Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Entrepreneur Bill Gates has announced a one billion dollar green tech fund, to try to make renewables fit for purpose.
According to the Sydney Morning Herald;
If successful, the Paris meeting could spur a fundamental shift away from the use of oil, coal and gas to the use of renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power. But that transition would require major breakthroughs in technology and huge infrastructure investments by governments and industry.
Where that money would come from has been a question leading up to the Paris talks. Developing countries like India, the third-largest fossil-fuel polluter, have pushed for commitments by developed nations to pay for their energy transition, either through direct government spending or through inexpensive access to new technology.
India has emerged as a pivotal player in the Paris talks. The announcement by Mr Gates appears intended to help secure India’s support of a deal.
As US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton pledged that developed countries would send $US100 billion ($139 billion) annually to poor countries by 2020 to help them pay for the energy transition. Indian officials have demanded that the Paris deal lock in language that the money would come from public funds — a dealbreaker for rich countries.
This summer, Mr Gates pledged to spend $US 1 billion of his personal fortune on researching and deploying clean energy technology, but the people with knowledge of his plans said the new fund would include larger commitments.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/world-business/microsofts-bill-gates-to-start-multibilliondollar-fund-for-clean-energy-20151128-glacw0.html
This isn’t the first time a project to make renewables viable has been attempted. Back in 2014, WUWT reported about a similar attempt led by Google, which was a total failure.
At the start of RE<C, we had shared the attitude of many stalwart environmentalists: We felt that with steady improvements to today’s renewable energy technologies, our society could stave off catastrophic climate change. We now know that to be a false hope … Renewable energy technologies simply won’t work; we need a fundamentally different approach.”
Read more: http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/what-it-would-really-take-to-reverse-climate-change
I applaud Bill’s enthusiasm – who wouldn’t want cheap magic solar panels, which eliminated the need to ever pay another electricity bill. But if the Google experience is any guide, it seems unlikely that another billion dollars will make a significant difference.
I feel sorry for the people and holy life on the planet, which Vissi believe some models, the wrong mathematical predictions and political manipulation, but what we allow laws of nature and our consciousness, which is related through intuition with all causes of phenomena in the universe.
Climate change on the planet, not just on our own, depend exclusively, from the mutual influence of the planets and the sun. When you take science as the basis of research, everything will go right through.
I again, as anonymous in science, I must warn you, at least those who use their consciousness and intuition, not politicized erroneous theory that the human factor is so small compared to the relationship of the planet, as well as a man smaller than planets.
In previous worthless and false works of all kinds, spent so much money, in vain, that it may resolve the matter in the right way, and that throughout the planet could equalize the impact of these changes.
My proof, that no one so far refused to publish it, without my payment is:
Four influential planets causes the sunspot cycle, every 11.2 years .This are only indicators of climate change on the planet, while the rest cycles and other planets in relation to the sun, are much longer and more intense and causing changes inside the planet that making changes in the behavior of all the planets.
I draw the attention of all scientists of the impact of that, if you have the will, to this way of thinking is applied and will see that they made a mistake, because it will come to amazing results, which so far has not been the case. NUDIM correspondence: !!!
Download this in Paris, let them know that all their decisions and agreements have nothing to do with the true causes of phenomena around us and in us.
The last I checked Mr Gates considers 4th generation nuclear to be ‘clean energy’.
What do you mean by ‘clean’? All power plants in the US are required to demonstrate insignificant environmental impact. I would rather live near the coal plants that supply power to Seattle and Portland than live the the cesspools called green cities.
Wait I already do.
We can’t all live on cheap, clean Bonneville Power so the middle class will just have to work harder to pay for the elite schemes.
Do you mean BPA with 4000 MWe of coal, gas, and nuclear generation at the moment? Just down the road from Bill is a big old coal plant keeping the lights on.
http://transmission.bpa.gov/Business/Operations/Wind/baltwg.aspx
Bill Gates ponies up one billion dollars to advance clean, renewable energy sources for the world.
The recent nuclear arms treaty with Iran freed up one hundred and fifty billion dollars to a fundamentalist religious government whose stated ideas of the future are in direct opposition to western countries.
I wonder who is going to get the most bang for their buck here.
There are plenty of alternatives but I doubt Gates will invest in any that don’t support existing corporate powers. His charitable works almost exclusively support multinational corporations.
