Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

Starting from the 1st Chapter, you get the idea that Bill Gates did nothing more than restate the Sierra Club's headline titles or the Environment Defense Fund. It is evident that with all Bill Gates's talk of consulting with experts, he offers nothing more than an understanding of the issues that a reviewer of late-night news versus the average person who has taken the time to read papers from both sides of the argument. In swallowing hook-line and sinker every morsel of bad versus investigating the veracity of the claims or the massive number of mistakes models made over the past 30 years, Gates assumes truth to whatever gurus of doom he consults for information. For instance, Gates perpetuates the myth that natural gas may worsen due to 'leaks,' a debunked idea. Besides, the US leads all western nations in CO2 reduction mainly due to a transition to natural gas and fracking over coal. Near the end of chapter 2, Gates attempts to answer the rationalization of skeptics, even those not opposed to the AGW theory. He fails miserably in accounting for many of the better claims made by many that the costs to fight climate change heavily outweigh the costs of mitigating it. Financial models use the numbers of the IPCC in lost GDP to show the futility of going 'green' versus mitigation. Don't get me started on his lack of understanding of government incompetence completely wrecks any of his financial models, such as his silly 'Green Premium' in Chapter 3. He finishes Chapter Two by admitting outright that only a drastic set of changes will save the world as doom is headed our way within a generation. Adaption is not even considered. More on this later. In Chapter 3, Gates creates Five questions to provide a framework for guidance in decision making. Except, his answers seem to be a bit off by a lot in some instances. For instance, nuclear energy is far denser in energy output than fossil fuels in materials (by a long shot) and square meters for energy output by an energy plant. Further, his book uses the 'Green Premium' as a continual cost analysis. The book notes that the GP values are from a calculation supposedly explained on breakthrough.org. Yet, no explanation of where the numbers come from except more gibberish about using fossil fuels and exacting actual costs. Somehow, through forced governmental policy change, always a winning market move, we will pay this incredible difference in cost to use sustainable energy. Of course, Gates feels for those who will have to carry this cost burden, but again, government policy will manage that burden. The government, of course, is going to do everything correctly. Chapters 4 through 8 are dedicated to the five different sources of energy consumption. Gates once again assumes we can mitigate each source of energy consumption in some miracle fashion through the force of government policy and government 'investment.' One can easily read in higher taxes to pay for future failed government intervention. Gates assumes that we will achieve some level of success similar to the microwave and space exploration, forgetting these were primarily done when the government did not have nearly the bureaucratic size, unionization of administrative staff, nor the cost that government employees consume in wages and worse, magnificently sized pension benefits. Even when Gates makes a relevant point, such as how nuclear would quickly achieve far superior energy service, Gates seems to forget that the politicians his organization backs are the ones who would never allow a successful transition to more nuclear. Oddly, within the Republican and Libertarian parties, a consensus is available to allow a booming increase in creating more nuclear reactors in which Gates has a vested interest. Gates spends one entire Chapter on adaption, but it is a marginal effort. Gates could discuss what many see as only a minor reduction in GDP if the earth were to warm between 2 to 4 degrees C. Thus, the enormous calamity he insinuates throughout the book is a scare tactic. Gates avoids this discussion here as he did in Chapter 2. In chapter 10, Gates is either revising history or making stuff up. From his falsified history retelling that Obama spurred innovation with the 1 trillion dollar waste labeled a 'stimulus' (which contributed to the Tea Party winning 63 Republican seats in 2010) to his completely fictionalized history that it is up to the government to invest in R&D as it did with the microprocessors (?). Even Obama labeled much of his stimulus a failure. Not only did that stimulus throw good money at non-existent garbage projects, but there were dozens of 'green' project failures. Further proof that Gates has zero clues in making any of his book's fairy tale wishes come true. His goal to "level the playing field" is to exact enormous costs on today's successful energy use, which will only make the world's poor poorer. But do not worry, Gates states we will use more successful government actions to fix this inequity. To top off the laughs that keep coming, Gates cites SPAIN as a success in the green energy transition! Yes, the US and the world, for that matter, require nearly 15 to 20% unemployment, whatever the costs to achieve proper climate costs when the US achieved less than 4% unemployment under Trump at that time. SPAIN! What a joke. Chapter 11 is about the mythological "Net-Zero." The previous Chapter is about how government plays a role in stewarding the move to a fossil-free future, or in other words, forced regulations, expensive penalties, and mandated percentages of Unreliable energy production. Naturally, the government will play a role in this fantasy move by the world to Net-Zero by 2050. Gates gives humanity a reprieve stating that any earlier is not realistic. Throughout the book and this Chapter, Gates mentions the urgency but cites no rationale for the necessity of 2050 or any date for attaining Net-Zero. He completely misconstrues "Economics 101" as a balance between supply and demand for INNOVATIONS(!), not the supply versus demand of the product and the associated charting of costs. In other words, we will get to Net-Zero by finding ways to stimulate, through government intervention, to find these magical innovations that disappear CO2 production from the aggregation of supplies and minerals, manufacturing, distribution, consumption, and disposal or recycling of materials. Gates never mentions the unrealistic amount of money that others, including leading environmentalists, estimate that cost to be nearly 100 Trillion dollars. Gates wants Net-Zero by 2050. Remember, Net-Zero means we must also find ways to pull CO2 OUT of the atmosphere to reduce the damaging effects already occurring because of the current and higher levels of CO2 before Net-Zero 2050. Chapter 12 is a useless littany about the civic duty of each of us—nothing more to see here. If this book were a business case for Microsoft, Apple would have been the one targeted by the Justice Department for anti-competitive practices, as there would be no Microsoft. Gates continually throws up the success of Microsoft driven by the innovative and market necessary changes Paul Allen, and he needed to make. This book has net-zero of those ideas to make this fantasy of Net-Zero real. Since getting to Net-Zero by 2050 appears to be the goal driving his ideas in this book, this book is a complete waste of time. I am finishing this book shortly and will continue the rest of this review and modify the rating as I complete the book.