George Soros: Investing In Green Energy Could Save Global Economy (VIDEO)

Last Friday, in an interview with Bill Moyers on PBS, George Soros, who has made billions of dollars based on his ability to read the ebb and flow of markets, suggested that investing in alternative energy technologies, refurbishing aging electricity grids and pursuing household energy efficiency, among other green strategies, could yet save the global economy.

Mr. Soros, whose prescient book "The New Paradigm for Financial Markets: The Credit Crisis of 2008 and What It Means," was published in May, told Moyers that the business of green could serve as the new "motor of the world economy" -- echoing a refrain he has used before.

Read the full story here

-OR-

::See WallStrip's Julie Alexandria Talk About Investing In Wind Power

Comments

[JuniorNorman]

Les Otten in Maine is making pellets out of hardwood trees. He can supply 20% of the current fuel oil heat with pellets in 2 years. He is going to deliver the pellets in big trucks with chutes going in to the houses. He can supply 70% in 5 years and still have an excess of harwood trees left!

[Stephen308]

Burning down the forests is not the way to solve the worlds energy problems.

[bluprojekt]

I read the tr0lls ravings about socialism as not being American

WTH constitutes being American? From what I can see, the citizens of countries that have some form of democratic/socialist mix government seem to be better off at a base level than many americans.

I just don't see a rational position being given as to why certain aspects of our American government shouldn't have a some form of socialist components to it - healthcare, oversight on wall street, nationalized energy that is green, etc.

Maybe the narrow world view of these so called "Patriotic" Americans needs a paradigm shift and move into the 21st century.

"Now Go Away or I Will Taunt You a Second Time."

[blastit]

I don't understand people who cry socialism either we do need some socialist componets to our government we all would be much better off, even if we pay higher taxes I would love to get free college education for those that qualify, healthcare , and like you stated a nationalized green energy

The happiest people in the world live in Sweden

[degenerate1991]

Nationalized energy means government control. I'd rather read by candlelight than be a slave to men that are not accountable to me.

[hungariangirl]

Nagyon buszke vagyok arra, hogy Soros Gyorgy (George) a magyar nemzet fia. Koszonom a gyermekeim neveben az eddigi munkajat, torekveseit.

[mamacat]

I would posit that not only can investing in green technology be a component of a plan that will rebuild America and save the economy, but that any plan that does not include green investing is doomed to failure.

Not only is the world getting smaller, but it is getting more interconnected. If we let the environment go, we increase other costs, while we are foregoeing absolutely necessary expenses.

[Erdgeist]

I like Soros, but his ideas, to be honest are not advanced enough nor do they root out the main problem this being "globalization". As I see globalization, nations are supposed to lose their ability to provide for their own goods and services becoming, as it were, "interdependent links" in a global economic chain. But this doesn't make for strong nations with happy populations. Instead, it makes nations that are weak and vulnerable.

It should dawn on us that instead of being a weak link, each nation can also be part of a community of self-sufficient nations that only trade with each other after they have established each their ability to provide the basics for themselves. Thus, each nation will benefit its people instead of being at the mercy of predatory corporations looking for cheap labor, which is the problem now. In fact, I would argue that globalization as it exists now is for the benefit of predatory corporations -- not nations.

For nations effectively to become "green", each nation will need the necessary capital by which to greenize their infrastructure which is only possible if they are self-sufficient and not dependent on predatory corporations whose only concern is their own profit. I can foresee a time when some world body helps fledgling nations to achieve self-sufficiency -- to bring prosperity to their people instead of a veiled form of servitude.

[rockyersocksoff]

We must be newly vigilant, lest the coming "Green Revolution" become a "Green BUBBLE, (ie mismanaged for short-term predatory gain), like Clinton's "Tech Bubble" and W's "Housing Bubble."

[Stephen308]

IT's getting colder. Reports keep coming in. This winter might just kill the green revolution like the historic cold snap in California just killed the grapes. And did you hear about the GROWING glaciers in Alaska? Yup, getting cold.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/53884.html

I'm hoping for a very very cold and snowy winter so I can watch "man made global warming a disaster" religion die a frigid death.

[Stephen308]

By the way, the left will no longer need the "global warming disaster religion" to push their socialist agenda if they take the needed seats in the Senate and the Whitehouse...they will be able to dictate their socialist agenda without need of a "man made it worse" club.

If global warming now dies a frigid death in cold winters it will not matter, you will have control of Washington, Reid and Pelosi will be writing up all their socialist fantasy's and sending them to Obama to sign and become law.

Things are going to be very interesting. The radicalized left is about to size power after a long struggle. What will they do to us? Will the world survive the power vacuum when the US no longer stands up against the darkness? Will massive taxation for huge government take us down to a second tier economy inside of 8 years? Will 7% unemployment levels due to the over taxation of business become commonplace? Stay tuned, things are about to get interesting, sadly so I think.

