Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Earth Power

Bill Gates Urges 'Impatient Optimism' on Climate Change Innovations (gatesnotes.com) 79

Posted by EditorDavid from the hoping-for-a-Breakthrough dept.
Bill Gates, noted billionaire philanthropist, discussed the need for "impatient optimism" about both climate change and global development last month during an interview at an international affairs think tank: Q: If you go back a decade, are you more or less optimistic about where we are on climate change now, or then?

Bill Gates: I'm certainly more optimistic because in 2015, when the Paris Agreement was signed, there were so many areas of emission where there wasn't any activity...

Q: if you go back a decade, solar and wind were the most expensive energy sources we had. Since then, the price of solar has dropped 90%, and the price of wind has dropped 70%, and electric vehicles are now economically viable... I know you get excited about innovation. What are some of the areas that you're most excited about for innovation?

Bill Gates: Across this portfolio of 100 companies it's hard to pick my favorite. Some are kind of straightforward, like a company that makes windows where the temperature doesn't cross over, but instead, it blocks getting cold in the winter or hot in the summer, which is very cheap. Or there is a company where you leave your home, and you pump this air through, but it's got a chemical in it. When it sees cracks, it actually seals those cracks. You don't have to find the cracks; you just pump the air in. You can reduce the amount of heat loss between the windows and getting rid of those cracks. You can reduce the energy bill by a factor of two, which then means less load on the overall energy system...

The cement and steel ones are the ones, in a way, I'm most impressed by, because I wasn't sure we'd find anything in those spaces...

Q: The problem, I guess, with cement is that you are taking basically limestone, and then you are converting it to calcium oxide. But the byproduct you get in that conversion process is CO2. Basically, you need a way to capture that CO2....

Bill Gates: As you heat the limestone, that releases CO2. It's exactly as you say, it's an equal number amount of emissions. One of our companies doesn't use limestone. They actually go and find another source of calcium, which fortunately turns out to be quite abundant and cheap. They make exactly the same cement that we make today, but not using limestone as the input. I was stunned that you could do that.
Gates also hopes to see nuclear power in an economically viable form. "The nuclear industry basically failed, because their product was too expensive. It wasn't because of the waste or safety-type issues, which we can get into those, but it was economics." Bill Gates: First and foremost, you must have a much different economic proposition. The nuclear reactor I'm involved in, TerraPower, we only generate electricity when the renewable sources that have very little marginal costs aren't generating. We just make heat all day, and then only when the bid price of electricity is high enough, do we actually generate electricity, because otherwise, you have all this capital cost that half the time, the solar bid into that market is going to be very low.

I think fission, we shouldn't give up on it. I'm involved in that company only because it may be able to make a significant contribution to [fighting] climate change... I can't overstate how much easier it is to solve the problem if you can mix in some degree of fission or fusion that are there to fill in the periods where renewables are not generating. Cold snaps or where you have these cold fronts just sitting there, that's when houses need the most heating. That's when neither wind nor solar are generating.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Bill Gates Urges 'Impatient Optimism' on Climate Change Innovations More

Bill Gates Urges 'Impatient Optimism' on Climate Change Innovations

Comments Filter:
  • And not answer this post (oops, ok, starting .... now!)

  • Why did he short Tesla? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Sunday November 05, 2023 @03:12PM (#63982336)

    He lost credibility as someone who cares about climate change when he shorted Tesla. I mean, I don't like Musk's politics .. but I support Tesla (which he didn't found btw.)

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I absolutely do not like Musk, either, but I do think EV's are the future. EV's are not doing well at the moment, however. The overall car market is down, and EV's in particular. A short does not have to be a long-term thing. Maybe Gates just saw the writing on the wall that in the short term, EV's were not going to do well. I recently rented an electric vehicle, and it was not the best experience. It was a very nice car, but it got 230 miles to a charge. I drove two hours away and the car was down to less

      • EVs aren't presently a one-size-fits-all replacement for ICE vehicles, as you've experienced with your rental. Charging rates (as in billing, not speed of charging, but that also is an issue) at public chargers sometimes are high enough that an ICE economy car truly is cheaper to "refuel". Where EVs excel at is as commuter/grocery getter vehicles that you charge at home at the end of the day.