Here is a list- http://peswiki.com/index.php/Congress:Top_100_Technologies_–_RD
I have a close friend who was involved in a company 30 years ago that developed a working engine that could power a car for 50,000 miles on a $20 canister of catalyst. While preparing their IPO big oil came in with an army of lawyers threatening patent infringement. They had to fold.
I recently witnessed an LED being powered by dark energy which comprises about 70% of the universe.
https://gust.com/companies/quantum-power
You have a friend who is a con artist.
Retired Kit P
November 30, 2015 at 12:10 pm
“You have a friend who is a con artist.”
No he is one of the most ethical businessmen you would ever hope to meet. I’ve done deals with him. We gave up on a very lucrative deal because the marketing department was misrepresenting facts. We were going to get the hard science done for them but the marketing guys wanted a quick buck.
Why did big oil feel the need to enlist an army of lawyers?
Then name this “Big Oil” company and supply copies of these threats.
gyan1 –
Would you mind helping me out with a minor banking snafu? It seems that this close friend of mine who just recently died had $20,000,000 in an offshore bank account (Nigeria? I can’t recall). His dying wish was that it be transferred to me here in the States. I don’t really want to explain to the government how I suddenly came by $20-million, so here’s what we could do. If you’ll send me your bank account number, I’ll transfer in the money to your account and then forward it to my account. I’d be willing to share $5-million of my good fortune with you if you would be so kind as to help me in this manner. What do you say; are you in?
.
.
.
.
.
P.S. to Retired Kit P
Did that look about right or should I have misspelled some of the words?
Maybe you should look at the science before you judge.
http://cheniere.org/references/found%20phys%20letters/no%201%202001/index.html
I read the links. Maybe you should invest $5-million in that.
Wait up… that last answer was rather rude and abrupt. Sorry.
gyan1, the explanation before the introduction is that Magnetic energy is taken directly ex vacua and used to replenish the permanent magnets of the MEG device, which therefore produces a source of energy that, in theory, can be replenished indefinitely from the vacuum.
But in the summary, I make it as a contradiction to their statement in the introduction that there is “more output than is input by the operator” because they state clearly that the energy in the permanent magnet is replaced by Jv from the vacuum. So there is a source of energy. What I didn’t look at was the amount of energy available and what interferences there may be from other electromagnetic sources. (Will this puppy work while sitting beside your toaster?)
As near as I can make out (can’t get to the references and I won’t have time to chase them down), the explanation for the current produced by a vacuum is covered by O(3) electrodynamics. Now I won’t attempt to fool anyone by pretending to be familiar with O(3) electrodynamics. It looks interesting, but at this point in my life, I’d rather be fishing than delving into that topic.
I’m going to hold back on buying an MEG until Ford offers it as options on the F-150.
HR
I like your answer. I have never been wrong about a con artist. One of the interesting thing about victims of scams is that they often are still believers.
One of the fun things I got to do for the big power company I worked for around 2000 is investigate local renewable technologies. One of the problems with smart inventors is that they do not understand the power industry. It is a business with thin margins and lots of regulations. For all practical purposes, coal is as close as you can get to a free and unlimited resource.
What the con artist always offers is free and unlimited energy. The goal is not to work to make electricity but to get rich by scamming investors.
Bill Gates is no ordinary Socialist — he is, what the Irish call a “Smoked Salmon Socialist”!
Nothing is renewable.
Oh, puhleeze! If you’re going to throw stones get your facts right. Bill Gates may be a crony capitalist and I believe could better use his money funding third world micro-entrepreneurs, but he followed up on what Jobs and Woz did with the Apple II using Visicalc and put personal computing in the hands of ordinary people and third party providers. While Jobs went the other way with the MAC, invoking IP protections.
He did this by tricking IBM into funding MS Dos (as PC Dos), thinking they would have an exclusive money maker.
As to ‘Free Software’… where? Only if you wrote it. And used command line for everything. I was there.
The point remains, though. It should NOT in any way be backed up with government funding. Tax Exemptions are NOT government funding.
It works for Bill because of government subsidies. The government guarantees no failure – to its friends, it seems.
Bill Gates was always a quasi-socialist liberal at heart. I am surprised some readers don’t realize that. He got rich the way most liberals get rich, by rigging the system to favor themselves. And his so-called philanthropy is really just a way to boost his already bloated ego, and to give him power to try and influence the world. It is a favorite pastime of every liberal billionaire – create a foundation to get favorable tax status (at the taxpayer’s expense) and then use that foundation as a vehicle to further your own objectives.