Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon Announces $2B Fund to Invest in Climate Tech Companies

press.aboutamazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 92 posts

Re: Amazon Announces $2B Fund to Invest in Climate Tech Companies

#11

Post by pen2l »

1-6 wrote: post #10

How about them delivery trucks and waste cardboard boxes? Those data centers can also generate a lot of emissions. Amazon is throwing spare change at a massing problem they're involved in.

But you’ve gotta admit they’re like 10 times better than the alternative.

I mean, their whole operation is optimized up the wazoo. Imagine the time saved, the carbon emissions saved when folks don’t have to drive to and back to get their stuff.

I’m kind of hooked on this grocery delivery stuff too now, so much time and headache and gas saved.

Re: Amazon Announces $2B Fund to Invest in Climate Tech Companies

#12

Post by GreeniFi »

wpasc wrote: post #9
dckeyjqmon wrote: post #2

This won't work. We need real regulation that penalizes polluters so much that it's no longer profitable to destroy the planet. We need social and cultural changes so that it's no longer hip and cool to fly around on jet planes and cars. This is mostly a political issue, not an issue of private industries in search of profits.

I could not disagree more. The second that renewable energy is a more economic and reliable way to consume energy it will easily become the default because there will be no reason not to. Private companies that could develop/build/scale such technologies and deploy them who seek profit are a viable method because the profit motive can deploy capital to that effect. Government research and regulations could help speed…

“ The second that renewable energy is a more economic and reliable way to consume energy it will easily become the default because there will be no reason not to.”

You ignore the realpolitik of climate change. FYI certain fossil fuel producing states invest heavily to disrupt the transition to renewables.

Ask yourself why the Green Climate Fund, probably the most important fund of its type, is based is based in the arse-end or nowhere.

Re: Amazon Announces $2B Fund to Invest in Climate Tech Companies

#13

Post by an_opabinia »

Suppose the investments turn out to be wildly successful. They turn $2b into $200b. They could still fail at the goal of slowing global warming.

The accounting value of an equity, especially a growth stage company, is never the same as its economic value. When in history has accounting (like a price) measured something real / believable about the environment?

One way to look at this is what is the environmental impact of Tesla? Amazon would have love to have invested in Tesla. That would have made this fund. Anyone would. But just because their accounting values goes up so and so, doesn't mean that's a measurement of their environmental impact.

My point is, equities are ill suited incentives for even economic profits, let alone environmental "profits."

Re: Amazon Announces $2B Fund to Invest in Climate Tech Companies

#14

Post by makerofspoons »

pphysch wrote: post #4

> Amazon announced it’s on a path to run on 100% renewable energy by 2025, five years ahead of schedule. A possible silver lining of market domination is the ability to tackle issues like climate change without falling behind competitors who aren't making those harder choices. Unless this is all PR and Amazon is actively burning down their namesake or something?

Switch to renewables, then lobby for a carbon tax to crush competitors that haven't switched or can't afford the transition.

Re: Amazon Announces $2B Fund to Invest in Climate Tech Companies

#15

Post by 1-6 »

pen2l wrote: post #11
1-6 wrote: post #10

How about them delivery trucks and waste cardboard boxes? Those data centers can also generate a lot of emissions. Amazon is throwing spare change at a massing problem they're involved in.

But you’ve gotta admit they’re like 10 times better than the alternative. I mean, their whole operation is optimized up the wazoo. Imagine the time saved, the carbon emissions saved when folks don’t have to drive to and back to get their stuff. I’m kind of hooked on this grocery delivery stuff too now, so much time and headache and gas saved.

It just sounds like a PR stunt. They already have data centers which are under scrutiny for energy use and reducing packaging helps their bottom line as well. That's why I say it's 'spare change' for them.

Re: Amazon Announces $2B Fund to Invest in Climate Tech Companies

#16

Post by delecti »

Even if you view it cynically this is a smart plan. It's good PR, and they've got a better foot in the door for when those climate tech companies start getting a bunch more customers. And one way or another they're likely to start getting more customers, whether it's proactive or reactive.

Re: Amazon Announces $2B Fund to Invest in Climate Tech Companies

#17

Post by skrebbel »

pen2l wrote: post #11
1-6 wrote: post #10

How about them delivery trucks and waste cardboard boxes? Those data centers can also generate a lot of emissions. Amazon is throwing spare change at a massing problem they're involved in.

But you’ve gotta admit they’re like 10 times better than the alternative. I mean, their whole operation is optimized up the wazoo. Imagine the time saved, the carbon emissions saved when folks don’t have to drive to and back to get their stuff. I’m kind of hooked on this grocery delivery stuff too now, so much time and headache and gas saved.

> But you’ve gotta admit they’re like 10 times better than the alternative.

Not if the alternative is bikeable and walkable cities with decent public transport, though.

Re: Amazon Announces $2B Fund to Invest in Climate Tech Companies

#18

Post by depr »

pphysch wrote: post #4

> Amazon announced it’s on a path to run on 100% renewable energy by 2025, five years ahead of schedule. A possible silver lining of market domination is the ability to tackle issues like climate change without falling behind competitors who aren't making those harder choices. Unless this is all PR and Amazon is actively burning down their namesake or something?

In some cases, Amazon uses e.g. subsidied wind energy for new data centers. However, this means the renewable energy is not going to neighboring homes, which are instead still using non-renewables.

Re: Amazon Announces $2B Fund to Invest in Climate Tech Companies

#19

Post by bananabreakfast »

skrebbel wrote: post #17
pen2l wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you’ve gotta admit they’re like 10 times better than the alternative. I mean, their whole operation is optimized up the wazoo. Imagine the time saved, the carbon emissions saved when folks don’t have to drive to and back to get their stuff. I’m kind of hooked on this grocery delivery stuff too now, so much time and headache and gas saved.

> But you’ve gotta admit they’re like 10 times better than the alternative. Not if the alternative is bikeable and walkable cities with decent public transport, though.

I think they meant reasonable alternative.

American cities are not (for the most part) bikeable and certainly not walkable. Literally everything is designed to be driven to in a car.

The decent public transport would help, but since it's been made a political issue it's not exactly as easy as just working within the constraints of the system.

Re: Amazon Announces $2B Fund to Invest in Climate Tech Companies

#20

Post by bradstewart »

GreeniFi wrote: post #12
wpasc wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could not disagree more. The second that renewable energy is a more economic and reliable way to consume energy it will easily become the default because there will be no reason not to. Private companies that could develop/build/scale such technologies and deploy them who seek profit are a viable method because the profit motive can deploy capital to that effect. Government research and regulations could help speed…

“ The second that renewable energy is a more economic and reliable way to consume energy it will easily become the default because there will be no reason not to.” You ignore the realpolitik of climate change. FYI certain fossil fuel producing states invest heavily to disrupt the transition to renewables. Ask yourself why the Green Climate Fund, probably the most important fund of its type, is based is based in the a…

Certain ones do, sure. But not all, or even most. The vast majority of countries do not produce fossil fuels, so they all have an interest in reducing dependence on oil.

I know nothing about the GCF or the geography of Korea, but ~2 hours from Seoul doesn't really seem like the "arse-end of nowhere"?

Post reply on HN