      • Hybrids are the answer for at least the next ten years.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by PPH ( 736903 )

      Don't use short [electrek.co] and Tesla in the same sentence.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Powercntrl ( 458442 )

      He lost credibility as someone who cares about climate change when he shorted Tesla.

      Tesla sells carbon credits, so I'd question their own credibility when it comes to actually putting climate change above creating profit.

      IMHO, the best thing Tesla did was kicking the door open for other EV manufacturers and showing them there was a market. Their cars really aren't for everybody, and I mean even if they offered models which still ran on gas, it's just their other design choices which won't be everyone's cup of tea. That's kind of the way to think about it - if every vehicle on the market

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by serviscope_minor ( 664417 )

      He had credibility before that?

      Why would people think that a crook who made billions from sketchy to downright illegal businesses practices would have a clue about any of this.

      • He had credibility before that?

        Why would people think that a crook who made billions from sketchy to downright illegal businesses practices would have a clue about any of this.

        True this. To me, it's always seemed as if there's evil, criminal Microsoft Bill and Bill using all his wealth before he dies to buy his way out of Hell. And both Bills are the same person.

    • Shorting doesn't by itself hurt a company. It just means one thinks the stock is going to go down. One doesn't need to have any problem with climate issues to short a company helping with climate change. Heck, if one makes money on the short and then uses that money to help with climate issues it could easily be overall good for climate issues.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by quall ( 1441799 )

        I think the point is that Bill's investment into the company wasn't to make it more successful. It was to make money by betting against it.

        But you're right, this doesn't have anything to do with climate change. Mostly because electric vehicles don't help with climate change. It just makes people feel good. The energy used by electric vehicles isn't coming from windmills and solar panels. It's coming from fossil fuels. I.e. burning petroleum, coal, and natural gas.

        Ask Bill what his carbon footprint is and I

        • hear, hear! In my neck of the woods, we get our electricity from a nuclear powerplant and a coal burning one. So... Yeah. There was talk about installing a field of solar cells to add to the grid, but the NIMBY's shot that down because non-scientific FUD.
    • The stock price isn't the company profits or losses. It is only a measure investor hype. The stock price going down does not mean Telsa loses money. Shorting a stock does not force the stock price to go down. It is only placing a bet that it might go down. The money Gates might have made from shorting Telsa down would have come from Wall Street, not Telsa Inc. So Gates trying to profit from Wallstreet to fund his environmental projects is not a loss of credibility.

  • Needs an asshole icon (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Why does slashdot file this under "world"? Wouldn't "asshole" be closer to the truth? You need a special icon to designate Bill Gates stories. I have a design in mind...

  • Plot twist (Score:3, Funny)

    by NFN_NLN ( 633283 ) on Sunday November 05, 2023 @03:19PM (#63982356)

    > They actually go and find another source of calcium, which fortunately turns out to be quite abundant and cheap. They make exactly the same cement that we make today, but not using limestone as the input. I was stunned that you could do that.

    Plot twist: That source of calcium is pulverized bones of children. lol

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Entrope ( 68843 )

      I suspect there is a similar plot twist in his nuclear-power company. "We avoid being too expensive by not even trying to sell power when it's cheap! Instead of having expensive capital just sitting there making cheap power, our expensive capital is fissioning away and only generating heat that contributes to global warming!"

    • "That source of calcium is pulverized bones of children."

      So.... It's a renewable resource! Excellent!

  • Bill’s Fixes for Planet Earth (Score:5, Funny)

    by Press2ToContinue ( 2424598 ) on Sunday November 05, 2023 @03:30PM (#63982378)
    In his latest eco-endeavors, Bill Gates, the Sultan of Software and now Commander-in-Green, is urging us to hustle with 'impatient optimism.' Reflecting on the climate conundrum, he seems more chipper than a server room after a successful backup.

    When asked about his eco-enthusiasm over the last decade, Bill's optimism levels have skyrocketed faster than a Linux server's uptime. Back in 2015, while the world was signing the Paris Agreement, Gates must've been waiting for the loading bar on climate innovation to finally start moving.

