Richard Branson "Baffled" By President Trump's Paris Decision

Richard Branson and Al Gore

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Richard Branson is so shocked by President Trump’s decision to withdraw from Paris, he’s putting his own money into renewables R&D. My question – isn’t this how Capitalism is supposed to work?

Richard Branson: Business leaders are ‘baffled’ by Trump on climate change

[British] billionaire Richard Branson said business leaders were left dumbfounded by President Trump’s decision to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement. But if there’s a silver lining, it’s that companies are now even more driven to invest in clean energy and cut greenhouse gas emissions.

“Whether it’s GE, or whether it’s the big oil companies… I haven’t come across one business person who doesn’t want to get out there and do everything they can to try to compensate for the [Trump] administration’s very strange stance,” Branson said on a Wednesday call with reporters.

“A lot of people in the world are baffled by the American administration’s comments,” the Virgin Group CEO said.

Read more: http://mashable.com/2017/06/21/richard-branson-business-leaders-trump-paris-agreement/

Does anyone need more evidence that President Trump’s decision to take government out of the energy business was a stroke of genius?

Before President Trump tore up the agreement, Branson and his friends were content to sit back and let US taxpayers take all the risks and pay all the bills.

Since President Trump tore up the Paris Agreement, Branson and his friends suddenly feel compelled to put their own money and time into funding high risk green energy R&D. Meanwhile, US tax money which would have likely been wasted on renewables can now be spent on stuff taxpayers actually care about, like retiring public debt, improving public healthcare or fixing broken US infrastructure.

Branson could raise the cash by selling his airline.

Of course, if anyone is unhappy their tax money is no longer being spent on green R&D, they are free to use their own cash to join Branson’s crusade to save the world. But people are also now free not to contribute to green R&D. Everyone gets to choose what happens to their own money.

Talk about win / win.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
161 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Joey
June 22, 2017 8:33 am

The “green” economy is a contemporary version of fascism. Lots of people making lots of money pried out of the pockets of average citizens by the brute force of the state.

Wally
Reply to  Joey
June 22, 2017 10:25 am

A la Elon Musk, Branson’s ‘investments’ are nothing more than an attempt to steal billions in taxpayer subsidies.
Quite a scam.

davetherealist
Reply to  Wally
June 22, 2017 11:12 am

Wally, you beat me to this. They are both Con-men. Musk should be forced to pay back all the subsidy money given to Tesla in their “Fast Charge” scam. When will people wake up and realize they are not innovators, they are hogs at the trough of government money.

Jer0me
Reply to  Wally
June 22, 2017 1:33 pm

Dave,
Probably a while after Musk loses his grip on the media. Right now, they are his lapdogs, eagerly panting for the next story of his genius solutions to copy & paste for public consumption.
I’m getting sick of reading how he will save us all, real soon now! Good for his share price, though…

wws
Reply to  Wally
June 22, 2017 2:23 pm

au contraire, Elon Musk is one of the greatest innovaters evah! He’s constantly coming up with new ways to jack fast cash out of all of us, while at the same time forcing us to thank him for the privilege!

Mark T
Reply to  Joey
June 22, 2017 12:47 pm

I was going to say the same thing. The “business leaders” are really just beneficiaries of fascism that allows them to remain wealthy and in power. Of course, they don’t realize what they are giving up, and apparently don’t care what the rest of society is giving up as well.

rogerthesurf
Reply to  Joey
June 22, 2017 2:20 pm

Who wants to contribute to renewable infrastructure anyway. If renewables were obviously more saleable than other energy – i.e. less expensive on all counts – their shares would be snapped up before one could say “Richard Branson”.

Barbara
Reply to  rogerthesurf
June 23, 2017 2:52 pm

Canada Revenue Agency / List of Charities
Virgin Unite Canada Inc
Registered: Toronto, ON, 2007-05-01
Registration No. 841790728 RR 0001
Lists three directors/trustees.
Information: Search at.
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/chrts-gvng/listings/menu-eng.html

Barbara
Reply to  rogerthesurf
June 23, 2017 7:21 pm

Canada Revenue Agency/List of Charities
Search:
Climate Reality Project Canada
Effective date: 2007-09-26
Registration No. 831268354RR0001
Montreal, Quebec
Lists 11 directors/trustees
Follow the links for information.
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/chrts-gvng/lstngs/menu-eng.html
Also use this website address for: Virgin Unite Canada Inc

rogerthesurf
Reply to  rogerthesurf
June 23, 2017 10:50 pm

Barbara,
Thank you for your comment.
These agencies which you mention and the many other like them simply raise money from
1. simple people
2. large funds which advocate that they wish to improve the world but on closer scrutiny have their own private agenda.
I have a post on my blog which features the Rockefeller Bros. who most likely fund the sites you mention and many others like them.
It is my considered opinion that the Rockefellers and many other people in their league, do not have the welfare of normal people like you and me at heart.
https://thedemiseofchristchurch.com/2015/08/15/the-rockefellers-who-they-fund-from-their-web-site/
The Rockefeller Bros website is convenient as they have a search engine where you may search their recipients.
Although it is possible that your agencies are funded directly via Rockefeller money it is more likely that they are funded by someone who the Rockefellers fund.
As many of these agencies have a page where they list their funders, (usually well hidden on their site though), you may check, as I have in a many cases, whether some of their funders are funded by the Rockefeller Bros. Sometimes you may need to search several tiers up each funding tree.
For the little people who contribute their dimes and nickels to sites which fund so called renewables, their money is in vain and lost and is an involuntary contribution to Rockefellers and their associates in their investments to change the world without asking you or me.
In my comment above I am talking about normal level headed investors.
Cheers
Roger

