Gates, Zuckerberg, Bezos...Major Investment In Clean Energy

[Star]

.

Many of the world's greatest innovators and futurists are combining their resources...


Gates, Zuckerberg and Bezos invest in huge clean energy fund
Steve Dent

After announcing the Mission Innovation program to convince nations to double their clean energy investment budgets, Bill Gates has launched another massive initiative at the United Nations Climate Change conference in Paris. The Breakthrough Energy Coalition is backed by a who's who of tech lewho's whoaders, including Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, Jack Ma and Richard Branson. The idea is to develop new green technology that will increase the world's energy output -- especially in poor countries -- without contributing to global warming. Such tech, however, poses a risk that regular investors might shy away from. "We need the basic research, but we need to pair that with people who are willing to fund high-risk, breakthrough energy companies," said Gates.

The coalition explains that green energy tech doesn't lend itself to the typical Silicon Valley investment pipeline, because of the "nearly impassable Valley of Death between promising concept and viable product." While government funding is an important part of that, Gates and the partners feel that enterprise can play an equal role. "The private sector knows how to build companies, evaluate the potential for success, and take the risks that lead to taking innovative ideas and bringing them to the world," according to the group.





As such, the group wants to throw investment money early and often at promising green power technology, and once it's "de-risked," let traditional investors take over. The group also plans to fund a broad array of tech like storage, generation and efficiency, search for novel "outliers," and focus investment dollars on countries that invest the most in the "Mission Innovation" program. So far, those nations have committed as much as $20 billion extra to the program, and given the luminaries involved in the private initiative, enterprise will no doubt significantly augment that sum.


.

 

[Star]

.

Many of the world's greatest innovators and futurists are combining their resources...


Gates, Zuckerberg and Bezos invest in huge clean energy fund
Steve Dent

After announcing the Mission Innovation program to convince nations to double their clean energy investment budgets, Bill Gates has launched another massive initiative at the United Nations Climate Change conference in Paris. The Breakthrough Energy Coalition is backed by a who's who of tech lewho's whoaders, including Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, Jack Ma and Richard Branson. The idea is to develop new green technology that will increase the world's energy output -- especially in poor countries -- without contributing to global warming. Such tech, however, poses a risk that regular investors might shy away from. "We need the basic research, but we need to pair that with people who are willing to fund high-risk, breakthrough energy companies," said Gates.

The coalition explains that green energy tech doesn't lend itself to the typical Silicon Valley investment pipeline, because of the "nearly impassable Valley of Death between promising concept and viable product." While government funding is an important part of that, Gates and the partners feel that enterprise can play an equal role. "The private sector knows how to build companies, evaluate the potential for success, and take the risks that lead to taking innovative ideas and bringing them to the world," according to the group.





As such, the group wants to throw investment money early and often at promising green power technology, and once it's "de-risked," let traditional investors take over. The group also plans to fund a broad array of tech like storage, generation and efficiency, search for novel "outliers," and focus investment dollars on countries that invest the most in the "Mission Innovation" program. So far, those nations have committed as much as $20 billion extra to the program, and given the luminaries involved in the private initiative, enterprise will no doubt significantly augment that sum.


.

Below is a link to the
Joint Launch Statement released today including these countries...

"November 30, 2015, in Paris, France, issued on behalf of the Governments of Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Denmark, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Norway, Republic of Korea, Saudi Arabia, Sweden, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United Arab Emirates, and the United States of America:"

and these private entrepreneurial/innovators/futurist/billionaire clean energy investors...



Who We Are

Mukesh Ambani
Chairman and Managing Director, Reliance Industries Limited

India

John Arnold
Co-chair, Laura and John Arnold Foundation
United States

Marc Benioff
Founder, Chairman and CEO, Salesforce.com
United States

Jeff Bezos
Founder and CEO, Amazon
United States

HRH Prince Alwaleed bin Talal
Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Alwaleed Philanthropies
Saudi Arabia

Richard Branson
Founder, Virgin Group
United Kingdom

Ray Dalio
Founder, Bridgewater Associates
United States

Aliko Dangote
Founder and Chief Executive, Dangote Group
Nigeria

John Doerr
General Partner, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers
United States

Bill Gates
Co-chair, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
United States