    Flash forward, and solar and wind costs are plummeting faster than the odds of successfully navigating an asteroid field (3,720 to 1, for those betting on Han Solo's odds). Now, Gates is geeking out over his climate-crusading portfolio, from magic windows that play keep-away with temperature, to a chemical air concoction that's more sealing than a system admin applying patches on Patch Tuesday.

    But wait, there's more! Gates is smashing the cement and steel industries like a software bug. His crew has ditched limestone for a mystery calcium source, turning CO2 emissions into a thing of the past, like floppy disks or dial-up internet.

    And then there's TerraPower, the nuclear endeavor that's playing harder to get than a PS5 at Christmas. This reactor only comes online when renewable energy decides to take a break—like a coding ninja waiting for the caffeine to kick in.

    Gates' grand vision? Fission and fusion as the dynamic duo, filling in the power gaps left by their renewable cousins. It's like having a solid backup server ready for when the main one goes on a coffee break.

    So, hats off to Bill, the OG nerd, for leveling up his climate game. Now, if only we could patch the planet like a security flaw, we'd be golden.
    • I see what you did there. xD
    • Maybe he would be one tiny bit credible if he grounded his personal jet.

    • So, hats off to Bill, the OG nerd, for leveling up his climate game. Now, if only we could patch the planet like a security flaw, we'd be golden.

      Jesus wept. Can you imagine a Microsoft quality patch for the planet? The nightmares that thought puts in my heads. Luckily, we wouldn't live long enough to worry much about it. I'm sure they'd build a patch meaning to slow climate change, but end up 'patching' gravity by flipping it and we'd all go flying off into space.

  • We will never get there if any of these new technologies run on Windows.

  • I'm impatient (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Rosco P. Coltrane ( 209368 ) on Sunday November 05, 2023 @03:39PM (#63982398)

    for billionaires to become legally unable to hide their obsene ill-gotten wealth in fake charitable foundations doing fake philanthropy to avoid paying their fair share of taxes [theguardian.com].

    More importantly, I'm impatient for those disgusting unprincipled individual who don't contribute to society like the rest of us to quit giving their opinions all the fucking time.

  • huge money for climate change with this one trick (Score:5, Interesting)

    by oumuamua ( 6173784 ) on Sunday November 05, 2023 @03:46PM (#63982420)
    Declare war on it.

    Budget constraints? constraints no more
    Not profitable? nobody cares
    The money pours out of woodwork.
  • Technology is the only solution to climate change. That is, we are going to continue to pump CO2 into the atmosphere in ever increasing amounts until new technology comes along that makes it easy to avoid.

    We aren't going to stop using electricity, and we aren't going to stop driving cars. Alternative electricity sources and electric cars are the answer.

    • A lack of technology isn't the issue. There already are EVs on the market right now which meet the needs of most people who are clogging up the roadways for their daily grind. The reason they're still sitting on a dealership's lot is mostly one of economics. That's also a big part of the reason why those people have to participate in their daily road-clogging rat race in the first place. Can't have all those office buildings sitting empty, now can we?

      We're collectively trashing the planet for exactly th

      • The reason they're still sitting on a dealership's lot is mostly one of economics.

        New technology will make them cheaper.

        That's also a big part of the reason why those people have to participate in their daily road-clogging rat race in the first place.

        Work from home will reduce emissions, but it won't prevent cumulative emissions from increasing.

        • New technology will make them cheaper.

          Lately, technology has been doing the opposite thing. Perhaps you've heard about using encryption and a distributed ledger to turn previously worthless database entries into something that people are actually willing to spend real money on? Worse, real world energy resources are being consumed to run this scheme.

          Technology can't fix greed.

        • Work from home will reduce emissions, but it won't prevent cumulative emissions from increasing.

          Except that it literally will. For example, commutes are growing longer. But if you take the commutes out of the picture, then not only do you save immediately, but you also save in the future by not increasing their length, which is exactly what you say won't happen.

      • A lack of technology isn't the issue. There already are EVs on the market right now which meet the needs of most people who are clogging up the roadways for their daily grind. The reason they're still sitting on a dealership's lot is mostly one of economics. That's also a big part of the reason why those people have to participate in their daily road-clogging rat race in the first place. Can't have all those office buildings sitting empty, now can we?

