David,

I don't think that Silver Lining ever had any investors. I don't think it
ever was an entity with any kind of legal existence. "Silver Linings" is
just a name for an informal group of friends and collaborators.

This article seems to have a fairly accurate description (
http://www.sfgate.com/science/article/Looking-to-sky-to-fight-climate-change-4170475.php
):

Since retiring, Neukermans has dedicated his time and money to a series of
social and environmental causes, including efforts to develop
land-mine-detection technology and inexpensive prostheses for the poor.

He turned his attention to cloud brightening in early 2010, recruiting a
team made up mostly of former colleagues, after the Bill
Gates<http://www.sfgate.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=science&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Bill+Gates%22>
-supported Fund for Innovative
Climate<http://www.sfgate.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=science&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Fund+for+Innovative+Climate%22>
and
Energy Research provided money for an initial viability test.


"He more or less showed it was feasible to my satisfaction," said Ken
Caldeira<http://www.sfgate.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=science&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Ken+Caldeira%22>,
a prominent climate scientist at the Carnegie Institution on the
Stanford<http://www.sfgate.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=science&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Carnegie+Institution+on+the+Stanford%22>
campus
and co-manager of the fund.


As the group attempts to develop an actual prototype, Neukermans is
covering the expenses out of his own pocket - and the group is working
pro bono.


The five-man team is an esteemed contingent of Silicon Valley's old guard.
Most are in their 60s or 70s; they have playfully referred to themselves as
the "Silver Linings."


But they're engineering heavyweights, boasting 250 years of experience and
130 patents among them. They include Lee
Galbraith<http://www.sfgate.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=science&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Lee+Galbraith%22>,
inventor of a breakthrough tool for inspecting semiconductors, and Jack
Foster<http://www.sfgate.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=science&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=%22Jack+Foster%22>,
a laser pioneer who helped create the first

This is what I mean by "truthiness". John Latham and others were making
claims about the ability to do marine cloud brightening, but many thought
that it would be impossible to make a fine enough spray. David Keith and I
chose to fund Armond Neukermans to try to demonstrate the feasibility of
such a fine salt water mist in the lab (which I had thought impossible).

We specified that while we were giving Armond some money, we would have no
financial interest in his outcomes. There was no investment. There was a
grant, which is essentially a gift.

When Armond demonstrated that he could make a fine spray, we cut off his
funding. He was a victim of his own success.

We were interested in a feasibility test. When he showed it was feasible,
that was the end of his funding. We were specifically not interested in
funding development of deployment hardware. We were also specific in not
wanting Armond to test anything outdoors, despite that it was just a
salt-water spray.

Rather than making money, Armond has sunk his own time and money into the
project.

So, a grant that David Keith and I chose to give a grant to Armond
Neukermans for an indoor feasibility test, where we specifically stated
that we wanted no financial interest in the outcome, becomes an
"investment" by Bill Gates, and the implication that he is trying to profit
even if it means damaging the global environment. This is the sort of
"truthiness" to which I refer.

Best,

Ken



On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 8:17 PM, David Appell <[email protected]>wrote:

> Ken Caldeira wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, Clive does himself and the broader discussion a disservice
>> by promulgating an abundance of misinformation.
>>
>> Just grabbing the first thing I could find on the web, he claimed that
>> Bill Gates is an investor in Silver Lining, which is patently untrue. Bill
>> Gates has no investment in Silver Lining.
>>
>
> OK.
> So where can we find a list of all the investors in Silver Lining,
> including amounts?
>
> David
>
>
> --
> David Appell, independent science writer
> e: [email protected]
> w: http://www.davidappell.com
> t: @davidappell
> b: http://davidappell.blogspot.**com <http://davidappell.blogspot.com>
> m: Salem, OR
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "geoengineering" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to 
> geoengineering+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<geoengineering%[email protected]>
> .
> To post to this group, send email to 
> geoengineering@googlegroups.**com<[email protected]>
> .
> Visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/**group/geoengineering?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en>
> .
> For more options, visit 
> https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out>
> .
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to