In episode 143, Gerard, Laurent and Michael have discussed the philosophy of Bill Gates when it comes to the Energy Transition, and the root causes of his flawed thesis. Let see now if this transpires in his main investment vehicle, Breakthrough Energy Ventures (BEV).
Michael Barnard is quite blunt:
“To be clear, Gates is still highly resistant to the reality that we have almost all of the solutions we require, and that Breakthrough Energy Ventures is mostly invested in distractions.” As we are about to celebrate the 10th anniversary of BEV, we dive into its successes and failures. And it is a complex picture. BEV has invested in more than 100 companies which is a feat in itself. For a 3.5bnUSD portfolio, that’s an average of 40mUSD/ticket.
When you dig into the portfolio, you will get the Good, with promising ventures (such as Antora, Rondo, Boston Metals, Brimstone, TS Conductor, Fervo, Natel, Pachama, Kobold), the bad with ginormous boondoggles (nuclear, carbon, Hydrogen planes, LDES…), and the Ugly, when BEV (but they are not alone) manage to offload failed ventures via SPACs (Heliogen, QuantumScape, ESS) or Public Money (Carbon Engineering).
So, Breakthrough or Break down? Glass half full or half empty? A lot of Silicon Valley billionaires have emulated BEV, with absurd amount of money chasing impossible or totally uneconomic ventures. To name a few, Sam Altman, Khosla Ventures, Patrick Collinson (CEO Stripe) Bezos, Benioff. So, Bill is definitely not alone.
And BEV, with a string of smart choices, is probably the least bad, or best of them all.
Michael Barnard unleashed in Cleantechnica
https://cleantechnica.com/2024/07/04/breakthrough-energy-ventures-has-bad-investment-theses-therefore-bad-investments/