        We're collectively trashing the planet for exactly the same reason there were folks screaming "open the everything back up!" during a pandemic: because numbers on a balance sheet made us do it.

        Greed is all. Profit is god. Anything that has a negative impact on giant corporations is strictly verboten. Climate change doesn't matter at all compared to our fetishization of the imaginary concept of money and wealth. We must serve the almighty profit! It's the only thing that matters.

        Kill the planet? Who cares. As long as somebody ends up with billions sitting in their account as the Earth's surface is scoured clean? It was all worth it!

      • One of the best technologies to use in a cold climate is a rocket mass heater. They work by conductively warming your butt. They burn so cleanly and efficiently that they capture the vast majority of the energy inside your house while emitting almost zero smoke. You can learn more about them by watching the Free Heat Movie [freeheat.info]

    • Technology is the only solution to climate change. That is, we are going to continue to pump CO2 into the atmosphere in ever increasing amounts until new technology comes along that makes it easy to avoid.

      We aren't going to stop using electricity, and we aren't going to stop driving cars. Alternative electricity sources and electric cars are the answer.

      You forgot to add: "I'm sure the future will find a solution. For now, I'll just enjoy myself, ignoring everything with my fingers in my ears and singing lalala."

      • You forgot to add: "I'm sure the future will find a solution."

        Hope so. But I'm not going to stop using electricity or get rid of my car. That would literally be worse than the scientifically predicted effects of global warming.

        • But I'm not going to stop using electricity or get rid of my car

          Because of course, the choice is a binary one. God forbid reducing your carbon footprint in general (use your car less, change your phones/laptops/electronic devices less often, eat less meat, use less electricity, lobby for low-carbon energy sources like hydro, nuclear, solar/wind...).

  • Just whatever you do (Score:3, Interesting)

    by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Sunday November 05, 2023 @04:21PM (#63982480)
    Don't take any of my enormous wealth away from me and use it to actually do anything about climate change in the material the effect of fashion like for example building out cities that are walkable or developing large-scale public transportation.... But I'll be happy to continue to drip feed money for the sake of my legacy in the form of a half dozen charities because Americans aren't good at percentages.

    • for example building out cities that are walkable

      Walkable
      Affordable
      Not crime-ridden

      Pick any two.

      • but you can't have all 3 and classism, racism and bigotry.

        The problem with the "inner cities" is that we as a nation did terrible things to black folk (and plenty of poor white folk, hence the classism).

        Nobody gets left behind. We're all Americans or we're not. There's no in between. Anything less and your pettiness gets exploited by the upper class and they use it to divide and conquer, walking away with all your money.
      • Walkable - The Criminals don't have a getaway car.
        Affordable - So there is no need for widespread theft.

        I think we found our two!

    • BG is worth about $110 billion.

      So, let's assume we follow your dystopian plan to take away all the money from not only BG but everyone you envy and use it to create your vision of utopia where no one works and everyone gets everything they want.

      How much do you think that will cost?

      Let's see... https://www.capitalfrontiers.c... [capitalfrontiers.com].

      Tells us it's about $300k per resident to build a city.

      There are about 300 million people in the US.

      Calculator says that is 9e13 USD or $90,000,000,000,000. 90 trillion dollars.

      The n

      • The problem is that you're imagining luxury condos instead of the kind of slummy housing that would give PETA nightmares if it was being used to house animals instead of people. Ever see Korben Dallas's apartment in The Fifth Element? That'd be a lot cheaper to build.

        Aut-o-wash.

        • I am imagining nothing. Read the link I provided. It's where I got the base cost from and it has a ton more data.

          If your idea is seriously that we should all live in slummy closets like in 5th element then there is nothing to discuss. That's not living. We aren't made to live like that. That's serious dystopian hell. The movie made it clear their vision of the future was complete shit. If that what I get for stripping all the billionaires to nothing then I'll keep the current system, thanks.

          • Oh and 300k is not a luxury condo. Not even close. I was shopping condos last year and the year before across the country. Even in cheap places a nice condo started at 700k and the higher end ones went for as much as 2 million. 300k was your 5th element slum box closet.