Barbara
Reply to  rogerthesurf
June 24, 2017 7:51 pm

‘The story of the Carbon War Room’, Oct.28, 2016
Founded 2009 and merged with the Rocky Mountain Institute in 2014.
http://www.virgin.com/richard-branson/story-carbon-war-room

rogerthesurf
Reply to  rogerthesurf
June 24, 2017 10:52 pm

Barbara,
“and many other people in their league, do not have the welfare of normal people like you and me at heart.”
I suspect Richard Branson may well be one of those “other people”.
Cheers
Roger

Barbara
Reply to  rogerthesurf
June 25, 2017 8:18 pm

Reuters, April 25, 2007
Branson tells Canada to “Flick Off”, save energy
“The program launched in Canada, but Branson, head of the Virgin Group of music, telephone, and airline businesses, said he hoped it would eventually go global.”
“Flick Off” was an environmental challenge to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-branson-idUSN2535299620070425
“Flick Off” was launched in Toronto, Canada, April 25, 2007.
More information on line.

rogerthesurf
Reply to  rogerthesurf
June 25, 2017 11:46 pm

Barbara, And your point is?

Resourceguy
June 22, 2017 8:36 am

The guy with fleets of aircraft and a private low-lying island resort is baffled. Next story

June 22, 2017 8:36 am

Branson should lead the pack by converting his planes to run on Renewable Energy.

hunter
Reply to  Ross King
June 22, 2017 9:00 am

He tried and found out that jets don’t run well or safely on recycled cooking oil. I am baffled that so many spoiled brat billionaires have been co-opted into green bs.

dmacleo
Reply to  hunter
June 22, 2017 11:08 am

did he really try bio diesel?
had not heard that before

Editor
Reply to  dmacleo
June 22, 2017 11:15 am

Obama’s USAF expanded Bush’s greenie-tree demands for USAF eco-fuels … the “new and improved” jet fuel ended costing some 260.00 dollars a gallon, much of it from bio-fuel, regardless of what it did to the engines and fuel nozzles and fuel pumps in the aircraft. From the defense (USAF budget – which the Obama White House hated/did not care about and wanted to weaken if not destroy) to greenie defense contractors who had contributed to democrat politicians and NGO efforts – which the Obama White House most very specifically DID care about and DID want to strengthen! )

Michael darby
Reply to  hunter
June 22, 2017 11:32 am

RACookPE1978, don’t worry, the same fuel filters they use to filter the dirty filthy diesel fuel that a gas turbine burns are very effective in filtering out solids in bio-fuels: http://highpuritynorthwest.com/diesel-fuel-filtration-improves-gas-turbine-reliability/

dmacleo
Reply to  hunter
June 22, 2017 4:22 pm

I know usaf messed with it, but never heard branson trying it on passenger a/c.

MarkW
Reply to  hunter
June 23, 2017 6:57 am

It really is sad the way some warmists actually believe that they already know all that is worth knowing.
IE, solids aren’t the only problem with bio-fuels.

Michael darby
Reply to  hunter
June 23, 2017 7:55 am

Tell us MarkW, what other than solids could be problematic?

Michael darby
Reply to  hunter
June 23, 2017 7:58 am

You do realize that a gas turbine can run on straight vegtable oil rith?
..
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876610214000125

Eugene S. Conlin
Reply to  hunter
June 24, 2017 4:13 am

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7261214.stm – “The first flight by a commercial airline to be powered partly by biofuel has taken place.
A Virgin Atlantic jumbo jet has flown between London’s Heathrow and Amsterdam using fuel derived from a mixture of Brazilian babassu nuts and coconuts.
Environmentalists have branded the flight a publicity stunt and claim biofuel cultivation is not sustainable.”

Reply to  hunter
June 24, 2017 9:06 am

How do they prevent the bio-diesel from “gellin up” at altitudes of 25,000 to 42,000 feet?

Diesel fuel gelling happens when the paraffin usually present in diesel starts to solidify when the temperature drops. At 32 degrees, the wax in liquid form will crystallize and leave the fuel tank clouded. At 10-15 degrees, it will finally start to gel and clog the tank and fuel filters.

Michael darby
Reply to  hunter
June 24, 2017 9:56 am

Samuel C Cougar: “To avoid water condensation or the fuel itself solidifying at low temperatures (-55 °C), fuel tanks have thermometers and heating systems. ”
..
..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_fuel_system#Turbine_fuel_system

Reply to  Ross King
June 22, 2017 9:34 am

convert the fleet to electric. of course this won’t work because you don’t have a practical battery design, and thousand mile extension cords are problematic.
If you had the 100 billion dollar green fund, how would you go about developing a better battery:
1. give the 100 billion dollars to poor countries
2. pay government scientists to research climate
3. announce a 100 billion dollar prize for a battery to replace fossil fuels

Bryan A
Reply to  ferdberple
June 22, 2017 9:53 am

Plus, the Tesla recharging model doesn’t work well for Aircraft (Landing to recharge every 250 miles???)

Reply to  ferdberple
June 22, 2017 10:05 am

convert the fleet to electric. of course this won’t work because you don’t have a practical battery design, and thousand mile extension cords are problematic.
But isn’t lightening a renewable source of energy? – why not just harness THAT? – oh yeah, that’s right, it’s too infrequent and unpredictable.
Hamsters!

RWturner
Reply to  ferdberple
June 22, 2017 11:00 am

Bryan, the answer is obviously to have KC-135 style refueling tankers, except they won’t be filled with fuel, they will have a generator burning fuel with an extension cord plugged into the electric commercial airliner — Green Logic.

MarkW
Reply to  ferdberple
June 23, 2017 6:58 am

ferd, how long an extension cord can a jet carry, and still get off the ground?

