The UKIIF was announced by Brown last June and will target slow growing businesses, start-ups and spin-outs including those in the pre-profit and pre-revenue stages of development.

It was announced last month that a total of £125m from the UKIIF will be invested in clean tech and low carbon sectors.

The UKIIF has now completed first closing on the first £200m UK Future Technologies Fund with fund managers the European Investment Fund (EIF), who have in turn raised £100m.

Gordon Brown said: “This fund, seeded by the Government, is bringing private venture capital to growing enterprises. It is already providing £125 million of funding to high tech, low carbon businesses. From today, a further £200 million will be available for life sciences, digital and advanced manufacturing.”

I personally believe the leveraging of the UK government’s funds and expertise coupled with the European Investment Fund’s experience in the EU venture capital market will help the next generation of high growth, high-tech businesses.

View a previously written post by Mouli Cohen about overseas markets

Many German exporters do not compete directly with the Chinese, as they have undergone a comprehensive modernization over the past two decades, moving away from consumer goods such as textiles towards high-tech industries.

There are signs that China may, in the future, catch up with and even overtake Germany in these sophisticated products. But for now, the boom in China’s manufacturing sector will raise demand for German plant machinery and high-end engineering goods, supporting a tentative, export-fueled recovery in Europe’s largest economy.

Germany, the world’s largest exporter of goods from 2003 to 2008, is heavily dependent on foreign trade for economic growth and it suffered heavily from a drop in global demand last year, when the economy shrank by a record 5 percent.

The Federal Statistics Office said last week China looked to have overtaken Germany in 2009 as the world’s largest exporter of goods, and policymakers say Germany’s recovery is tentative. Many German companies are now counting on demand from China, which is expected to return to double-digit economic growth on strong exports.

Government stimulus packages in Asia are boosting demand, and economists say there will be a greater need for investment there than in developed Western economies even long after the economic crisis is over.

I think emerging markets, especially in China, have a sound structural picture and also private indebtedness, and there is enough room for growth in the coming years. That would, of course, especially profit export nations like Germany.

View a previously written post by Mouli Cohen about international economies

The other part of the story is about L3Cs, which are a type of “low-profit” LLC that has a charitable mission. It also qualifies as a PRI for foundations.

This essentially means that if Bill Gates is giving his blessing to PRIs, he is also, by extension, doing the same for L3Cs. And that could mean that 2010 will become the year when L3Cs really start to gain momentum.

Although the $400 million program-related investments fund is dwarfed by the $3.5 billion in grants made annually by the Gates Foundation, the fact that the world’s largest foundation is dipping its big toe into the world of venture philanthropy may accelerate a nascent trend in philanthropy.

So, what is venture philanthropy, and how do program-related investments play a key role in it? The phrase “venture philanthropy” was coined in the 1960s as an alternative strategy to merely having foundations write grant checks and hope the recipients (usually public charities) would use the money wisely. The concept is borrowed from venture capital, and uses loans and equity investments along with ongoing management and strategic assistance as a way to help the recipient organizations become self-sufficient.

In my opinion, the $400 million commitment to program-related investments by the world’s largest foundation supported by the two wealthiest men in the world – Bill Gates and Warren Buffett – should be just the kick in the pants needed to bring program-related investments into the mainstream of foundation philanthropy.

View a previously written post by Mouli Cohen about philanthropy

The new draft also fails to provide any long-term goals for emissions reductions, the peaking of emissions, and long-term financing to help developing countries deal with the impact of climate change. It stated only that the provisions were “to be elaborated” with reference to an earlier draft issued last Friday, which contained a range of emissions targets.

The new draft comes as leaders from over 100 countries arrived in the Danish capital to hammer out a plan, but the talks have been slow going due to tensions over who should cut carbon dioxide emissions and who should pay for it.

The draft was issued the day after the group of 77, which includes poor countries as well as large emerging economies like China, India, and Brazil, walked out of the talks, accusing industrialized nations of trying to kill the Kyoto Protocol.

The walk out prompted a suspension in the official negotiations Monday, and the chairman of the conference appointed five different working groups to advance consultations on the more complicated issues.

