Bill Gates talks climate change, AI—and whether billionaires should exist

In the new Netflix series, What’s Next? Future with Bill GatesThe Microsoft founder and philanthropist digs into a few of his biggest issues: the power (and danger) of artificial intelligence, how to deal with climate change and malaria, and how to deal with misinformation and income inequality. We talked to him about some of the solutions—as well as the episode where Bernie Sanders told him billionaires shouldn’t exist.

In an episode about climate change, when you spoke to young climate activists, you were struck by how bleak their worldview was. Did talking to them change your perspective in any way?

Definitely. Their anger about the urgency and the way they looked at it was important, and even their desperation motivated me to push forward with strength. [But I wanted] to make sure they see that their making this issue a priority has really made a difference. I mean they shouldn’t give up. We need them in their creative ways to keep this on the agenda.

It’s very difficult [my] generation to help the next generation by doing well. By seeing through the youth’s eyes their feelings about how bad things were, I was able to make them feel better. But it was very encouraging to feel that energy.

He shared some examples of climate technology that could help tackle the problem, but one of the biggest challenges is how to scale it up. For example, Brimstone, which your company Breakthrough Energy Ventures has backed, has developed a zero-emission cement that is cheaper or cheaper than conventional cement, right?

That’s right.

However, it is still a big challenge to change the standard process in thousands of cement plants around the world. What do you think it will take to do that? How can we actually do that as quickly as needed?

However, getting the so-called green premium down to zero is very important when you go to places like India, where there are maybe, I don’t know, 5,000 cement plants alone, and of course, the demand for cement is growing. up.

So, all these Breakthrough companies, we’re not just trying to make them good investments [we’re also] saying to them, “Okay, go to India, go around the world, validate your technology.” Find out how to get it [the adoption] not only in the US but everywhere. ” That’s why we have offices all over the world, because we’re not just driven by economics. We’re driven by purpose, and these rising companies are how we measure ourselves. How much carbon have we avoided? Cement is great when people are surprised that there’s a different way to do it that doesn’t cost more.

It seems that somehow, dealing with climate change is getting harder. For example, there is now a huge jump in energy demand predicted due to AI. Obviously, there are two sides to it. AI can also help with climate change, but if you just look at energy demand, how do you think we can solve that problem?

Stepping back, do you believe there are some more irrational uses of AI that shouldn’t happen because of the power implications, or do you believe we’ll be able to solve that challenge?

Yes, more electricity demand from AI [isn’t projected to be] more than 10%. It makes sense, but driving cars takes energy. Heating buildings takes energy. Doing things requires energy. And so you have to keep it in perspective.

AI companies are going around the country and finding backup electricity and trying to sign up for that, because as we’re putting in electricity because of the climate, for the first time in over 30 years, even a rich country like the US is going to have to increase generation. . And yet we added this caveat that it’s not just about building a new coal plant or a natural gas plant, which is 24 hours a day, independent of the weather and very close to wherever the electricity will end up being used.

The need to invest now because of the growing demand is very complicated. And getting the government policy right, getting the investment right—the permit and the grid is a big hurdle for that. I’m very optimistic over time because I think that, with the continued progress in wind and solar, even geothermal, either nuclear fission or fusion will come in and play a much bigger role. And that’s why I’ve made some really good investments to help some of those companies succeed.

How far into the future could this new nuclear technology be?

The best case for nuclear fission is the TerraPower plant [a new nuclear power plant under construction in Wyoming] works in 2030, people will say, “Okay, let’s build 50 or 100 of those.” For fusion, the leading company, the Commonwealth Fusion System, wants to be operational by 2035. Fusion is still not far off, but there are many companies. I have been invested in more than 5 and I think there are about 15 in total. In the long run, they may be the winners in terms of how cheaply they can generate electricity. And again, it’s green and doesn’t depend on the weather.

I like the idea that fission and fusion will compete, but neither is available as quickly as we would like. We need more green electricity today. So we have to go as far as we can with wind, solar, and geothermal. Maybe if we have geologic hydrogen in the amounts we expect, that will be very important. But in the long run, you have to have nuclear as part of that mix.

He seems to have a unique perspective because he is very focused in many different areas—health in developing countries, agriculture, education, climate change, AI. Usually people in each of these fields focus on that one area only. How has this idea of ​​big plans influenced the way you think about problems or solutions? Does anything come to mind when you think that maybe you communicate differently than others?

However, I have a few advantages. When I was younger, I was one of those people who wrote code, thinking about software. And I didn’t let myself get too wide, so I could move as fast as I could.

Now with that success, not only did I get resources but now I can have an idea that can be driven by what makes money. [For example]Malaria has no business need associated with it. But because 500,000 children die [of malaria] year after year, I would say, let’s highlight that. And I can find people who were like when I was in my first period, who are very focused, they say, how do you kill mosquitoes? How do you make a malaria vaccine? And I can connect them with other people, help them form groups, help them find resources.

It’s a very different role than when I was younger, but as you get older, even if your raw intelligence may not be at its best, you gain wisdom on how to bring teams together and motivate teams. Especially in things that take longer than what a politician would get, because if it takes 10 years, they won’t get the rewards for that. And things like eradicating malaria or using AI to create great personal tutors for the inner city, those are things that will take time to get right.

I find people, in their own way, as if I was in my first period of work, and especially in things that have no chance of profit, make sure that they do their amazing work, which is very lucky. That’s why I enjoy working, even though I don’t have to.

I’m curious how much crossover you see between these spaces. Because you’re thinking about malaria, about climate change, AI, and you’re looking at all these different efforts that are going on, are you making connections or seeing something different because you have this zoomed-in view of the big picture?

Definitely. [For example], we use AI to model malaria eradication. We’re using AI to say, okay, where is polio going to break out? How do we get to zero? We use AI to take an expectant mother and give her advice on her mobile phone in her local African language.

The work that I’ll be doing—helping Microsoft a little bit, I’m working with OpenAI, a lot of basic systems, whether it’s drug discovery or delivery—AI is an important part of that. Of course, our educational work, that is our main investment now. And then in Climate Breakthrough, AI helps us find new things, we look for new batteries, how do you use the grid? The fact that I can take that horizontal technology and say, okay, how are we at the end of that? Everything fits together.

In an episode about inequality, he spoke to Bernie Sanders about his argument that billionaires shouldn’t exist. I think maybe he didn’t change your mind on that. But how much do you believe the wealthiest Americans should be taxed?

Well, in that episode I wanted to remind people that the reason we have wealth is because we have a program to motivate people. And no matter how you sing it, there are countries that, according to the communist equation, destroy wealth creation. And so it’s not just a matter of, “Hey, how do we spread it?” And, how do we make sure that we continue to grow the economy?

I thought it worked well to have Mitt Romney, Tom Friedman, and Mark Cuban [in the episode]. Bernie made some good points, but where does Vermont pay the price for providing free medical care to everyone [the state]they say, well, we are not rich enough yet. If we can continue to innovate, especially with things like AI, we will get to a point where, I believe, some of his dreams of everyone having a place to live and health care can come true.

I’m clear that I think we can tax the very rich. But when you get to the point where you make it illegal or have a 100% tax, I think that’s a mistake. And one might say I’m biased about that, but I can see how I can improve without breaking the law of billions.