Butch
June 22, 2017 8:39 am

Well, it doesn’t take much to “baffle” a liberal socialist mind…IMO

drednicolson
Reply to  Butch
June 23, 2017 12:36 pm

Reality in general baffles them on a daily basis.

kokoda - the most deplorable
June 22, 2017 8:40 am

It is not surprising that Billionaires and Multi-Millionaires are baffled or even angry that Trump has decided to exit the Paris ‘Agreement’ – they are the ones that benefit from Governments that print money for the mega-corporations to devour at the expense of the citizens via taxes or higher costs due to carbon credit ‘schemes’, etc.

June 22, 2017 8:41 am

I love the silly notion of “Renewable R&D”. Are they going to find a way to make the sun always shine or the wind always blow? Some have confused battery storage with energy production. Apparently they don’t realize that batteries STORE energy, they do not GENERATE energy.And what’s going to restore those batteries energy when they go dry and, at the same time, supply the grid? Branson is one high profile moron.

Reply to  arthur4563
June 22, 2017 10:08 am

How much power could burning a billion dollars in cash generate?
Just curious.

benofhouston
Reply to  Robert Kernodle
June 22, 2017 11:13 am

Cloth has roughly 7,000 BTU/lb. Each bill weighs roughly 1 gram.
If it’s in Washingtons, that comes out to 2.2 million lb of notes, getting you 15,418 MMBTU. That’s enough to fuel a small industrial furnace (2 MMBTU/hr) furnace for a year, or enough to fire a stove (5,000 BTU/hr) for 200-300 years.
If it’s in Franklins, just drop 2 zeros from all of those numbers

Russ Wood
Reply to  Robert Kernodle
June 23, 2017 8:47 am

If, for example, it was in Zimbabwean dollars from a few years ago, even a million REAL dollars would end up with a couple of forest’s worth of Z$.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  arthur4563
June 22, 2017 12:37 pm

I don’t think they have any intention to “find a way”. They just want R&D funding from taxpayers. And that’s what baffles him the most, how is he going to taxpayer money now?

Butch
June 22, 2017 8:41 am

“ritish billionaire Richard Branson” ??
I’ll assume that should have been “British”

Bryan A
Reply to  Butch
June 22, 2017 9:55 am

Could be
Fritish
Gritish
Pritish (Pratish?)

Another Doug
Reply to  Bryan A
June 22, 2017 10:25 am

Twittish

Carbon BIgfoot
Reply to  Bryan A
June 25, 2017 1:06 pm

GRIFFISH

Latitude
June 22, 2017 8:51 am

Whether it’s GE,…the worlds biggest supplier of wind turbines

June 22, 2017 8:54 am

Here’s me thinking Branson was quite clever, yet he can’t even figure this out!

Reply to  David Johnson
June 22, 2017 9:05 am

He’s spent too much time in the echo chamber. Quite a common affliction in the tech world.

Bryan A
Reply to  roughcoat
June 22, 2017 9:56 am

Echo chamber or Eco chamber?

RWturner
Reply to  roughcoat
June 22, 2017 10:53 am

The Eco-industry$ echo chamber. Money for nothin’

Bryan A
Reply to  roughcoat
June 23, 2017 2:14 pm

Reply to  David Johnson
June 22, 2017 10:07 am

Branson, like Musk, is a classic example of the male ego doing its worst. You make loads of money selling a basic product (air flights, or online payments) to eager consumers, then think that makes you a technology guru. Virgin Galactic and similar flights of fancy from Musk prove otherwise, there is something called engineering that will always shoot down monster business egos.

June 22, 2017 8:55 am

If the field of “renewables” is such a good investment, Branson and his buddies should use their own money.

Aphan
Reply to  Tom Halla
June 22, 2017 9:34 am

Tom Halla- THAT is the question that we should be asking every single time this issue arises! Perfect, concise, and extremely revealing.
+10

Reply to  Aphan
June 22, 2017 9:43 am

There is an old joke on this general line==>A syndicator for oil exploration from New York is talking to the Texas oil wildcatter about the long series of dry holes the Texan has drilled, and the response is always “Well, it could have been worse”. When finally asked to explain what he meant by “worse”, the Texan came back with “Well, it could have been MY money”.

RWturner
Reply to  Aphan
June 22, 2017 11:08 am

And it’s a common malpractice in all investments to sell more than 100% of the working interest to partners. If you can raise 200% of an investment for a project, that project makes you money if it fails, and it better fail or else you are left paying 200% back to the investors. Someone got rich from the long list of renewable energy company bankruptcies, and it wasn’t the investors (taxpayers).

Nigel S
Reply to  Aphan
June 22, 2017 12:26 pm

The Max Bialystock principle (Come on, Germans, go into your dance).

schitzree
Reply to  Aphan
June 22, 2017 4:28 pm

It isn’t a Godwin’s Law violation If the Nazis are dancing.
comment image

Reply to  Tom Halla
June 22, 2017 10:25 am

Renewables are a great investment – as long as the government adds taxpayer’s money generously.

Jim G1
June 22, 2017 8:58 am

As long as we quit subsidizing the green schemes and investors are required to risk their own money instead of mine, I’m happy.

June 22, 2017 9:03 am

That’s pretty much fine by everyone I think, Dickey – with the possible exception of your shareholders who still retain a functioning brain cell. Just so long as you don’t start squealing for subsidies and demanding everyone buys your products at economically non-viable prices to save the world without any evidence that the world needs saving. Suggestion for the venture – Virgin Blob.

RHS
June 22, 2017 9:12 am

Doesn’t one of his chief engineers have a public but opposing view to Al Gore’s Warming?

