This is DANGEROUSLY misguided and unhelpful take from @BillGates ( https://www.gatesnotes.com/Energy/Leaders-Summit-on-Climate?WT.mc_id=20210423100000_Leaders-Summit-on-Climate_BG-TW_&WT.tsrc=BGTW).">https://www.gatesnotes.com/Energy/Le... It promotes classic #NewClimateWar ( https://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/titles/michael-e-mann/the-new-climate-war/9781549157004/)">https://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/titles/mi... climate inactivism tropes. Among these are: https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="🧵" title="Thread" aria-label="Emoji: Thread">

1. The climate problem is “too complex” to solve w/ existing technology. That’s false. Research Gates inexplicably neglects shows we can get there w/ existing renewable energy. See my @Newsweek commentary, “The Right Path Forward on Climate Change” https://www.newsweek.com/right-path-forward-climate-change-opinion-1571169">https://www.newsweek.com/right-pat...

2. The insistence that “today’s zero-carbon technologies are more expensive than their fossil-fuel counterparts”.
That’s false. See this report from Lazard (and associated graphic): https://www.lazard.com/media/451086/lazards-levelized-cost-of-energy-version-130-vf.pdf">https://www.lazard.com/media/451...

3. That we need new “affordable” technology to decarbonize our economy. See above! Gates says he doesn’t know the solution to climate “politics”. And it shows. Because the solution IS politics: subsidies for renewables, carbon pricing, etc. Just need the political will to do it.

4. Gates indefensibly dour take on renewable energy leads him to propose dangerous “geoengineering” solutions instead. Read my @Guardian commentary w/ @ClimateBook "Some say we can ‘solar-engineer’ ourselves out of the climate crisis. Don’t buy it": https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/22/climate-crisis-emergency-earth-day">https://www.theguardian.com/commentis...