In November 2015, world leaders descended on Paris to negotiate a historic agreement to limit global warming. But on the summit’s opening day, attention turned to a private citizen slouched awkwardly in a chair on stage: Bill Gates.

Gates, with his characteristic flop of sandy hair, grinned impishly as President Barack Obama called him a “visionary” and a “driving force” behind a pair of pledges that both saw as key to the larger agreement. First the world’s largest economies would double their spending on research into clean-energy technologies. Then investors like Gates would back the startups that emerged. The Microsoft cofounder had already enlisted two dozen other billionaires to join the effort.

For Gates, who’d become increasingly consumed by this unprecedented threat to human well-being, the moment marked his arrival as a leading figure in the fight against climate change.

“If we back over 50 different breakthrough approaches, we know that several of those will give us the solution that we need,” Gates said during his own speech. He would invest at least $2 billion of his own money in companies developing geothermal wells, new kinds of nuclear reactors and machines that pull carbon from the air, to name just a few.

With much less fanfare, however, Gates has put more than double that amount into a very dirty, old-school industry. At the time of the Paris summit, he was already the dominant shareholder of America’s No. 2 landfill operator, Republic Services. He has since increased his stake to 38% of the company, a position worth $29 billion.

  • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Thought someone said it was paywalled, so didn’t click it. But see things are tricky. If gates tried to influence it into doing something that hurt profits, the shareholder can sue. That said, I have no illusion that bill gates is a good guy. I’m just saying I don’t think this is the big thing it is being made out to be.

    • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago
      • Your comment was the second one here – where the first one was: “Well then he doesn’t want to stop global warming, does me [sic]?” I personally think you’re full of shit.
      • Even if you aren’t, it’s fine not to read it. What’s not fine to do is write out a comment based solely on the headline defending the subject of the investigation as though you’ve read the claims presented. Coming to the comments at all without reading it first is misguided – you’re Exhibit A – but trying to dismiss the investigation out-of-hand based solely on the headline is disgraceful.
      • “But see things are tricky.” Maybe if you think they’re so tricky, you should read the goddamn article and its specific claims before continuing to defend him from this investigation based on vibes. The article is not paywalled; you can still go read it in case you want to stop wasting everyone’s time by throwing rhetorical spaghetti at the wall. Jesus christ.
      • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        You must be a lot of fun to be around.
        You are correct in that I accidnetally transfered my it’s paywalled to this post from another. My bad.
        That said. Since you want to be the comment police. Why is it not fine to comment on just the headline? You wanna reference some rules, or do you just like being a dick. I mean, probably isn’t a rule against that either. I am not wasting anyones time. You choose to waste your own replying.

        • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 hours ago

          > “You must be fun to be around”

          > Reaction to getting called out for shitty behavior is “dollar store Phoenix Wright villain”

          • killea@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 hours ago

            I support you in your fight to uphold some kind of standard. People wanna engage in reflexive opinionation but don’t wanna put in the work. I could chide you for being curt and to the point, but these are things I feel and haven’t typed so I won’t. Let’s all support critical thinking; we need it now more than ever.