Chris Wright
Reply to  RHS
June 23, 2017 3:12 am

Yes, Burt Rutan’s company is building Branson’s spaceships. Rutan is an active climate change sceptic who has actually lectured on the subject. If Branson is “baffled”, all he has to do is ask Burt to explain the garbage, otherwise known as climate science.
Another climate sceptic is Harrison Schmidt, the only scientist to walk on the moon.
Actually, I thought Trump made it clear in his speech. He stated that, if fully implemented, by the end of the century Paris would achieve a global cooling of – drum roll please – one fifth of a degree Celsius.
It’s a no-brainer. I’m baffled as to why Branson is baffled!
Chris

Carbon BIgfoot
Reply to  Chris Wright
June 25, 2017 1:10 pm

Chris “rubbish” Branson doesn’t understand garbage.

marnof
June 22, 2017 9:14 am

Sir Richard’s bafflement instantly reminded me of a song written by Sir Paul:
Did I hear you say
That there must be a catch
Will you walk away
From a fool and his money
If you want it,
Here it is,
Come and get it,
But you better hurry
Cause it’s going fast.

commieBob
June 22, 2017 9:19 am

He smiles and he’s good at PR, but some people think he’s just as tricky as any other self-made billionaire. link

Venril
Reply to  commieBob
June 27, 2017 1:51 pm

I always think of Zaphod Beeblebrox when i see him. Funny.

Urederra
June 22, 2017 9:21 am

Me thinks this is like when some celebrities were saying that if Trump wins they were going to leave the USA. At the end nobody left. I guess Branson is pretending to invest on renewables and see if he can convince somebody else to put the bulk of the money, so he does not have to. And then to take credit on “saving the planet”.

Ed Zuiderwijk
June 22, 2017 9:27 am

The believer is always baffled when someone tells him that his god does not exist.

ThomasJK
Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
June 23, 2017 3:20 am

Ed, I think that is the most profound thought that I have run across yet today — But it is quite early, yet. Truly, honestly, simply profound — and describes a burden that will always and for eternity be a burden for human kind to bear.

James Schrumpf
Reply to  ThomasJK
June 23, 2017 3:46 pm

I’d say you’re going on a bit far there. A believer has people every other day telling him his God does not exist. The bafflement is on the other side, mostly.

Bruce Cobb
June 22, 2017 9:28 am

“…companies are now even more driven to invest in clean energy and cut greenhouse gas emissions.”
Yeah, I’ll bet they are. As long as there’s still free money being handed out for so-called “clean energy”, they’re in. I mean,who doesn’t like free money? But the spigot’s going to close, and when it does, we’ll see how much Branson and his fellow virtue signallers want to “invest” in it.

Sheri
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
June 22, 2017 10:34 am

I don’t see the spigot closing. Congress keeps handing out free money to wind and solar. Who’s going to stop them? Is Trump willing to veto a bill just to stop this? The PTC was extended for 5 years in 2015. This was REPUBLICANS doing. Ryan and others. So, again, how do you plan to stop this? Elections certainly won’t work.

Trebla
June 22, 2017 9:36 am

I’m baffled by the fact that he doesn’t make an effort to save suffering humanity right now rather than worrying about what might happen 100years out. Take some of that fossil fuel generated wealth and buy kerosine stoves for poor African women, for example

Alan Robertson
Reply to  Trebla
June 22, 2017 9:49 am

That would be inconsistent with the primary tenet of Green philosophy, which is, that too many human beings exist.

Tim Hammond
June 22, 2017 9:45 am

Branson is no fool. Virgin/Branson is a brand, and a brand that appeals largely to the young middle classes. Supporting Greenery and being anti-Trump simply plays to that audience.
When it was record-breaking stunts (that used vast amounts of fossil fuels), that was what he did. When it was trying to save (the hugely fuel guzzling Concorde), that’s what he did. Now all you have to do is send a few right-on Tweets and the young think you are OK..

Jeff in Calgary
June 22, 2017 9:49 am

I bet renewable startups will have better success when using private money than they ever did using public money. Private money tends to demand success. Maybe now that the Trump has taken government out of the energy business, we will finally see true renewable breakthroughs.

Bryan A
Reply to  Jeff in Calgary
June 22, 2017 9:59 am

One can always hope…

jclarke341
Reply to  Jeff in Calgary
June 22, 2017 2:17 pm

I bet there won’t be much private money invested in renewable energy R & D. The whole ‘rush-to-renewables’ movement was driven by the widespread belief in a climate crisis, and generous government subsidies. Both of those are beginning to wane. Government money is spent based on ‘feelings’. Private money is spent based on reality!

ThomasJK
Reply to  Jeff in Calgary
June 23, 2017 4:01 am

The most likely “breakthrough” that we will see will be something like to feeding corn to a horse and then using the horse to pull buggies and wagons, etc., for transport rather than converting the corn to ethanol to use to power internal combustion engines. And maybe using this renewable ‘bio-fuel’ that we call wood in wood-burning stoves to heat our homes and to cook our food. Been there and done that but it was long ago an far away in a world that sometimes seems never really was. The likelihood that I will live long enough to return to that lifestyle is virtually nil……Unless parasitoidic people such as the Goracle have their way with our current energy production and distribution systems.
Richard Nixon may have been right when he said something to the effect that “1968 in The United States is the best time and place that humans had ever lived.” I think he was intending that to be historical in context but without necessarily intending to, he may have been prophetic.
There seems to be an underlying assumption that if governments use enough force-of-regulation and laws and/or enough financial inducements then it is just a matter of time before a solution will magically appear much in the manner that all of the magic money magically appears from the magic hole in the air from which The Federal Reserve conjures to magic money so it can be used for financial inducements. That could very well be an assumption that is kin to assuming that it is just a matter of time and intent before someone will achieve a breakthrough in the design of functional perpetual motion machines, devices and processes.

