BREAKING: Richard Branson (Virgin) Donates $3 Billion!!

[Coexist]

$3 billion - over 10 years - to fight Global Warming!

[leftchick]

1. omg!

This is such wonderful news!! :)

[tuvor]

2. Link?

[Coexist]

6. it was breaking news on CNN - found an article though:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14936341/

Branson bets billions to curb global warming
Virgin airlines founder announces plan at Clinton Global Initiative

NEW YORK - British business mogul Richard Branson on Thursday announced a multibillion-dollar investment in efforts to combat global warming over the next decade.

Branson, the billionaire behind Virgin Air and the multi-platform Virgin brand, unveiled the details of the investment at the Clinton Global Initiative, a conference being hosted by former President Clinton.

The commitment would in one stroke ensure that the conference, which brings people together to brainstorm tangible solutions to global issues, would more than meet its goal of matching last year's efforts. In 2005, the conference resulted in more than $2 billion in pledges; even before Branson's effort, this year's conference had already brought in more than $350 million.

[The Backlash Cometh]

8. Now there's a man with a conscience.

And he's not even trying to shove his religion down our throats with all the good will he's earned.

[Coexist]

10. did you read the second half of the article that highlights

all of the good he's already done in his own company.

What a guy.

[bluestateguy]

3. Why is his (non)sexual practice relevant here?

??

[acmavm]

4. Funny, but it took a while for me to get it. I guess I'm slow on the

uptake in some areas.

[Coexist]

7. cute!

[WilliamPitt]

13. Um...

Virgin Airways.

Read the article.

[Raster]

20. are you serious? His COMPANY is called Virgin. Virgin Records, Virgin

Airlines, etc.

[bluestateguy]

22. I do hope people realize I was kidding

The sarcasm icon gives it all away.

[petronius]

39. You didn't use the sarcasm smiley... And actually, I think a

:silly: or a :dunce: would have been a better choice.

However, people should have gotten it - it was funny!

:toast:

[Raster]

40. Dear Blue: I've always enjoyed reading your commentary and couldn't

imagine you wouldn't know. However, no :sarcasm: logo or smiley.

[wicket]

5. Link here:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14936341/

[mom cat]

56. From the link: Interest in cellulosic ethanol

Interest in cellulosic ethanol
Last year, Branson said he planned to turn his back on fossil fuels and use farm and logging waste to power his four airlines, which operate almost 100 aircraft.

“We are going to start building cellulosic ethanol plants (to make) fuel that is derived from the waste product” on farms and logging sites, he said at the time. “It is 100 percent environmentally friendly and I believe it’s the future of fuel, and over the next 20 or 30 years I think it actually will replace the conventional fuel that you get out of the ground.”

Using organic waste, or biomass, could be substantially cheaper than corn or sugar cane, the traditional sources for ethanol, since that waste is not a primary product but simply residue from other agriculture or logging. But the technology to efficiently use biomass is still several years away, experts estimate.

Branson did not say where Virgin would build his factories or how economically viable cellulosic ethanol would prove. “We are in the early days,” he admitted.

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

9. $3 billion - no wonder pickles wanted a piece of the action

[legin]

11. Mmmm.. Richard Branson for Prime Minister 2012

just a thourght....

[legin]

16. His school headmasters oppinion

(snip)

When I left Stowe in 1967 aged almost seventeen, my headmaster's parting words to me were: 'Congratulations, Branson. I predict that you will either go to prison or become a millionaire.'

http://www.xtracts.com/program/branson.htm

[earth mom]

12. Woo Hoo! Richard Branson is my new hero!

:woohoo:

:yourock:

:loveya:

[Buzz Clik]

14. I dont' see how $3 billion will help.

The problem is overconsumption of carbon-based fuels. Unless he's dedicating this money to the development of non-carbon energy sources (wind, solar, etc), I'm at a loss as to how this huge sum will be meaningful.

The biggest impact would be convincing us Americans to quit being so wasteful.

[Coexist]

15. From the article:

<snip>
Not your traditional ethanol

Last year, Branson said he planned to turn his back on hydrocarbons and use plant waste to power his four airlines, which operate almost 100 aircraft.

“We are looking for alternative fuel sources. We are going to start building cellulosic ethanol plants (to make) fuel that is derived from the waste product of the plant,” he said at the time.