[blastit]

Stephen 308 if we go semi socialist you'll be loving every minute of it, would be the best thing that ever happened to this country, I think some would be pissed because it would put everyone on a more equal footing.

[thugOcrat]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/53884.html

liberal nut theory debunked, it's getting colder, you idiots.

[blastit]

not where I live , the winters get shorter and shorter every year.

[markie1111]

so, if we want to throw cash into the grren economy (really the green e-economy) what mutual funds are doing that???

[Stephen308]

You probably would want to go with more general funds like the contentious fund that are referred to as "Socially Responsible Investing". SRI Funds. Putting money directly into the stock of "green startup companies and so forth is really too risky for the average investor. If you want to put a sigificant portion of your investment dollars into socially responsible companies the best thing to do would probably be to locate a good SRI fund that focuses on issues you care about.

Another thing you could do would be to put your money where your impact is. Have you insulated well? Have you swapped our your bulbs to energy saver? Have you unloaded a gas guzzler for a more energy efficient model. Do you have double pane windows in good repair? Tight, insulated exterior doors? Have you had your furnace cleaned and tuned up lately? Would some shade trees reduce your cooling bills? Is your water heater efficient? Is your furnace a 60 year old model from that distant past? Do you recycle?

Buying stock from someone who bought stock from someone who brought it from someone does not necessarily do a lot for some green energy company. GE may be doing lots of great green things particularly with nuclear power. But buying their stock wont do much for them. So you get my drift. You would have a larger impact going green at home most likely than investing in green companies.

[markie1111]

well, i live in the woods, burn wood, borrow cars, grow garden and have cash to invest in that which is a sane future. and besides that, i'm a pretty happy guy.

[Stephen308]

What soros wont talk about is how his buddies on the left were pushing for easy lending to these subprime markets so they could get the votes. Friends of Soror like of Obama and his pressuring Chicago banks to force them to make the bad loans in order to help Obama build his "base". The very people like Franks, Obama, Dodd and others started this mess. Now he puts them forward as our "salvation" along with himself.

That's not "change I can believe in".

Not to mention that Soros himself put money into Acorn who was pushing for these Junk Loans. Soros knew what they were up to, he approved it, he FUNDED IT!

These people are such frauds. They pushed to FORCE BANKS and Fannie and Freddie to make these trash loans to the poor and now they pretend that it was the Republicans who did it all and they have "clean hands" and are the answer.

The irony of having men like Obama and Soros who helped create this disaster put themselves forward as the answer. They should be answering questions like "Why did you push for these trash loans to the poor that were at the root of this mess"?!!!!!

[markie1111]

get real would you. yes the subprime leading was scandalous, but ICE ripping you a new hole, CDSs and CDOs bringing down lehmans, aig etc. and the commodities moderization act of 2000 are the real villians.... you listen to too much talk radio and what's worse, you believe it hook line and sinker.

[Stephen308]

But it could not have happened if Obama, Soros, Franks, Dodd, and others were not forcing banks to make bad loans to individuals who never should have been given the loans in the first place. Yes, others took this huge mistake of those pandering bad loans for votes and made them worse.

Obama should have been INSISTING that banks MAINTAIN STRONG lending standards instead of pushing for easy money to people that should not be given loans..

Get real indeed! Self Serving politicians pushing for bad loans to pander for votes is at the heart and root of this scandal.

Could Obama KNOW that his forcing banks to make bad loans would lead to a global disaster? No. But he should have known it was WRONG to make the bad loans and that it would cost all of us more to cover them in time. He should have been more concerned about making the banks hold tight lending standards than how many votes he could pander for by pushing far left policy.

It's Obama's judgment that time and time again was proved to be WRONG. He's a smart man, but he DOES NOT THINK and time and time again his judgment goes no further than pandering to far left wing agenda's. There he was pushing for those crappy loans and now he stands up and points the finger at others and claims he was against it and has the answer. Get Real Indeed.

[jacobomorales]

but without support from the Federal and State governments it will not be done effectively. The Federal gov needs to get involved completely. No half measures, the next Manhattan Project or a project like the one that saved western Europe after WWII.

[KillTheMessenger]

You mean a new Marshall Plan?

According to

http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2007/08/27/070827crbo_books_ferguson?currentPage=all

the total cost would today be around $740 billion... what a coincidence.

Sadly, in order to change our energy infrastructure, we are looking at a cost closer to $10 trillion (over the next 30 years or so). This would be something like $1000 per US citizen per year. A lot less, of course, if the money stayed inside the country and could therefore be multiplied with a significant economic multiplier. It's not a trivial amount, but doable. We just have to want to do it.