Mike Maguire
June 22, 2017 9:52 am

Based on the “save the planet” narrative that goes along with the Climate Agreement most people are for it. However, if you revealed the actual details…….what it might do, who pays, where the money goes and so on, in the US, only the minds captured by the catastrophic (human caused) climate change cult would support it.
Obviously the rest of the world supports the US tax payer taking on the biggest burden. However, the US tax payer has a right to know where their money is being spent. Not what the the scheme asserts it will do(save the planet by reducing a beneficial gas) but the nuts and bolts that show what each country is paying, where the money really goes and the authentic science related to carbon dioxide.
In private business, the absence of this information would be a no brainer, deal breaker. In government and politics the absence of this information DEFINES deals like this.
Focusing on global climate model projections of temperature as the key element in a marketing scheme to promote an agenda that excludes an objective comprehensive analysis of our greening planet is scientific fraud.

dennisambler
June 22, 2017 10:03 am

Independent Online 22 September 2006
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/branson-pledges-3bn-to-combat-global-warming-417027.html
“Branson pledges $3bn to combat global warming”
By Michael Harrison, Business Editor
It will…be an extremely tall order since Virgin’s various air and train ventures contributed only £90m to the group’s coffers last year. That means they will either have to start making a lot more money or Sir Richard will have to look elsewhere for contributions.”
He didn’t deliver, fast forward to 2014:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/sep/13/richard-branson-failed-climate-change-pledge
“Richard Branson failed to deliver on $3bn climate change pledge”
“New book by Naomi Klein claims that Virgin founder gave less than a tenth of cash promised to develop low carbon fuel.”
In 2009 he set up the Carbon War Room, with the brother of ex-IPCC’s Christiana Figueres, Jose, as Chairman, he became President in 2012. In 2014, the CWR merged with Amory Lovins Rocky Mountain Institute, with Figueres as a trustee. Also a trustee is Obama’s Chief Climate Negotiator, Todd Stern…..
https://www.rmi.org/about/board-of-trustees/
“Stern was the chief U.S. negotiator of the successful Paris Agreement. Stern previously served in the Clinton administration as Assistant to the President, and as Staff Secretary in the White House from 1993 to 1998, during which time he also acted as the senior White House negotiator for the Kyoto Protocol and Buenos Aires negotiations.”
Birds of a feather etc.

kakatoa
Reply to  dennisambler
June 25, 2017 11:09 am

+10

ossqss
June 22, 2017 10:08 am

Let me check those percentages again. Yep, ya gotta look real close to find wind and solar on this little item from the IEA…….comment image

J Mac
June 22, 2017 10:08 am

Is it just me? Does Algore look like Kim Jong Un’s brother?

Luis Anastasia
Reply to  J Mac
June 22, 2017 10:14 am

It is you. You might benefit from getting your eyes checked.

J Mac
Reply to  Luis Anastasia
June 22, 2017 8:31 pm

Last trip to the eye doc showed better than 20/20 vision, Luis…..

barryjo
Reply to  J Mac
June 22, 2017 5:25 pm

Nope. Algore is WAY taller.

Stu
Reply to  J Mac
June 22, 2017 7:50 pm

You are mistaken. He looks like Kim Jong Un’s mother.

Hans-Georg
Reply to  Stu
June 23, 2017 2:42 am

The crest is already true

MarkW
Reply to  Stu
June 23, 2017 7:02 am

He looks like he might have eaten Kim Jong Un’s mother.

June 22, 2017 10:17 am

I think it would be great for this billionaire to spend loads of his money on green energy research that would provide many new jobs for many motivated people.
But given today’s versions of renewable energy technology, this would be like spending loads of money to pay people to build horse-driven carts. Great for creating jobs and for giving people a purpose, but how does it help those living in reality? Employment for the sake of employment is not the purpose of employment, is it?

John F. Hultquist
June 22, 2017 10:23 am

Trump has taken government out of the energy business, ” [9:49 am and others]
That is not the best description of what Trump did with the Paris thingy.
U.S. businesses will continue to introduce new products that are more efficient, improve the processes they use, and support environmental projects. Various government agencies from NSF to the DoE will continue to fund energy related projects.
Trump has cancelled the large flow of tax dollars that the UN wanted for its Green Climate Fund (Obama sent a bundle before being kicked out of the White House**) that was to be controlled (wasted) by unaccountable foreign agents.
[**3 days before leaving the White House, Obama sent $500,000,000 to the Green Climate Fund]

Mark T
Reply to  John F. Hultquist
June 22, 2017 12:52 pm

Obama should be impeached, at a minimum, for that. He’d lose his security detail and 10-year (or whatever it is now) pension, too.

R.S. Brown
Reply to  Mark T
June 23, 2017 1:50 pm

Mark,
A past President is not subject to impeachment. That’s reserved
for folks who are currently “in office”..
A past U.S. President is actually just a normal citizen, with a Secret
Service detail mandated by Federal Law.
Past Presidents MIGHT be subject to criminal and civils laws that
they personally violated during their term in office. Richard Nixon
was issued a blanket pardon by then-President Gerald Ford for
impeachable and otherwise unspecified acts while President.
Vice President Spiro T. Agnew was indicted in criminal court for
conspiracy in an infra-structure bribe scheme while Governor of
Maryland… before being elected Vice President. He WASN’T
offered a pardon by then-President Nixon.

R.S. Brown
Reply to  Mark T
June 23, 2017 3:20 pm

I don’t think I’ve ever had a comment moderated into oblivion on
WUWT in over nine years.
What did I do wrong?
[You triggered a “key word and tricky phrase” alarm in the “queue list” … No problems ….mod]

Chris
June 22, 2017 10:36 am

Strange, fracking research was carried on by the US government when no one in the private sector would put up the money. I don’t recall see any complaints on WUWT about that.
[??? .mod]

RWturner
Reply to  Chris
June 22, 2017 10:50 am

And once again we’re faced with a conundrum, can non sequitur actually be rationalized?

dmacleo
Reply to  Chris
June 22, 2017 11:12 am

you mean the SAFETY of fracking was researched.
as in water table, geo stability, etc.
quite a difference.
I’m SURE its an honest mistake……

Hans-Georg
Reply to  dmacleo
June 23, 2017 2:46 am

With the aim to prove the environmental damage under Obama. But what did not succeed.

