

Also well worth reading -- https://www.institute.global/insights/climate-and-energy/reimagining-the-uks-net-zero-strategy https://www.institute.global/insights/climate-and-energy/rei... Tl;dr = Climate change is best addressed by producing technology that makes things more efficient and/or that helps the developing world decarbonise. If anyone is working on something gamechanging please hit me up -- I'm happy to help out on the dev / infra side pro bono.

lucianbr 2y ago

> The financial opportunity of building in this space is massive: an estimated $3-10 trillion in EBITDA will be up for grabs. Recent legislation will also significantly accelerate the existing market trends. Yeah, I don't think these will be part of the solution. We're not going to get out of this by making more money. Trying to make more money is how we got here. I recently read some opinions about carbon credits for example, and boy does it look like it's just a scam to take money from governments into private pockets, while at best doing greenwashing.

BillFranklin 2y ago
> We're not going to get out of this by making more money. I absolutely think we are going to get out of this by making money. The incentives preventing action on climate change are not moral/ethical, but economic. Countries and individuals use fossil fuels because they are cheaper, and are unwilling to make decisions that put them in a worse position relative to others. While de-growth naively sounds appealing, the results are horrendous – countries with approx. the same GDP that they had 20 years ago are not places you would want to move to. You might also point to the ozone layer issue in the late 80s and argue an accord will fix our current problem, but fossil fuels are far more fundamental to our way of life than CFCs were.