tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11206300.post6872315826642255388..comments2007-02-26T13:52:09.614+01:00Arthur Josephsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06303355947094882916noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11206300.post-79529696078221837712007-02-26T13:52:00.000+01:002007-02-26T13:52:00.000+01:00Cant you post the article link?<BR/><BR/>Sounds like a bit of a rough guess as a: its such a massive amount of money its hard to say that they couldnt do it for that, b: before the theory and technology is developed any guess at cost is premature.<BR/><BR/>I say a safer bet is to secure the worlds biodiversity first- at 10% of the cost.Arthur Josephsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06303355947094882916noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11206300.post-89564366042542484812007-02-25T21:21:00.000+01:002007-02-25T21:21:00.000+01:00I've red an article that says it would cost about 300 billion US$ to develope techniques and machines to provide the whole world with non-fossile regenerative energy. It is so cheap, but the question is always, will it be done in time? And how to achieve it? We mostly know what should be done, but not how to realize it.<BR/><BR/>SchnitzelSchnitzelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00941057201281985577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11206300.post-44798957396255530892007-02-13T14:48:00.000+01:002007-02-13T14:48:00.000+01:00I just realised that Warren Buffett's 2005 donation to the Gates Foundation, or Bill Gates' donations since 2006 could have preserved 70% of the worlds biodiversity instead. Similarly, the required $30 billion was spent on Federal Relief from Hurricane Katrina. Exxon Mobil could pay it and still dish out $6 billion to shareholders from last years profits. Finally, it is less than 10% of the $360 billion that has been spent by the US on the Iraq war.Arthur Josephsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06303355947094882916noreply@blogger.com