DonM
Reply to  Chris
June 22, 2017 11:14 am

OK, here ya go…
Respond, respond, respond.
(if this doesn’t give you needed emotional boost let me know and I’ll respond again).

Reply to  Chris
June 22, 2017 11:15 am

Here’s some context on the government funded fracking research:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorensteffy/2013/10/31/how-much-did-the-feds-really-help-with-fracking/#7e8b4fda3edf
Wouldn’t you agree that low level R & D funding to supplement larger industry efforts is in a quite different category than massive subsidies?

benofhouston
Reply to  Chris
June 22, 2017 11:27 am

I have no problem with funding research. The problem is that line production has been funded by the tens of billions of dollars. That distorts the market and floods us with inefficient and uneconomical technologies.
They can research all they want. I’ll even support funding it, but the factory needs to be economically sustainable.

MarkW
Reply to  Chris
June 23, 2017 7:04 am

Chris, do you make stuff up on the spot, or is someone you handing you the nonsense you spew?

Zum Bomb
June 22, 2017 10:38 am

“Branson could raise the cash by selling his airline.”
He sold half, Virgin Atlantic, to Alaska Air!
And pocketed the loot!
Jajajajajajajajajaja

Russell
June 22, 2017 10:46 am

https://www.infowars.com/white-house-shows-no-sign-of-reopening-paris-climate-talks/ White House Shows No Sign of Reopening Paris Climate Talks

RWturner
June 22, 2017 10:47 am

Mr Branson probably can’t hear us all the way up on that soap box. It’s important work pretending to be saving the planet by finding cheaper ways to power your resorts for the elite on once uninhabited Caribbean Islands.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2014/02/25/richard-branson-launches-a-green-energy-plan-for-the-caribbean/#3fb6f478734f
This is like Leo proclaiming to be saving the planet by building personal resorts on uninhabited shoals and saying they are restoring the environment better than ever by doing so.
Level 50 hypocrites.

Jaakko Kateenkorva
June 22, 2017 10:49 am

[British] billionaire Richard Branson said business leaders were left dumbfounded by President Trump’s decision to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement.

Oh man. You cannot ride two horses at the same time Richard. If you want to personify big corporations and attract Occupy Wall Street movement clientele at the same time, you should have read their memo first: governments should be influenced by the majority of voters, not by 1%, particularly some arbitrary spokesmen of big corporations.

Ander
June 22, 2017 11:32 am

Branson has a criminal conviction for tax evasion in the UK.
He has chosen to domicile outside the UK to avoid paying taxes, he is not British.

Mark T
Reply to  Ander
June 22, 2017 12:53 pm

Taxes are for the little people.

TA
June 22, 2017 11:48 am

““A lot of people in the world are baffled by the American administration’s comments,” the Virgin Group CEO said.”
The people that voted for Trump are not baffled by his comments. They understand and agree with Trump that the Paris Accord was a bad deal for the U.S.

Mark T
Reply to  TA
June 22, 2017 12:57 pm

Indeed. None of us really care about “a lot of people in the world.” They have their own governments, let them commit economic suicide at their own peril.

ATheoK
Reply to  TA
June 22, 2017 5:39 pm

“A lot of people in the world are baffled by the American administration’s comments,” the Virgin Group CEO said.”

Yes, there are a lot of very gullible people out there who have elevated demonizing CO2 to religious ecstasy.
It was the observation of one of the tribe of Levi, to whom some person had expressed his astonishment at his being able to sell his damaged and worthless commodities, “That there vash von fool born every minute.” And perhaps the calculation might be brought to the proof, that not more than fifty men of genius are born in half a century.”
Or as stated more recently: “there is a sucker born every minute“, a watchword phrase known by con men and fraud artists for many generations.

TA
Reply to  TA
June 22, 2017 6:05 pm

Trump got a standing ovation from the huge crowd last night in Iowa where he gave his speech, when he mentioned that he had withdrawn the U.S. from the Paris Accord.
Trump said something to the effect that his supporters “get it” when it comes to understanding the issue of CAGW. Apparently, Mr. Branson does not get it.

ThomasJK
Reply to  TA
June 23, 2017 4:15 am

The Paris agreement was a bad deal for all people or all countries with the exception of the parasitic dictators of some countries who stand to be the primary beneficiaries of the “climate fund” plus the “industrialists” who have been astute enough to have positioned their companies to be in the money flow path when the “grants” money starts to flow.

Joel Snider
June 22, 2017 12:08 pm

A crony capitalist who’s baffled by an unwillingness to bilk people. Go figure.

Mark T
Reply to  Joel Snider
June 22, 2017 12:55 pm

Please don’t use that phrase. There is no such thing as a “crony capitalist.” The phrase is an attempt (by socialists and other collectivists) to paint capitalism in such a way that makes it appear as if it is corruptible. It is not. What is more appropriate is the term corporatist, or even better, fascist.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Mark T
June 22, 2017 1:11 pm

No argument there.

June 22, 2017 12:49 pm

This was basically my exact response to the NYT advert taken out by several businesses just prior to President Trump’s announcement to exit the Paris agreement. If companies feel obliged to put up their own money for “green” R&D and production then that is their prerogative, and was exactly the President’s point! The free market is a much more powerful force than it is given credit for and 99 out 100 times the government has intervened in the economy to try and “fix it” they have made it worse, not better. Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell and dozens of other economists have been saying this for decades.

Richard Bell
June 22, 2017 1:00 pm

I used to admire Richard Branson as a business person, I fly with Virgin and I love the Space Program they have undertaken ……..BUT I just can’t get my head around the fact he has been hoodwinked by the Gore’s of this world into believing the junk science of GW ……. AND after working with Burt Rutan ??????? …… The only thing I can think of is he feels he must side with the Green Blob because of the emissions from the planes that he fly’s ……… I wish he was a bigger man and would do the research instead of following like a sheep ……….. Oh well !!!