The global climate summit in Copenhagen seeks to find a new agreement on international rules to limit global warming after 2012. Developing countries want to keep the structure of the Kyoto Protocol – which requires developed nations, but not poorer countries nor the United States, to cut greenhouses gasses – with a new document to supplement it.

It is my opinion that since developed nations have been historically responsible for most global emissions of greenhouse gases, they must also take the lead in combating climate change by abating their carbon emissions and providing money and technology to poorer nations.

View a previously written post by Mouli Cohen about the global climate summit

The plan originally called for all buildings of 50,000 square feet or more to be audited in order to determine which renovations would make them most energy efficient, and for owners to pay for many of those changes. Building owners were nearly unanimous in their view that the plan would be far too costly, especially in the midst of a recession.

Bloomberg still wants to move forward with the proposal to require energy audits, but is currently leaving the decision to undertake the challenges called for in the hands of building owners.

The initiative would have put New York far ahead of other major cities in the green-buildings movement. A number of cities require that newly constructed buildings be energy efficient, but do not impose those requirements on existing properties. Nearly half the square footage of New York City – some 22,000 buildings – would have been affected by the plan.

According to Stuart Saft, chairman of the Council of New York Cooperatives and Condominiums, “It’s another unfunded mandate, and this is just not the time for it. Come back in five years when we’re past this recession. At this point, it’s just a slap in the face.”

City officials attempted to play down the change after the announcement, saying the package of bills would still make important strides in energy efficiency. It would require large commercial buildings to measure and provide information to tenants about individual energy use, which typically results in lowered usage. The plan would also create the city’s first energy code for all buildings.

In New York, buildings account for roughly 80 percent of total carbon emissions. Mr. Bloomberg has stated that he wants to reduce the city’s emissions by at least 30% by the year 2030. The City Council is scheduled to take up the package of legislation on Wednesday.

View a previously written post by Mouli Cohen about renewable energy

Even as the Treasury attempts to lock in low interest rates by exchanging short-term borrowings for long-term bonds, the government faces a payment shock similar to those that sent masses of homeowners into default on their mortgages during the last housing crunch.

With the national debt now over $12 trillion, the government’s tab for servicing the debt should exceed $700 billion a year in 2019 (up from $202 billion this year) even if annual budgets shrink dramatically. Other estimates have been much higher.

As problematic as the issue of rapidly escalating interest payments may seem, it is just one of many hurdles facing the United States after decades of living beyond its means. The surge in borrowing over the past several years may or may not have been a necessary response to the financial crisis, but there is little doubt that the United States’ long term budget crisis is becoming too big to postpone.

We are now faced with the challenge of climbing out of two very deep holes at once – as debt-ridden consumers, and as taxpayers whose government debt has almost doubled in the last two years alone. The competing demands could embitter political debates over the size and scope of the government, the trade-offs between taxes and spending, and the bottom line questions about who ultimately should bear the burden. And regardless of who’s to blame in the end, inflation, higher interest rates, and rollover risk cannot be entirely handled by clever debt management strategy.

View a previously written post by Mouli Cohen about Economy

If it goes public, Tesla would mark the first offering from a U.S. automaker since Henry Ford’s Ford Motor debuted its shares in 1956. The potential IPO symbolizes the resurgence of electric-car technology that most carmakers had dismissed as impractical until recently.

The financial turmoil in the latter half of 2008 virtually shut down the IPO market, but the demand has since picked up considerably. Tesla’s IPO would follow the successful debut of lithium ion battery maker A123 Systems, whose shares rallied 50 percent on their first day of trading on September 25th. Tesla will have to compete with a slew of established automakers that are racing to launch electric or plug-in vehicles.

A combination of factors, including the Obama administration’s push to have one million rechargeable vehicles on U.S. roads by 2015 and low-cost department of Energy loans, has driven the recent interest in developing electric vehicles.

The automaker said in September that it has delivered over 700 Roadsters since February 2008. The Roadster, which is built on a Lotus frame, can do 0 to 60 in less than four seconds and is faster than a Porsche 911 or Ferrari Spider. Tesla is also currently in the process of developing a lower cost model known as the Model S, which will have a base price of just under $50,000.