[indi1216]

vote for Ob ama

[cobberreno42]

Yes, we should be investing in alternative power, getting the US commuter to buy into using public transport from their front door, and really looking at how we dispose of anything in our home/office. So many companies say they are green. If you truly look at the practices of most construction companies, their claims are so very false. Reclamation is not the wave of the future, it was for the Amish and those who truly lived within their means. Nothing ever left their home, everything was reused. To use reclamed wood means, pay Johnny, to drive 150 - 1,000 miles to go pick up this wood, take it to Louie at the lumber yard to mill, have Joey pick it up to take it to the lumber yard awaiting sale, tell Randy to go to the lumber yard to pick it up to take it to a job site. WOW, and this is green? Not in this life time. Framing a home/building using green practices, well the US is still in the dark. Purchasing sustainable lumber, using pre-engineered framing, (NO WASTE) from a factory that uses all waste as finger joints, this is green. Yet you have so many custom home builders who are claiming this, that they are practicing green. I'm sorry if I'm not as knowledgeable about the rest of the green issue, but I'm just trying to handle my little piece of the world. I own a green framing company.

[sheila]

i am working on legislation that would implement a feed in tariff, along the lines of those implemented in 40 more advanced countries, where renewable power producers (US!!) get paid good rates for feeding clean renewable power into the grid. this has the quadruple benefits of:

1 reducing grid loads because power is created at point of use, and excess is fed into grid;

2 greatly increasing harmless generation facilities so no open spaces are killed, no carbon sinks (like the Mojave) are destroyed, no families are forced from their homes, and property values increase instead of decrease;

3 stimulating local economies by distributing money to people who do the right thing by producing more clean energy than they use; creating hundreds of thousands of local, skilled jobs; and decentralizing the monopolistic Big Energy systems which manipulate supplies and pricing;

4 greatly increasing conservation - when people are PAID for power they generate and do not consume, their consumption drops enormously, FAR MORE than price spikes or net metering.

this is the highest and best use of "green investing." each of us installing PV, solar thermal, geothermal heat exchange, smart meters, microwind, passive solar, etc. on our own properties to greatly reduce consumption and greatly increase the clean power flowing into the grid WITHOUT ANY ENVIRONMENTAL OR ECONOMIC DEVASTATION... Feed in Tariffs work. We are the last ones onboard because Big Energy owns our government (and Big Renewables are MORE OF THE SAME).

PLEASE SUPPORT GENEROUS FEED IN TARIFFS!

[Stephen308]

So a feed in tariff is a way to force our electrical utilities to buy more expensive energy at above market rates because that energy is renewable but not price competitive? And you realize the price is then going to be passed along to all of us.

So you are working on a tax on all americans to force us to pay more money for more expensive energy. Thanks? I'm sure that people who are losing their homes are gratefully you want them to pay more for energy.

How about this, lets go with NUCLEAR which has no carbon emissions and is CHEAPER! And thus you would push rates down or hold them instead of forcing America to pay more?

[sheila]

not to feed the trolls, but do your homework. nuclear is the most corporate welfare intensive form of power on the PLANET!!! who do you think insures against all the nuclear disasters just waiting to happen? not insurance companies, because they ran the numbers and smartly decided that there was no way in hell they would ever insure nuclear for any price. so now Joe Sixpack is acting as insurance company for private, deadly profiteers.

coal and natural gas are not price competitive with market rates, either. the GHG emissions alone from coal cost over 9 cents/kWh, not to mention all the particulate pollution you are so concerned about, the mining deaths, poisoned waterways, dynamited mountains, etc. if the REAL cost of coal were not SOCIALIZED, it would cost more than PV, over 30 cents/kWH.

why do you hate Americans? why do you only want Big Energy to get all the money, power and preference in this formerly democratic nation? why do you hate the thought of PEOPLE getting paid for producing clean power instead of monopolies? Cuz either way, the people are gonna pay for the energy infrastructure and the power price increases. the only question is to whom. i say pay it to Americans. You say pay it to hijacking offshore corporations who dodge their taxes. reasonable minds can't differ. you are just wrong.

[darthdarcy]

How can so called green investing possibly hurt..?

[KillTheMessenger]

Good sarcasm!

But to answer the underlying question... I am having real trouble finding real green investments that help the environment that are not direct investments into my own energy efficiency. For sure any money into biofuels is inviting nothing but long term ecological devastation. And I figure the best thing anyone can do for a solar company is simply to buy their products.

[Stephen308]

I think Sorros is talking about the government "investing" and individual companies investing...not you. You can't afford to rebuild the grid of fund a new type of battery or whatever. I think he's pushing more for policy change. What you can do is what others have suggested...do what you can at home and in your transportation, in your product choices and life style decisions.