Mark Johnson
June 22, 2017 1:02 pm

I think that Mr. Branson is being overtaken by another of his pet causes: Legalized marijuana. I think he smokes too much of it and is losing touch with reality. It’s his money, if he wants to waste it, please go ahead.

June 22, 2017 1:57 pm

If any of these guys really thought climate change was such a serious problem they wouldn’t be falling over themselves to try and make money from it. I thought the idea is you spend what ever it takes to address a threat of global catastrophe. Instead these hypocrites are racing each other to see who can make the most. Meanwhile most affluent people wont pop a set of solar panels on their house unless they can make a profit. Most scientific research on climate change is just a bunch of self righteous arrogant people using it as an excuse to go have an adventure in an exotic location on somebody else’s purse. Its all BS as clear as day.

June 22, 2017 2:07 pm

Richard Branson is not very bright, so it wouldn’t take much to baffle him.

Michael darby
Reply to  Phillip Bratby
June 22, 2017 2:19 pm

Both Branson and Trump prove you don’t have to be smart to make lots of money. Helps if dad is rich.

Leonard Lane
Reply to  Michael darby
June 22, 2017 11:21 pm

Michael darby. Don’t know about Branson but Pres Trump is a brilliant man. Leftists like to call him dumb and say that he should be killed. That typifies their brilliance.

Hans-Georg
Reply to  Michael darby
June 23, 2017 2:53 am

This is total nonsense. Trump has managed more than 500 companies before its presidency. His father only a few. And Trump has founded his success on hard work, namely on construction. Not in programs with which money is drawn from the taxpayer

philincalifornia
Reply to  Phillip Bratby
June 22, 2017 5:36 pm

Not true. I was at University in England when he founded Virgin Records. He’s a very clever man business-wise. Got lucky, but still no dumbo.

Hans-Georg
Reply to  philincalifornia
June 23, 2017 3:04 am

However, he did not make his billions with hard work like Trump. This (Trump) had more than 500 companies, from the small construction company to the large construction company. One comes into contact with all sorts of people, rich and poor, and does not come to marijuana smoking.

George Lawson
Reply to  philincalifornia
June 26, 2017 8:55 am

philincalifornia
Being a good businessman, and Branson clearly is, does not necessarily make him capable of thinking intellectually. Yes, like most entrepeneurs, he is a good at being able to make £1 into £2, but beyond that most do not have much intellect when discussing more technical and scientific matters

Robert of Ottawa
June 22, 2017 2:15 pm

You can bet he’s getting subsidized somewhere

Michael darby
June 22, 2017 2:39 pm

“When pigs fly”
..

June 22, 2017 4:47 pm

When they say they’re baffled, it really means they can’t accept that their con has been busted. The hyper-rich will put some of their own money in, in hopes of keeping the con going long enough to restore their ability to fleece 98% of the world’s population, but within a few years, when they discovery that they still can’t hedge using “crap and traitor”, they’ll bail out, too. Then Al Gore will have to either commit seppuku or go back to hawking snake oil.

philincalifornia
June 22, 2017 5:34 pm

Actually, Branson did put money (his own) into the huge bioethanol facility in Keyes, California, that became Aemetis. He lost his shirt, but now that company has enjoyed some profitability, mostly due to the fact that bioethanol facilities are really cattle and chicken food producing companies (DDGs) with the ethanol (15 Billion gallons a year) as a by-product.
He’s not as bad as people on here are making him out to be. I don’t think he’s a phony virtue signaler, phony socialist w@nker. Obviously he’s just wrong on climate crap, but who wouldn’t be moving in the phony baloney circles he has to live in.
…. and no he’s not my Dad (smiley face).

alfredmelbourne
June 22, 2017 5:56 pm

Richard Branson pays almost no taxes. He lives in a tax-haven. Furthermore, his airlines and businesses are structured so as to funnel the profits to tax-havens.
It is not so long ago since he – as a publicity stunt – made one engine (out of 4) on one of his aircraft burn alcohol. Obviously, the piping and so on on that part of the aircraft had to be replaced afterwards – alcohol is far more corrosive than jet fuel.
“Jumbo Jet No Longer Biofuel Virgin after Palm Oil Fuels Flight”
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/jumbo-jet-no-longer-biofuel-virgin-after-palm-oil-flight/

HAROLD
Reply to  alfredmelbourne
June 23, 2017 7:06 am

In saying Branson pays almost no taxes, surely you make the point of how smart he is ?

Me!
June 22, 2017 8:33 pm

You could have stopped at:
Richard Branson “Baffled”

June 22, 2017 8:45 pm

G,gl “Richard Branson tax evasion”, read and enjoy!!!

June 22, 2017 8:58 pm

In the top photo, is that a cardboard cut..out of Gore?
Add two spiky ears and a snout, and what do you have??!!! A Branal Piggory?

Bryan A
Reply to  Ross King
June 23, 2017 2:26 pm

I thought that it was “The Turtle of Enormous Girth”

willhaas
June 23, 2017 2:44 am

Trump’s arguement has nothing to do with climate science. Trump thinks that it is a bad deal for the USA. The reality is that our federal government has a huge national debt with huge annual deficits and huge annual trade deficits..We need to first get our own financial house in order before we can possible consider helping out wih the Paris Climate Agreement. We need to get out of debt first.

Hans-Georg
Reply to  willhaas
June 23, 2017 3:12 am

That is only half the truth. Trump sees that the world warms, he does not say that the man does not have his share in it, but does not draw a catastrophe out of this warming and no human (alone)guilt. This is also an essential scientific difference between people like Mann and Watts, between Schmidt and Dr. Christy an so on. And he concludes that it would be cheaper to adapt than to fight against civilization and warming. Therein he lies in a line with Lomborg.

phaedo
June 23, 2017 6:47 am

The bearded one is baffled by the idea that the earth revolves round the sun.

talldave2
June 23, 2017 7:51 am

Good for Branson, he has the key to making a small fortune in renewables — a large fortune to invest.