“It is 100 percent environmentally friendly and I believe it’s the future of fuel, and over the next 20 or 30 years I think it actually will replace the conventional fuel that you get out of the ground.”

Branson did not say where Virgin would build his factories or how economically viable cellulosic ethanol would prove. “We are in the early days,” he admitted.

He said cellulosic ethanol “is the byproduct you get from the waste product (of plants), the bits in the field that get burned up,” as opposed to traditional ethanol, which is produced mainly from corn or sugar cane.

[Buzz Clik]

19. Plant biomass: great alternative fuel, but still carbon based.

Its impact on global warming will be nothing.

[Chemical Bill]

25. All those plants...

take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. That's what the advantage of plant biomass is. No net CO2 gain.

Bill

[Coexist]

26. interesting - do you know of any lay sources (that I could understand)

to read up on this?

Thanks.

[Chemical Bill]

30. Here's one:

http://www.cet.edu/ete/modules/carbon/efcarbon.html

[Coexist]

34. thanks, I will check it out.

[Chemical Bill]

52. There's a typo...

in the second paragraph. It says plants release CO2 into the atmosphere during respiration. Plants release oxygen (O2) into the atmosphere during respiration. They release CO2 when they rot. Oops....

Bill

[Coexist]

54. ...so in essence, this is taking CO2 OUT of the atmosphere

at the same level the fuel it creates is putting it back in?

[Chemical Bill]

55. Pretty much.

There is a cost (CO2 production from the energy used) in the manufacturing and any components of the fuel that aren't biomass. The biomass itself is CO2 neutral.

Bill

[Buzz Clik]

29. If one can assume 100% energy efficiency.

It's better than burning fossil fuels, but is it really a marked decline in CO2 emissions?

[Chemical Bill]

42. Well...

CO2 emissions and CO2 level are two different issues. Fossil fuel is sequestered carbon, that adds to the CO2 level when burned. We could double our CO2 emissions with no rise in CO2 level if we have the plants (or another method) to remove the CO2 from the atmosphere at the same time. The greenhouse problem is really the rise in CO2 level.

Plants remove CO2 from the air, but then die and rot and release it back. Or they are eaten and the animal releases methane. The only way to have a decline in CO2 level is to sequester carbon in some form other than CO2. Like wood flooring, or diamonds.;)

100% energy efficiency is not even a possibility.

Bill

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

32. Plant based biomass is carbon neutral

It takes carbon dioxide out of the air when the plants are growing and releases it again when it is burned. The net gain of carbon in the ecosystem is zero.

Fossil fuels take carbon that has been trapped underground for millions of years and releases that into the ecosystem, causing a net increase of carbon dioxide and global warming.

[Buzz Clik]

38. You're incorrectly assuming absolutely no inputs into the system.

If we could plant, cultivate, harvest, and process the biomass into fuel with no expenditure of energy or carbon, then you'd be correct. Currently, we barely have positive energy gains, but there still is a net release of CO2 into the air.

Again, it's better than burning fossil fuels, but it will not solve the problem of global warming without a more serious and broader approach.

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

44. You incorrectly said the impact would be nothing.

If the plants are raised using tractors and fossil fuels, there is that impact.

If the plants are raised Amish style with horses, there is no net gain.

Ideally, the energy for processing would also come from biomass once the process is up and running.

Why are you in such a hurry to crap on this? It's very positive. It doesn't have to be perfect to be good.

[ananda]

17. Yeah, I'm wondering..

.. exactly what they're going to -do- with that money.

Give everybody in the world clean-burning vehicles?

Give every corporate polluter in the world the resources
to create clean machines?

[wtmusic]

21. You. Must. Be. Joking.

"The commitment would in one stroke ensure that the conference, which brings people together to brainstorm tangible solutions to global issues, would more than meet its goal of matching last year's efforts. In 2005, the conference resulted in more than $2 billion in pledges; even before Branson's effort, this year's conference had already brought in more than $350 million."

It's a safe bet that some of that money will go exactly where it should--to help convince Americans to be less wasteful.

The guys coughs up $3B out of his pocket--roughly $3B more than the US government has come up with--and you don't see how it will help?