Reid Hoffman
Founder, LinkedIn and Partner, Greylock
United States

Chris Hohn
Founder, The Children's Investment Fund
United Kingdom

Vinod Khosla
Founder, Khosla Ventures
United States

Jack Ma
Executive Chairman, Alibaba Group
China

Patrice Motsepe
Founder and Executive Chairman, African Rainbow Minerals (ARM)
South Africa

Xavier Niel
Founder, Iliad Group
France

Hasso Plattner
Co-founder and Chairman, SAP
Germany

Julian Robertson
Founder and Chairman, Tiger Management
United States

Neil Shen
Founding Managing Partner, Sequoia Capital China
China

Nat Simons and Laura Baxter-Simons
Co-founders, Prelude Ventures
United States

Masayoshi Son
Founder, Chairman and CEO, SoftBank Group Corp.
Japan

George Soros
Chairman, Soros Fund Management LLC
United States

Tom Steyer
Businessman, Philanthropist, and President, NextGen Climate
United States

Ratan Tata
Chairman Emeritus, Tata Sons
India

Meg Whitman
CEO, Hewlett Packard Enterprise
United States
Ms. Zhang Xin and Mr. Pan Shiyi
Co-founder and CEO, SOHO China
Chairman, SOHO China
China

Mark Zuckerberg and Dr. Priscilla Chan
Founder, Chairman and CEO, Facebook
Pediatrician and CEO, The Primary School
United States

University of California
.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Bunch of rich idiots who either have no idea or no care for the harm their AGW scam is causing.

 

[Star]

Bunch of rich idiots who either have no idea or no care for the harm their AGW scam is causing.

I'm guessing but-----but I'm guessing that, like most smart people this group has - in one form or another invoked...

...Bill Clinton's Grandma & Grandpa test:

"I think with regard to science we have to at least get those people who have no interest in it to adopt what is now my mode of thinking—the grandparent test. That is, you name me one other risk-related decision, where if 95 percent of the experts were here and one to five percent of the experts were there, any grandparent would stake his or her grandchild’s future on the five percent. So how about this—suppose one guy wrote one article in one journal and said, You know, I’ve been thinking about these child-restraint seats and I think you know there’s a one-in-a-million chance a kid could snap his neck so I recommend just throwing the kid in the backseat and letting him roll around. And ninety-nine percent of you would say, Oh my God, you can’t do that. These are working—look at how much the fatalities have gone down.

Name me one grandparent that would choose the one percent? Not one."

I'm wondering, what test do you climate deniers use to conclude that bunch of mostly self-made billionaires/multi-millionaires/futurists/innovators/entrepreneurs are idiots? G'head, roll the dice on your baby's... future - now who's the idiot?

.

 

[westwall]

One percenters using the power of government to mandate that you pay them for the very air that you breath. I thought you didn't like the one percenters? I thought you were for the poor and the middle class the two groups who are going to be harmed the most by the policies they wish to implement.

 

[Fueri]

It is exactly this type of consortium that is needed to develop clean energies that are economically feasible, which is ultimately necessary for the success of any of them on a global level.

the money has to come from somewhere to do that as to this point it has been difficult to get over that hump so if they want to pump their $$$ in to push the technologies closer to that threshold good on them, IMO.

 

[westwall]

It is exactly this type of consortium that is needed to develop clean energies that are economically feasible, which is ultimately necessary for the success of any of them on a global level.

the money has to come from somewhere to do that as to this point it has been difficult to get over that hump so if they want to pump their $$$ in to push the technologies closer to that threshold good on them, IMO.

The problem is the money will come from those who can't afford to give it. Or is that lost on you?

 

[Fueri]

It is exactly this type of consortium that is needed to develop clean energies that are economically feasible, which is ultimately necessary for the success of any of them on a global level.

the money has to come from somewhere to do that as to this point it has been difficult to get over that hump so if they want to pump their $$$ in to push the technologies closer to that threshold good on them, IMO.

The problem is the money will come from those who can't afford to give it. Or is that lost on you?

Read what I wrote FFS before popping off. I'll reiterate:

"if they want to pump their $$$ in to push the technologies closer to that threshold good on them"

 

[Dot Com]

Bunch of rich idiots who either have no idea or no care for the harm their AGW scam is causing.

ironic first denier response is ironic. Proves OP's siggie.

The group is willing to fund the risky part that most capitalists are too scared/incapable of undertaking.

