From: "Bryan Johnson" <bryan@kemel.co>
To: "Lesley Groff' <1
Subject: Impact Investing Just Doesn't Cut It
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 22:09:09 +0000
Hello,
Given the UN Climate Report released a few weeks ago, by
the time my eight-year-old daughter graduates from high
school, we'll be in very big trouble. Yikes.
After reading the report, I thought through a list of my
instinctive yet unproductive reactions:
I. Attempt to persuade someone who does not believe the
risks are real
2. Rely on politicians to solve it
3. Rant on social media and throw away my computer
Upon further reflection, I had an epiphany. For the last few
years I've been investing in areas that specifically solve these
massive problems, and trying to galvanize the investor
community as well. I've often felt perplexed by the lukewarm
response...or lack of response at all, despite the impressive
investment returns.
Perhaps my problem is that I've been describing what these
"deep tech" companies DO - engineering at the atomic,
molecular, organism, and complex system levels - instead of
what they SOLVE: climate change, resource scarcity, and
sustainability. Maybe that's part of the disconnect.
We need substantially more investment and support of deep
tech (hard science + technology) if we want any chance of
solving these pressing global issues. How do we move onto
the next generation of "impact investing"?
Do we call it "survival investing"?
And how do we incentivize it?
Bryan
PS. From our first conversation with Synthego co-founders
(and brothers) Paul and Michael Dabrowski, Jeff and I were
sold on their mission to ensure that everyone, not just the
wealthy, has access to revolutionary gene editing technology...
Synthego was among OS Fund's first investments in 2015,
and we're thrilled they're getting an additional $110M in
investment to grow their business!
Read more at Future Literacy.
EFTA00484119
Forward
Unsubscribe
EFTA00484120