By Wall Street Jounal Opinion Journal
Al Gore no longer needs to make claims about creating the Internet, because the former Vice President deserves much of the credit for creating an entire new industry--the global warming business. And like the energy barons of an earlier age, Mr. Gore has the chance to achieve enormous wealth after being named last week as a new partner at the famously successful venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins.
There’s no shortage of new capital pouring into alternative energy projects these days. According to the National Venture Capital Association, “clean tech” start-ups attracted more than $800 million in venture capital last quarter, a new record. What’s not clear is whether these are fundamentally energy ventures or political ventures. The Manhattan Institute’s Peter Huber, a former engineering professor at MIT, exaggerates only slightly when he says that “Basically, ‘alternative’ means stuff that nobody actually uses.” If that turns out to be true, then alternative energy companies could struggle for market share without government assistance.
Those doubts exist even for the companies backed by Kleiner Perkins. After making more than a dozen “green tech” investments, Kleiner is still waiting for its first exit. According to a Kleiner spokeswoman, many companies in its portfolio are “in stealth mode.” The firm will “neither name nor comment on them.” Read more here.
By John McLean
For some odd reason the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is seen as an impartial organization - it’s not - whose reports are accurate - very doubtful -, written by experts - not all authors - and the predictions credible - impossible because the IPCC knows the models are incomplete. These reports are claimed to be examined by 2,500 reviewers - only in total - who are impartial - far from it - and these reviewers are unanimous in their agreement with the IPCC - only 5, none very credible, agreed with the major claim.
It’s high time people took a hard look at the organization whose charter requires it to “assess ... the risk of human-induced climate change”. That’s right. If the IPCC declared there was no risk then its reason for its existence would disappear. Shouldn’t that make you suspicious from the outset?
See the recent papers and stories calling into question the IPCC, its methods and motivations here.