 

[westwall]

It is exactly this type of consortium that is needed to develop clean energies that are economically feasible, which is ultimately necessary for the success of any of them on a global level.

the money has to come from somewhere to do that as to this point it has been difficult to get over that hump so if they want to pump their $$$ in to push the technologies closer to that threshold good on them, IMO.

The problem is the money will come from those who can't afford to give it. Or is that lost on you?

Read what I wrote FFS before popping off. I'll reiterate:

"if they want to pump their $$$ in to push the technologies closer to that threshold good on them"

The problem is they are not. They are taking money from the poor and the middle class to do it.

 

[whitehall]

It's a good thing for the private sector to invest in technology designed to reduce dependence on fossil fuel as long as the government doesn't force Americans to adhere to restrictions designed by the private sector. Clean energy research is good unless it is funded by taxpayers or it becomes a political issue designed to drain the U.S. economy..

 

[Fueri]

It is exactly this type of consortium that is needed to develop clean energies that are economically feasible, which is ultimately necessary for the success of any of them on a global level.

the money has to come from somewhere to do that as to this point it has been difficult to get over that hump so if they want to pump their $$$ in to push the technologies closer to that threshold good on them, IMO.

The problem is the money will come from those who can't afford to give it. Or is that lost on you?

Read what I wrote FFS before popping off. I'll reiterate:

"if they want to pump their $$$ in to push the technologies closer to that threshold good on them"

The problem is they are not. They are taking money from the poor and the middle class to do it.

Well if that is the case my opinion would likely change, but I don't see any proof of that and certainly not enough to toss the raspberry at them yet.

I read the article in which it seems they are addressing the problematic issue of profitability and seeking to help push those technologies over the hump. That basic issue is central to the development of any technology of course as if it doesn't sell to the people, it ain't going anywhere.

It also cites the Breakthrough Energy Coalition which is a private vehicle for funding the investment in these technologies. Yes, there is some gubmint partnership discussed, however, I don't see the pipeline from the poor/middle class to this coalition.

I think it's smart to get the private sector involved, as they are much, much better at this sort of thing than government in the long term, and it seems (to me at least) that this is what they are trying to do here.

without some serious $$$ behind it I don't see how we get over that hump whereby clean energies are more efficient than fossil fuels, which have had the luxury of many, many years of intensive development in terms of both the acquisition of the fuels and the maximization of their efficiency.

I think I'd let it play out before jumping with both feet on it like some offshoot of the AGW fringe element. These guys aren't nuts, they are arguably some of the brightest folks walking the planet today so if not them, then who I guess.....

 

[2aguy]

.

Many of the world's greatest innovators and futurists are combining their resources...


Gates, Zuckerberg and Bezos invest in huge clean energy fund
Steve Dent

After announcing the Mission Innovation program to convince nations to double their clean energy investment budgets, Bill Gates has launched another massive initiative at the United Nations Climate Change conference in Paris. The Breakthrough Energy Coalition is backed by a who's who of tech lewho's whoaders, including Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, Jack Ma and Richard Branson. The idea is to develop new green technology that will increase the world's energy output -- especially in poor countries -- without contributing to global warming. Such tech, however, poses a risk that regular investors might shy away from. "We need the basic research, but we need to pair that with people who are willing to fund high-risk, breakthrough energy companies," said Gates.

The coalition explains that green energy tech doesn't lend itself to the typical Silicon Valley investment pipeline, because of the "nearly impassable Valley of Death between promising concept and viable product." While government funding is an important part of that, Gates and the partners feel that enterprise can play an equal role. "The private sector knows how to build companies, evaluate the potential for success, and take the risks that lead to taking innovative ideas and bringing them to the world," according to the group.





As such, the group wants to throw investment money early and often at promising green power technology, and once it's "de-risked," let traditional investors take over. The group also plans to fund a broad array of tech like storage, generation and efficiency, search for novel "outliers," and focus investment dollars on countries that invest the most in the "Mission Innovation" program. So far, those nations have committed as much as $20 billion extra to the program, and given the luminaries involved in the private initiative, enterprise will no doubt significantly augment that sum.


.

Let me re-write that title….

Gates, Zuckerberg, and Bezos….about to flush billions of dollars down the toilet……..

 

[2aguy]

Bunch of rich idiots who either have no idea or no care for the harm their AGW scam is causing.

