Inventors, Musk and Gates

– We get a bad conscience for so much, but it is not our fault, my teenage daughter said to me the other day.

She thinks it’s wrong that her generation has to clean up the earth after generations of pollution and environmental destruction. She wants to travel around the world after high school without feeling like she’s doing something wrong.

I replied that, – yes, you are right. It is unfair. – But what your generation has that we did not is an (almost) unison world and companies that want to fix the earth and make it greener. Our generation also feels this responsibility, I replied, and we are many who want to help you get the world on track before we throw in the towel.

– When it pays off to go with green solutions, and China and the US are involved, then things happen, I comforted her. – Think of climate and environmental activists who for decades have spoken for deaf ears. – Beware also, that you have much more technology and information sharing now than when I was at your age.

Inspired by the conversation, I wanted to write about what I had just said to her.

Grassroots innovators, $100 million Musk prize and Bill Gates were what I came across this week. Bill Gates probably has the most followers and critics, so I start there.

Greenfluencer slightly missing the target

In his new book «How to avoid a climate disaster. The solutions we have and the breakthroughs we need. » Gates talks a lot about Green Premiums. That is, what the carbon-neutral alternative costs extra compared to the fossil one. A proper system and market where consumers and businesses at all times know this price has two effects, according to Gates.

First, it will be clear what is possible financially today. Most people will be able to take a small extra cost. For example, it would cost Americans an average of $ 18 per household a month to make all electricity in the United States renewable.

Ship traffic, on the other hand, will have to pay 600 percent more to switch to biofuels. And here comes the second point. Green Premiums shows where development and implementation of new technology must take place. And, it must happen first where the emissions are greatest.

The large CO2 emissions come from the production of goods, cement and machinery (31 per cent), power production (27 per cent), agriculture and food production (19 per cent) and transport (16 per cent).

The idea that costs for environmental protection measures and damage from residual emissions should be reflected in the price is nothing new. The principle was formulated in the OECD in the 1970s. You can emit, as long as you pay for it. But this principle is not quite the same as Green Premiums.

Gates contribution

Gates is not a climate expert, despite everything he has achieved and all the books he reads. At the same time, climate debate is rarely characterised by solutions as Gates presents them. That is the advantage of not being a politician. Gates focuses on optimisation and less on what is morally correct and all the sacrifices people need to make. The latter paralysing much of the climate debate.

Does Gates’ contribution help to stop global warming? Yes, because he has great credibility, power and money. No, because his technology-optimistic engineering “optimisation” universe misses the political and why most of the world’s population is still poor.

As the New York Times reviewer of his book points out; it is disappointing that Gates, which certainly has easy access to the world’s best climate experts, is not doing better. He is simply wrong about the importance of Green Premiums for investing in green energy.

It’s solved

The reviewer refers to studies that estimate that 80 percent of the world’s energy can be renewable by 2030, primarily with solar and wind power. The prices of solar cells have fallen to a level today that the International Energy Agency in 2010 thought would take 50 to 100 years to reach. Construction of solar and wind power is already, or will soon be cheaper than just running coal-fired power plants. Gates does not get this, according to the New York Times reviewer.

The fact that the ultra billionaire does not address the financing of oil companies and their 40-50 year long disinformation agenda also reveals his lack of knowledge and understanding of what hinders action, which he himself also claims not to understand (although Microsoft has invested in many of these companies in the past ).

The problem is that what comes from Gates is shared and listened to by so many.

Gates is quite formidable but he is not a social scientist or politician. But with several of his caliber on the team, such as Angela Merkel, Barack Obama and the new WTO chief, Nigerian Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala with fingertip feeling and influence in their respective areas, the chances increase that we can get rid of the grey economy once and for all.

Our kids main source of information is social media. For all its strengths, understanding the climate crisis is not one of them. One of the reasons I am writing this is to guide my kids in these questions.

So the answer is neither yes or no. We must take Gates for what he is. Not a guru. Not completely mistaken.

Be inspired by Elon Musk

Inventors and rich people in the lands of the sea?

Someone who has a $100 million to spare? There are probably a few billionaires out there who are passionate about the oceans and innovations. The richest man on Earth wants to go up in the air, but this time not all the way to space. He stays in the atmosphere, or rather, he will reward those who take the trip to the atmosphere to go CO2 hunting.

If you figure out how to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, there may be 50 Musk millions waiting for you.

He has announced a competition where the winner gets half if they manage to find a way to do this. The next two places are worth $20 million.

So, all you billionaires out there: let Musk inspire you and let your fortunes support great innovators with great ideas with little money.

Grassroots innovators

Back in the day, inventors had a hard time finding investors to realize their great ideas.

And not everyone is as lucky as those at Uppsala University: The researchers who forgot to turn off the lab equipment over the weekend and had accidentally invented a new, super-absorbing substance, Upsalite.

UpLink is a platform for connecting investors and inventors and has its own forum for ocean solutions. If you have an idea, you can present it there.

Robots, corals and kelp

The Charm coral robot is designed to help coral reefs grow. The robot finds and removes algae that hinder growth. It can also highlight the nutrients that coral reefs need and thus monitor the growth conditions. The idea is that it can help island communities and poor countries rebuild their coral reefs.

Another idea that is about to be launched is micro-fragmentation on land. A piece of coral the size of a golf ball is divided into 50-100 pieces. Then place and cultivate these a few centimeters apart and the coral grows up to 40 times faster than normal. The coral is then put back on the broken reef.

Seaweed and kelp production is a growing industry. Some analysts predict the market size will grow from $13.3 billion in 2019 to $23 in 2027. But getting this product to the market is still a challenge. In Maine in the US where fishermen grow seaweed out of season, and in British Columbia where the cultivation will also help indigenous peoples (first nations) and local communities with jobs. Kelp Blue and Sea6 Energy have similar ambitions.

My daughter has fallen in love with physics. Pure physics. Not as a mean to find solutions to save the planet. She is just very fascinated how the physical world is connected. Next time we talk about climate change, maybe she will see how physicists are key to put into practice some of the solutions needed.

Cover image: Recycled snowboard: The closest I’ve been to invent something. We built snowboards in my friend’s garage in the 80’s. The bindings were made of old petrol cans and the base from hard plastic billboards. Worked great.