View a previously written post by Mouli Cohen about Clean Energy

By enabling homeowners to pay for clean energy projects through higher property taxes, the new method allows them to avoid the hefty up-front costs typically associated with these projects. Traditionally, the municipality (which can borrow at low rates) covers the up-front costs, and then the homeowner pays the money back through property taxes. New York has made it clear that it wants its municipalities to have access to that new pool of funds.

Since the financing mechanism works through property taxes, the system allows homeowners the ability to pass on the cost of energy improvements to future owners. Without the new legislation, each municipality would have to get their own individual legislation passed to allow them to set up such a program. The passage of the law means that all municipalities now have the ability to enact such a program once they also pass a local law, but New York still needs a law that provides incentives to put in solar systems that meet only a fraction of their energy needs.

To implement their financing program, the definition of solid waste was expanded to include CO2 so that $2.5 million of the solid waste reserve fund could be used to finance energy retrofits. The program funds cost-effective energy efficiency measures such as air sealing, insulation, caulking, and replacing space heating and hot water systems. The program can also finance solar energy improvements, but only if the home meets the Energy Star standard for new home construction. 16 states now allow these programs, which originated in Colorado and California last year.

View a previously written post by Mouli Cohen about Energy

The United States has the highest per capita emissions in the world, with China registering the largest emissions over all. Both the U.S. and China have so far refrained from setting a specific emissions target. Many believe that if neither China nor the United States makes a commitment, the plans of lesser emitters will have little practical effect.

Todd Stern, the chief climate negotiator for the United States, said in an interview that the Obama administration was still trying to decide whether to release a proposal in the coming days. “What we are looking at is whether we feel that we can put down a number that would be provisional in effect, contingent on getting our legislation done. Our inclination is to try to do that, but we want to be smart about it.” Stern also noted that bills pending in congress involve cuts of around 17 percent in emissions by 2020, increasing to significantly deeper cuts by 2030.

United Nations officials have said they hope that the richest industrialized nations will promise to reduce their emissions to meet negotiated individual targets within a given time frame. For developing nations, the hope is that they will commit to reducing their future emissions to levels that would accumulate if they took no action. The poorest nations would receive money and assistance to adapt to the consequences of climate change.

In many ways it is easier for developing countries, such as South Korea and Brazil, to submit offers because they are under far less pressure to commit themselves formally under an agreement. The industrialized nations – those that were already industrialized when the UN framework on climate change was signed in 1992 – have the far more difficult task of committing to specific reductions.

View a previously written post by Mouli Cohen about Environment and Climate Change

The programs awarded include $100 million for the Hillsborough County Schools in Florida, $90 million to Memphis City Schools, $40 million for Pittsburgh Public Schools, and $60 million to College-Ready Promise, a coalition of public charter school management organizations in the Los Angeles area. An additional $45 million was awarded to the Measures of Effective Teaching project to develop measures that will be viewed by teachers, administrators, and policy makers as reliable indicators of a teacher’s impact on student achievement.

The grants are meant to ensure that young people across the country have the opportunity to go to college and earn a degree that has real value in today’s job market. The money will be used to develop and implement new strategies and policies aimed at improving student achievement, with a special emphasis placed on reforming how teachers are recruited, evaluated, supported, and rewarded. The American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association will act as partners in the effort.

“We are convinced that in order to dramatically improve education in America, we must first ensure that every student has an effective teacher in every subject, every school year,” said Gates Foundation co-chair Melinda French Gates. “These communities have shown extraordinary commitment to tackling one of the most important educational issues of our time. We must do everything we can to understand what makes teachers effective and cultivate those qualities across the profession, in every school and classroom, so that all students can benefit.”

The foundation announced a year ago that investments in effective teaching would be a critical component of its education strategy, a decision based on a wealth of information that shows teachers are the single most important school-based factor in student achievement. Researchers have indicated only half as much variation in student achievement between schools as across classrooms within the same school, underscoring the impact of teachers on student learning.