I'm guessing but-----but I'm guessing that, like most smart people this group has - in one form or another invoked...

...Bill Clinton's Grandma & Grandpa test:

"I think with regard to science we have to at least get those people who have no interest in it to adopt what is now my mode of thinking—the grandparent test. That is, you name me one other risk-related decision, where if 95 percent of the experts were here and one to five percent of the experts were there, any grandparent would stake his or her grandchild’s future on the five percent. So how about this—suppose one guy wrote one article in one journal and said, You know, I’ve been thinking about these child-restraint seats and I think you know there’s a one-in-a-million chance a kid could snap his neck so I recommend just throwing the kid in the backseat and letting him roll around. And ninety-nine percent of you would say, Oh my God, you can’t do that. These are working—look at how much the fatalities have gone down.

Name me one grandparent that would choose the one percent? Not one."

I'm wondering, what test do you climate deniers use to conclude that bunch of mostly self-made billionaires/multi-millionaires/futurists/innovators/entrepreneurs are idiots? G'head, roll the dice on your baby's... future - now who's the idiot?

.

Why would you take a serial sexual predator and quote them……..do you also quote john wayne gacey?

 

[2aguy]

Bunch of rich idiots who either have no idea or no care for the harm their AGW scam is causing.

I'm guessing but-----but I'm guessing that, like most smart people this group has - in one form or another invoked...

...Bill Clinton's Grandma & Grandpa test:

"I think with regard to science we have to at least get those people who have no interest in it to adopt what is now my mode of thinking—the grandparent test. That is, you name me one other risk-related decision, where if 95 percent of the experts were here and one to five percent of the experts were there, any grandparent would stake his or her grandchild’s future on the five percent. So how about this—suppose one guy wrote one article in one journal and said, You know, I’ve been thinking about these child-restraint seats and I think you know there’s a one-in-a-million chance a kid could snap his neck so I recommend just throwing the kid in the backseat and letting him roll around. And ninety-nine percent of you would say, Oh my God, you can’t do that. These are working—look at how much the fatalities have gone down.

Name me one grandparent that would choose the one percent? Not one."

I'm wondering, what test do you climate deniers use to conclude that bunch of mostly self-made billionaires/multi-millionaires/futurists/innovators/entrepreneurs are idiots? G'head, roll the dice on your baby's... future - now who's the idiot?

.

I will take that bet…..they won't be living off of solar or wind…..and you won't either…….there have already been billions spent…..to no good end……..

 

[2aguy]

I think this is the only important line that you need to read….


The coalition explains that green energy tech doesn't lend itself to the typical Silicon Valley investment pipeline, because of the "nearly impassable Valley of Death between promising concept and viable product.


Yeah…it really helps to have something that will one day work as well as coal, natural gas, oil and hydroelectric power……but cost the same or less…...

 

[Mac1958]

Man, I'd love to see this work.

Current clean energy technology simply isn't cost efficient enough right now, but a huge injection of cash (assuming it is used properly) and some market competition and innovation might be able to push us there.

Good news.
.

 

[westwall]

It is exactly this type of consortium that is needed to develop clean energies that are economically feasible, which is ultimately necessary for the success of any of them on a global level.

the money has to come from somewhere to do that as to this point it has been difficult to get over that hump so if they want to pump their $$$ in to push the technologies closer to that threshold good on them, IMO.

The problem is the money will come from those who can't afford to give it. Or is that lost on you?

Read what I wrote FFS before popping off. I'll reiterate:

"if they want to pump their $$$ in to push the technologies closer to that threshold good on them"

The problem is they are not. They are taking money from the poor and the middle class to do it.

Well if that is the case my opinion would likely change, but I don't see any proof of that and certainly not enough to toss the raspberry at them yet.

I read the article in which it seems they are addressing the problematic issue of profitability and seeking to help push those technologies over the hump. That basic issue is central to the development of any technology of course as if it doesn't sell to the people, it ain't going anywhere.

It also cites the Breakthrough Energy Coalition which is a private vehicle for funding the investment in these technologies. Yes, there is some gubmint partnership discussed, however, I don't see the pipeline from the poor/middle class to this coalition.