Tom in Florida
June 23, 2017 8:40 am

If investing in renewables was such a great idea and produced good profits, there would already be billions of private dollars invested there. But it ain’t so they won’t.

Joe Civis
June 23, 2017 9:27 am

Mr. Branson translated; “Every CEO I spoke with is more than happy to suckle off of the taxpayer teet for countless billions while providing no useful good or service.”
Cheers!
Joe

James
June 23, 2017 9:40 am

Sounds to me like Dick is just upset that now he won’t be able to get his fare share of the US $100 Billion that Barry O promised every year.

Fred van der Velden
June 23, 2017 12:44 pm

Ah yes, Richard Branson…….Holier than Thou….being a billionaire does not make one suddenly a climate expert or more intelligent than the rest of us for that matter.The Bull Horn is larger, for sure.
With his personal carbon foot-print he should feel ashamed after preaching to the world and should donate all and I mean all his dough to the Climate Green Fund. Fun is over, no more Obama kite-flying behind a 500 HP speed boat. We may safely assume Branson wasn’t pulling the Big “O” behind a kayak.

June 23, 2017 2:08 pm

More virtue signalling from a guy that has a carbon footprint bigger than any 100 of us.
Pardon me while I gag.

Bryan A
Reply to  wallensworth
June 23, 2017 2:29 pm

Between the two of them, their combined Carbon Footprint is larger than several small countries

SocietalNorm
June 23, 2017 5:00 pm

SOMEBODY is going to make billions of dollars in “green” energy. Any bets if it will be before the year 2050, or 2100, or next century?

Edward Katz
June 23, 2017 6:13 pm

No doubt Branson, like all the other celebrity eco-phonies, will do his bit to cut emissions by greatly reducing his air travel.

June 23, 2017 8:26 pm

“A lot of people in the world are baffled by the American administration’s comments,” the Virgin Group CEO said.
Sir Branson, a lot of Americans are baffled by your wedding dress. Your 1987 balloon crash might have damaged your brain
http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/scalefit_720_noupscale/57a0f13f2a00000002fb43e5.jpeg

Gary Pearse
June 24, 2017 12:12 am

Useful idiots are blind indeed! Two things:
1) having all these billionaires spend their money on global warming instead of taxpayers doing so (we have to make sure this research isn’t a tax deductible expense – it violates government policy) also defeats the neomarxbrothers’ goal of destroying the economy, polity and power of the United States. The ideologgers won’t be pleased.
2) The irony and stupidity of elitists and warming scientists (97%) turning out to be wrong and not brought down by an Einstein but by Donald Trump and the “deplorables”, will cement the fate of the neomarxbrothers plans, chop Ngo activities and funding, will result in the massive overhaul of education, institutions, universities… , will bring in codes of ethics and science disciplinary panels (as for engineers)…

June 24, 2017 7:10 am

I covered Branson fairly thoroughly at
https://cliscep.com/2017/03/06/heat-the-rich-1-friendly-british-virgins-or-paradise/
Warning: there’s a photo of the green billionaire in his solid teak bath which is not for the faint-hearted.

Russell Harris
June 24, 2017 11:52 am

Hey chris do some homework first so you don’t end up embarrassing yourself…
From the Business Insider: The origin of fracking actually dates back to the Civil War
Hey, if Branson wants to pander to 3rd world parasite I say go for it, he’s got the money… What floors me is that these fools think that we who know better should also be sucked into paying for that scam…
Paris Protocol Amounts to Massive Transfer of the Wealth of Nations

Resourceguy
June 24, 2017 5:07 pm

Rent-a-Fool is a new silicon valley startup. It’s offering deep discounts on their Branson fool product and Johnny Depp for a limited time.

June 25, 2017 1:09 am

Richard, I agree with the following:comment image
Controlling the outside air temperature and ocean level of your private Pacific island beach with taxpayer dime would be one of those. I’m confident you to live up to your own words in your latest adventure:
http://www.joelannesley.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/richard-branson_Picture-Quote_Every-risk-is-worth-taking-as-long-as-its-for-a-good-cause-and-contributes-to-a-good-life.jpg
Take a chance. It’s the best way to test yourself. Have fun and push boundaries. It will work eventually:comment image

Noix
June 25, 2017 2:50 am

Branson was ‘baffled’ that he had to pay tax early in his business career. Only the fact that his mother was friends with the county sheriff kept him out of jail, probably. The sum involved was £42,000, enough to buy several properties at the time. His initial business was a student magazine which made its money by advertising abortion clinics. Not a squeaky clean past.

June 25, 2017 4:32 pm

Should we note his bio fuel flight experiment data was not a splashing success
.

June 26, 2017 1:14 am

What is most important in this case?
Most importantly, Mr. Tramp realized that both science and politics had a curved network, as Einstein invented so much space time to prove what gravity was. To date, none of this, but the glutted science and now tries to dissuade the truth of natural laws and turn it into false theories in which it can earn good money on the ignorant peoples.
Such is the policy with “evidence” of the cause of climate change.
Every stupid man can moreover believe that climate change is a consequence of a human factor, but the interactions between the planet and the sun. This can be trusted by tycoons and ignorers who are “cows of a muzzle” for tycoons.
It is true that people pollute the atmosphere and that this should be prevented in many ways, and not that a person is stronger than nature. Only idiots believe this.

George Lawson
June 26, 2017 8:32 am

I call upon Branson to let us know what he knows about global warming that we don’t, and why is he playing ball with Al Gore, who has made so many statements about Global Warming, and that the end of the world is nigh in order to make $millions out of the scam, and all of which have been proven to be lies. Come on Richard, let’s hear from you.

%d bloggers like this: