Amazon Announces $2B Fund to Invest in Climate Tech Companies • Hacker News Board

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

#41

Post by adamsea » Tue, Jun 23, 2020, 5:22 PM UTC

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #30

an_opabinia wrote: post #13

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 impac…

> My point is, equities are ill suited incentives for even economic profits, let alone environmental "profits." What is your alternative proposal? It's not like Amazon's $2B investment in climate tech is mutually exclusive with government initiatives or other climate research. It's another angle to approach the problem, using the tools they have at their disposal. I don't understand the desire to assume the most cyni…

> I don't understand the desire to assume the most cynical takes on this initiative.

Because of Amazon's (poor) history when it comes to exercising corporate social responsibility?

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

#42

Post by santoshalper » Tue, Jun 23, 2020, 5:22 PM UTC

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #30

an_opabinia wrote: post #13

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 impac…

> My point is, equities are ill suited incentives for even economic profits, let alone environmental "profits." What is your alternative proposal? It's not like Amazon's $2B investment in climate tech is mutually exclusive with government initiatives or other climate research. It's another angle to approach the problem, using the tools they have at their disposal. I don't understand the desire to assume the most cyni…

They could pay taxes and we could, as a nation, decide how best to coordinate efforts to fight climate change.

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

#43

Post by toomuchtodo » Tue, Jun 23, 2020, 5:23 PM UTC

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #30

an_opabinia wrote: post #13

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 impac…

> My point is, equities are ill suited incentives for even economic profits, let alone environmental "profits." What is your alternative proposal? It's not like Amazon's $2B investment in climate tech is mutually exclusive with government initiatives or other climate research. It's another angle to approach the problem, using the tools they have at their disposal. I don't understand the desire to assume the most cyni…

Don't invest, subsidize, and expect no investment return (the return is climate change is mitigated). More DARPA, less VC fund. Identify critical technologies needed to rapidly decarbonize transportation, the supply chain, and the electrical grid, and directly subsidize them if they are not yet cost competitive with fossil use. Capitalism primitives (in this case, equity investment) are not always optimal tools for engineering solutions. The Bill and Melinda Gates foundation has saved >100 million lives by donating vaccines to the developing world. Donations, not investment.

Also a path to consider is lobbying and political activism. If Amazon has aligned itself with driving carbon out of the economy (their historical PPA efforts and this fund seems to communicate such a stance), they should be using their dollars to support political representation that will codify this into law (more aggressive subsidies for low carbon technologies & mobility electrification, and implementation of a carbon tax).

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

#44

Post by pkaye » Tue, Jun 23, 2020, 5:24 PM UTC

pathseeker wrote: post #21

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.

Unless you're getting all of your Amazon stuff in a single box in the weekly option, it's not really better. Driving 3 miles once a week to get everything from a store is better than 7 boxes a week + delivery increased truck load.

There is an option on Amazon to deliver on a single day of the week.

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

#45

Post by adamsea » Tue, Jun 23, 2020, 5:24 PM UTC

ronnier wrote: post #31

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.

Hacker news is a total unnecessary luxury. By using it, you are contributing to the problem. This website consumes resources and energy to run and view.

It's actually a very efficient website ;)

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

#46

Post by pinkfoot » Tue, Jun 23, 2020, 5:28 PM UTC

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.

> We need real regulation that penalizes polluters

How are you going to penalise the other 7,000,000,000 people that don't live in the USA/EU/Japan? Growing at 3 souls per second.

The only way is to provide a cleaner alternative for base line coal with 100% dispatch ration that is cheaper than coal.

Because that is what the next five billion are going to use otherwise - whether you like it or not.

If you solve this, then - like smartphones - they will line up around the block to buy it and you won't have to convince or police anyone.

Right now, thorium breeder reactors seem the only thing.

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

#47

Post by lukifer » Tue, Jun 23, 2020, 5:29 PM UTC

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #30

an_opabinia wrote: post #13

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 impac…

> My point is, equities are ill suited incentives for even economic profits, let alone environmental "profits." What is your alternative proposal? It's not like Amazon's $2B investment in climate tech is mutually exclusive with government initiatives or other climate research. It's another angle to approach the problem, using the tools they have at their disposal. I don't understand the desire to assume the most cyni…

> What is your alternative proposal?

According to the "The Largest Public Statement of Economists in History": a carbon tax and dividend [0].

The technology of markets is one of price signals and feedback loops, generally on time horizons between nano-second HFTs and quarterly earnings reports. Ecological events, occurring on the scale of decades or centuries, require governments (or other forms of collective action) to create artificial price signals for those externalities.

At any rate, I agree that there's nothing wrong with this initiative. Every bit potentially helps; I don't see this diverting resources from other efforts.

[0] https://clcouncil.org/economists-statement/

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

#48

Post by nostromo » Tue, Jun 23, 2020, 5:30 PM UTC

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.

Dear Jeff Bezos:

Amazon is great and all, but instead can you rebuild all of America to be denser walkable cities, with a great public rail system?

Signed, Hacker News

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

#49

Post by bttrfl » Tue, Jun 23, 2020, 5:31 PM UTC

Kalium wrote: post #37

skrebbel wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

OK. Let's say a magic wand is waved, and all of us Americans have bikeable and walkable cities with excellent public transportation. Let's say this happens literally overnight. How do you expect this would change Amazon's logistics and how favorable they are for consumers? For my part, at the very least, I'm still likely to get a lot of things delivered. Local stores are very rarely cheaper for anything non-immediate…

Perhaps, we should wave this magic wand to make you order less stuff? No tech can save us unless we start to consume less. Also, we should care less about optimising our time which we are likely to waste anyway on netflix and co.

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

#50

Post by PragmaticPulp » Tue, Jun 23, 2020, 5:32 PM UTC

santoshalper wrote: post #42

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My point is, equities are ill suited incentives for even economic profits, let alone environmental "profits." What is your alternative proposal? It's not like Amazon's $2B investment in climate tech is mutually exclusive with government initiatives or other climate research. It's another angle to approach the problem, using the tools they have at their disposal. I don't understand the desire to assume the most cyni…

They could pay taxes and we could, as a nation, decide how best to coordinate efforts to fight climate change.

> They could pay taxes

It's false to claim that Amazon doesn't pay their taxes. Amazon pays taxes on profits according to the tax law, just like every other company. Amazon employees pay taxes on their paychecks, just like every other company's employees. Amazon's customers pay taxes on their purchases, just like customers of every other company's customers. Amazon generates a lot of tax revenue.

> and we could, as a nation, decide how best to coordinate efforts to fight climate change

Like I said: Amazon's climate change actions are not mutually exclusive with government initiatives to combat climate change.

It's a false dichotomy, not to mention specious argument, to suggest that Amazon's $2B investment in climate change is somehow preventing the government from also investing in climate change intitiatives.