            • Move out of California you idiot. I bought a double family house (6 bedrooms, 5000 sq ft) in the suburbs for under $250k.

              • > I was shopping condos last year and the year before across the country.

                I did move. But I didn't want to live in BFE or any place cold. I bought a house 2x as big as my California house for less than half what I sold it for. And still live in a decent place.

                If I didn't care about anything else I saw 10k sf mansions out in nowhere. I guess I could have invited a new group of teens every summer and made a slasher movie. "Bobbie! My phone doesn't work way out here! What happens if that big old house

            • Construction costs != retail housing prices

              Even with today's increased costs of materials and labor, $300k per unit (not even $300k per resident, which is crazy) should be plenty to build some rather nice high density multi-family accommodations. That being said, I personally wouldn't want to live with my neighbor right up my ass even if the domicile itself is rather posh, but clearly that's not a dealbreaker for everyone judging by the real estate prices downtown.

              So right off the bat, there's going to be

              • It's true retail cost != construction cost but the silly guy I was replying to wants to rebuild all of society including how we live which would require rebuilding cities differently.

                Thus I used construction costs as per that link.

                You must be aware he posts the same dumbass paranoid 1%er nonsense all the time. And no amount of hard facts can dent his tinfoil armor but I do find it amusing to burn down his crazy little world with the hard facts and math on occasion.

                He almost never replies. What could he sa

      • the 1% hide their wealth in assets. Gates is the largest farm owner in America, for example. There's more to that. Look up the Panama papers.

        You're being tricked. The sooner you figure that out, and that what you can see is just the tip of a very big iceberg about to crash into you and your family, the better.

        • Holy shit, dude, it is called "net worth" for a reason. If you don't understand the most basic financial terminology you have no business discussing the cost of bubble gum much less making grand claims about how society needs to be restructured so people like you with low-end skills who quietly quit the day they got their first job who do nothing but whine about other people who worked hard their whole lives can sit at home smoking dope and crying about their betters having earned more than them.

          Go look up

          • Why would BG hide his wealth?

            Torches and pitchforks. If the average dingaling ever realized just what the billionaires hoarding wealth was doing to them, which is not very complicated but they are very stupid, they would be part of an angry mob before you could say "suck all the air out of the room".

            • Tinfoil.

              It is public knowledge he's worth well over 100 billion. He was loudly celebrated when he was #1 richest for a while.

              The pitch fork carriers are VASTLY outnumbered by wealth worshippers.

              Anecdote: while waiting for a table at random place a few years ago, Zuckerberg and his wife walk in. I was cracking jokes to my wife about evil comoany overlords while everyone else was drooling over the guy like he was JFC. Most people are born followers and fan boys. The entire entertainment industry is built

              • You're in a tiny tiny itty bitty minority who doesn't love the guy.

                Yep, most people are ignorant AF, they don't know how compromised everything Gates is doing is because they don't want to know. It's easier for them to believe the myth of the benevolent billionaire because then they don't have to change any of their own habits.

  • "...I'd really hope that everyone sorts of forgets about Jeff Epstein while they're at it, m'kay?"

  • I don't like the guy (Score:3)

    by gweihir ( 88907 ) on Sunday November 05, 2023 @06:08PM (#63982788)

    And I never forget that he got his fortune by aggressively pushing a substandard product, the damage from which is still raising. But at least in the quotes in the story, he is right on the mark. In particular, he is right that current nuclear is wayyyy too expensive and that nuclear as base-load is a main reason for that failure. Nuclear usable as regulation energy would be a whole different thing, because regulation energy can be more expensive and still be worthwhile. With thermal storage, it could even be combined with storing overproduction from wind and solar. Of course, updated safety-standards need to be part of that mix, but they will be. I am also beginning to think that safe long-term storage of nuclear waste can actually be achieved, but not cheaply either, which also says nuclear as base-load is not economically viable.

  • that is 25 times the size of an ordinary house in the US.
    He invested all his money in nuclear solutions I guess.

  • Why doesn't just do what he's good at and buy out global warming and shut it down?

Slashdot Top Deals

Don't tell me how hard you work. Tell me how much you get done. -- James J. Ling

Close