Hacker News Reader

Comment by ben_w | Hacker News Reader

Inside me there are two wolves[0]; the optimistic one says this is fantastic and applauds the effort, the cynical one thinks this was going to happen on this time scale anyway and is therefore a waste of money.

Which is right?

[0] well, I am a furry :P

View on HN

No. The eradication of pollution sources, even coal, is not at all inevitable. Remember that there's an active and large pro-pollution element in US politics right now. it Any money spent in a positive direction is useful to help avoid or win fights to push things in the wrong direction.

> an active and large pro-pollution element in US politics right now

No, there is not. Rather there is a Democratic strawman that they enjoy attacking.

What there is, is an element that doesn't want energy disruptions, and isn't willing to compromise on that. Look at this table: https://www.fool.com/research/renewable-energy-by-state/ and notice how with the exception of California, all the states with high renewable percentages are conservative leaning.

who knows maybe in Bloombergs old age he's trying to grow a soul. He's realizing that he can't take it with him and he's been a shit steward while he's been on earth, maybe he's trying o to correct the error of his ways...or he's afraid he's going to hell.

Or he wants to run for president next year and getting his bonafides in order.

Bloomberg has been known as a philanthropist for decades, he donated over $14 billion in his lifetime

My cynical version is asking what Bloomberg is getting out of it. Is he heavily invested and 500M is just a good way to increase the electicity costs and generate better return?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com