I think it's smart to get the private sector involved, as they are much, much better at this sort of thing than government in the long term, and it seems (to me at least) that this is what they are trying to do here.

without some serious $$$ behind it I don't see how we get over that hump whereby clean energies are more efficient than fossil fuels, which have had the luxury of many, many years of intensive development in terms of both the acquisition of the fuels and the maximization of their efficiency.

I think I'd let it play out before jumping with both feet on it like some offshoot of the AGW fringe element. These guys aren't nuts, they are arguably some of the brightest folks walking the planet today so if not them, then who I guess.....

I suggest you look up the litany of failed government loans to the various "green" energy companies out there. All have failed, all have been paid for by the American taxpayer and the one percenters have laughed all the way to the bank.

 

[2aguy]

The next step will be them calling for the elimination of all power except for solar and wind….that is one way to make solar and wind feasible….just arbitrarily get rid of the ones that actually work….

 

[Fueri]

It is exactly this type of consortium that is needed to develop clean energies that are economically feasible, which is ultimately necessary for the success of any of them on a global level.

the money has to come from somewhere to do that as to this point it has been difficult to get over that hump so if they want to pump their $$$ in to push the technologies closer to that threshold good on them, IMO.

The problem is the money will come from those who can't afford to give it. Or is that lost on you?

Read what I wrote FFS before popping off. I'll reiterate:

"if they want to pump their $$$ in to push the technologies closer to that threshold good on them"

The problem is they are not. They are taking money from the poor and the middle class to do it.

Well if that is the case my opinion would likely change, but I don't see any proof of that and certainly not enough to toss the raspberry at them yet.

I read the article in which it seems they are addressing the problematic issue of profitability and seeking to help push those technologies over the hump. That basic issue is central to the development of any technology of course as if it doesn't sell to the people, it ain't going anywhere.

It also cites the Breakthrough Energy Coalition which is a private vehicle for funding the investment in these technologies. Yes, there is some gubmint partnership discussed, however, I don't see the pipeline from the poor/middle class to this coalition.

I think it's smart to get the private sector involved, as they are much, much better at this sort of thing than government in the long term, and it seems (to me at least) that this is what they are trying to do here.

without some serious $$$ behind it I don't see how we get over that hump whereby clean energies are more efficient than fossil fuels, which have had the luxury of many, many years of intensive development in terms of both the acquisition of the fuels and the maximization of their efficiency.

I think I'd let it play out before jumping with both feet on it like some offshoot of the AGW fringe element. These guys aren't nuts, they are arguably some of the brightest folks walking the planet today so if not them, then who I guess.....

I suggest you look up the litany of failed government loans to the various "green" energy companies out there. All have failed, all have been paid for by the American taxpayer and the one percenters have laughed all the way to the bank.

Thanks for the suggestion. I will suggest, again, that you actually read what it is you are responding to before clattering away on your keyboard.

I do not support government funded efforts like this as government kind of sucks at it, but I have a tendency at this point to at least consider this initiative- precisely because it is not a government effort, but rather something being advanced by the private sector.

if we are to get over this hump a ton of cash will need to be pumped into it, the private sector will have to lead, and this is a tough nut for reasons I've cited before in terms of lack of profitability that is starving the industry of that necessary investment capital.

these people are among the most successful business leaders in the history of the planet, are we supposed to think that they don't have a clue about how to launch an effort or leverage the private sector? that's just crazy talk, far as I'm concerned.

I guess I should also be clear that I'm no fan of the AGW movement in all of it's embodiments. While it's pretty clear to me that there is a problem, I think a lot of it is clap-trap motivated by people cashing in and I do think there is an element that are using this as an excuse to advance political agendas and I do not trust them one bit, BUT, if we are to advance technologies we need to invest in those technologies. To this point this has been a huge sticking point with clean energy, as it has not crossed the threshold of being profitable.

These people see this and cite getting over that hump as exactly what they are trying to do. They've identified a major problem with development in this sector and are attacking it. To me this makes perfect sense.

Not everyone that is developing future technologies is the boogeyman. I'd rather see people like this doing things like this rather than having the politicians selling us carbon credits or using other methods to jerk with the other side of the economic equation in order to make these technologies falsely 'profitable' such as jacking taxes on energies, cap and trade, etc. etc..

Will they be successful? I don't know. Tough nut to crack here, that is for sure, but what they are trying to do makes sense to me so I think it's worth hearing them out at the very least.....