‘It was actually quite painful when it got down to adding those last few zeros.’ To reflect America’s expectation that billionaires were philanthropists, Branson would later explain, ‘With extreme wealth comes extreme responsibility.’
Intent on capitalising on his new popularity, he sought another headline-grabbing initiative. During a conversation with Gore, they came up with the Virgin Earth Challenge. Branson would offer $25 million to the inventor of a commercially viable process to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. To win, the ‘design’ would need to remove at least a billion tons of carbon from the atmosphere per year and would be tested over ten years. The winner, said Branson, would receive $5 million immediately and the remaining $20 million at the end of the decade.
Al Gore shared the platform in Kensington, London, in February 2007 to announce the competition and endorse Branson’s boast that ‘This is the largest ever science and technology prize to be offered in history.’ The reason for his initiative, explained Branson, was the threat of the world beingoverwhelmed by an unprecedented crisis if his Challenge did not deliver the answer: ‘We will lose half of all species on Earth, 100 million people will be displaced, farmlands will become deserts and rainforests will become wasteland.’ Branson’s championing of climate geo-engineering was shared by other billionaires, including Bill Gates. A fortune would be earned by the entrepreneur who backed the best scientists and produced a solution that ‘offset’ carbon emissions.
Branson was riding a populist wave, although there were some who doubted the accuracy of Gore’s award-winning documentary. A number of respected scientists acknowledged the need to cut carbon emissions but accused the politician of exaggeration and even falsification. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change disparaged the imminence of the scenarios which Gore portrayed – of gigantic ice sheets melting fast, seas rising twenty feet to swamp vast areas of land, hurricanes battering coastlines, and the end of the Gulf Stream, causing Europe to plunge into an ice age. Even if Gore’s predictions were correct, said his critics, they would be manifested only in many thousands of years. Similarly, some experts criticised Stern’s prediction of certain environmental catastrophe as ‘tendentious’ and ‘propagandist’. He was guilty, wrote one analyst, of ‘statistical sophistry’ by quoting inaccurate mathematical models and peddling bogus science. Branson ignored these opponents. ‘Man created the problem,’ he told his guests in Kensington, ‘and therefore man should solve the problem.’ His fame guaranteed worldwide coverage of his competition. Hundreds of submissions began arriving at Virgin’s headquarters to be scrutinised by Branson’s experts, who included Crispin Tickell, a former Foreign Office ambassador, and Tim Flannery, an eminent Australian environmentalist. Both had been invited to Necker to brief Branson, and both bestowed upon the tycoon credibility as a global champion.
Placing himself at the forefront of encouraging the use ofrenewable energy, in 2007 Branson agreed to testify in Congress. He enjoyed annoying rivals by sermonising that aviation was a dirty business ripe for anti-carbon taxes and criticising those in the airline industry who were unwilling to limit carbon emissions. ‘If I ground my fleet,’ he replied to those who accused him of hypocrisy, ‘another company will just step in to meet the inevitable consumer and business demand.’ He laughed at Jeff Gazzard of the Aviation Environment Federation, who accused him of advocating bogus green initiatives to make passengers feel guilty. Beyond his exhortations, his practical contribution so far had been to persuade the management of Heathrow and Los Angeles International airports to convert their municipal waste to fuel. ‘You’ve got to start somewhere,’
Intent on capitalising on his new popularity, he sought another headline-grabbing initiative. During a conversation with Gore, they came up with the Virgin Earth Challenge. Branson would offer $25 million to the inventor of a commercially viable process to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. To win, the ‘design’ would need to remove at least a billion tons of carbon from the atmosphere per year and would be tested over ten years. The winner, said Branson, would receive $5 million immediately and the remaining $20 million at the end of the decade.
Al Gore shared the platform in Kensington, London, in February 2007 to announce the competition and endorse Branson’s boast that ‘This is the largest ever science and technology prize to be offered in history.’ The reason for his initiative, explained Branson, was the threat of the world beingoverwhelmed by an unprecedented crisis if his Challenge did not deliver the answer: ‘We will lose half of all species on Earth, 100 million people will be displaced, farmlands will become deserts and rainforests will become wasteland.’ Branson’s championing of climate geo-engineering was shared by other billionaires, including Bill Gates. A fortune would be earned by the entrepreneur who backed the best scientists and produced a solution that ‘offset’ carbon emissions.
Branson was riding a populist wave, although there were some who doubted the accuracy of Gore’s award-winning documentary. A number of respected scientists acknowledged the need to cut carbon emissions but accused the politician of exaggeration and even falsification. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change disparaged the imminence of the scenarios which Gore portrayed – of gigantic ice sheets melting fast, seas rising twenty feet to swamp vast areas of land, hurricanes battering coastlines, and the end of the Gulf Stream, causing Europe to plunge into an ice age. Even if Gore’s predictions were correct, said his critics, they would be manifested only in many thousands of years. Similarly, some experts criticised Stern’s prediction of certain environmental catastrophe as ‘tendentious’ and ‘propagandist’. He was guilty, wrote one analyst, of ‘statistical sophistry’ by quoting inaccurate mathematical models and peddling bogus science. Branson ignored these opponents. ‘Man created the problem,’ he told his guests in Kensington, ‘and therefore man should solve the problem.’ His fame guaranteed worldwide coverage of his competition. Hundreds of submissions began arriving at Virgin’s headquarters to be scrutinised by Branson’s experts, who included Crispin Tickell, a former Foreign Office ambassador, and Tim Flannery, an eminent Australian environmentalist. Both had been invited to Necker to brief Branson, and both bestowed upon the tycoon credibility as a global champion.
Placing himself at the forefront of encouraging the use ofrenewable energy, in 2007 Branson agreed to testify in Congress. He enjoyed annoying rivals by sermonising that aviation was a dirty business ripe for anti-carbon taxes and criticising those in the airline industry who were unwilling to limit carbon emissions. ‘If I ground my fleet,’ he replied to those who accused him of hypocrisy, ‘another company will just step in to meet the inevitable consumer and business demand.’ He laughed at Jeff Gazzard of the Aviation Environment Federation, who accused him of advocating bogus green initiatives to make passengers feel guilty. Beyond his exhortations, his practical contribution so far had been to persuade the management of Heathrow and Los Angeles International airports to convert their municipal waste to fuel. ‘You’ve got to start somewhere,’
Similar Books