Wow. :wow:

[Buzz Clik]

23. You're missing the point.

His generosity is admirable. No problem there. But, if he's going to fight global warming, one wonders what he's going to do with all the CO2 being spewed out of his fleet of jets. Burning used french fry grease won't do anything, nor will ethanol or butanol from switchgrass.

Perhaps I'm just picking at his choice of words -- his contribution will most likely be in the area of alternative fuels, not global warming. That's a fantastic contribution, nonetheless.

By the way, unless they were actually being bribed by a chunk of that $3 billion, how many Americans would leave their cars at home simply because they saw a public service announcement or a cool billboard? We can gauge that by the current track record...

[Coexist]

24. I agree with you.

Helping out is helping out.

the "thats not enough" meme is tiresome.

[Buzz Clik]

27. "Thats not enough" is not what I said.

Simply throwing money at global warming may be meaningless. The problem is burning carbon-based fuel and incredible overconsumption. My point is simple but different than your interpretation: $3 billion in and of itself will have no impact on global warming. How do we convince American/Chinese/Indian/European industry to back off on CO2 emissions? How do we convince automobile drivers to cut their driving in half?

American industry is aware of the accelerated rate of the huge chunks of polar ice breaking off into the sea. Their response? "Oh, it must be a natural cycle. Kyoto Protocols are still bullshit." They will not react until they receive a regulatory boot firmly up their collective butts.

[jsamuel]

33. I agree, throwing money at the problem is not a solution in itself. You

must think about which solution that best needs and would benefit from that money.

and biofuels is not the way to go

[kestrel91316]

35. That much money just might buy a hell of a lot of INFLUENCE.

Think of all the pro-conservation and pro-alternative/self-sufficient energy lobbying it could fund...............

We have to be glad for the small things. And this isn't even a SMALL thing.

[muriel_volestrangler]

31. Not from his own pocket - from the company profits

The $3 billion is his estimate of the profits that the transportation companies he controls will make in the next 10 years. That is, for instance 51% of Virgin Atlantic, for which the whole profit was £41.6 million last year - so the Virgin Group share was, say $35 million. The profit from Virgin Trains, in which, again, Virgin Group has a 51% stake, was £11 million - so, say $10 million for Branson's group. How he makes that $45 million a year up to $300 million a year, I can't tell. But Branson is brilliant at PR.

[wtmusic]

41. Call it PR or whatever you like

The guy is putting money behind his talk. With more "PR" like that the world would be a better place.

[IndyOp]

45. 3 Billion could go a long ways in convincing many Americans to

quit being so wasteful...

Public education and grants to fund solar panel or wind energy projects...

:hi:

[cyberpj]

50. Read the article. nt

[TX-RAT]

53. The problem is overconsumption of carbon-based fuels.

And his company's are part of the problem.

[Cha]

18. That's cool cause they say planes

are part of the prob but here's a plane guy willing to put some of his profits into helping!

[Subdivisions]

28. I've always admired Sir Richard. He always seems to give back

to humanity through projects that include the development of commercial space industry and tourism and it's always fun to watch his adventures.

[fishwax]

36. Reminds me of Buffett, who

said, when he pledged his donation, that part of the reason he was doing it now was to encourage like action from others.

Props to Richard Branson for putting serious money into a serious problem. :applause:

[Drifter]

37. Why does he hate America and Jesus.

Cheers
Drifter

[Chemical Bill]

46. He should learn to speak english, too. n/t

[zonkers]

43. When will the global conglomerate be shamed into matching him? Never.

[tex-wyo-dem]

47. Excellent! More wealthy donors need to do this...

since the effects of global warming will make all other crises, diseses, etc. look like a walk in the park.

[hunter]

48. He could build a fleet of bombers to take out our coal fired power plants.

That would be so cool... 24 hour notice to evacuate the places then...

KABOOM! A huge source of carbon dioxide is destroyed.

Do I need to put some kind of smiley on this for the humor impaired?

[lonestarnot]

49. Woohoo for saving earth! Blessings heaped upon your head Branson!

[cyberpj]

51. That he did it at CLINTON'S CONFERENCE is GOLD!!

"Branson, the billionaire behind Virgin Atlantic Airways and the multi-platform Virgin brand, announced the pledge at the Clinton Global Initiative, a conference being hosted by former President Clinton."