#Deep Decarbonization

[man-and-atom]

This hourly diagram of electricity production and emissions for eleven European countries over the course of 2023 is honestly fascinating.

The lowest emissions, unsurprisingly, are found in Norway (hydro), Sweden and Switzerland (hydro plus nuclear, although Switzerland has yet to abandon its “nuclear phase-out” policy), and France (nuclear). The highest are in Poland, which burns coal very heavily. And Germany varies wildly.

But we can also see, for instance, that Poland has a very narrow range in its production of electricity. So does Denmark, perhaps suprisingly ― although, contrary to what you might expect, Denmark is not among the top 10 countries in the world by share of wind power, according to OECD-IEA. We can guess that Norway’s very broad range of output variation reflects the use of its hydro plants to follow the variations in the Danish load.

Belgian output is also in a fairly narrow band, and we can likewise guess that a part of the large variation in French output is to compensate for that. German output, on the other hand, is all over the map because of variations in supply, not correlated with load.

What inferences can you draw?

[man-and-atom]

It is certainly true that the Earth is vast and its natural systems are complex. One result is, in effect, a great number of feedback loops, some of them incorporating time–delays which are long compared to the human lifetime. Therefore, it may be difficult to discern the effects of actions we take now, because of the continuing effects of what has already happened. And not seeing immediate results tends to be extremely discouraging.

One thing that seems certain is that whatever is coming will be easier to meet with more energy, whether that be for cooling overheated housing, or desalting seawater to cope with a lack of rainfall, or pumping water out of low–lying areas…

Fission can provide vast amounts of energy with minimal environmental disturbance. Even as practiced now, inefficiently, its associated emissions are less than those for wind or solar, as recognized in IPCC reports ― and it efficaciously displaces the burning of fossil fuels, which wind and solar have persistently failed to do. It is also less affected by environmental conditions, such as changes in the patterns of wind and sunshine. The point is, a global transition to nuclear energy will give many benefits which are clearly tangible in the here–and–now, as well as helping to limit future climate risks.

DR ADAM LEVY ClimateAdam ROSEMARY MOSCO

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this story from Canary Media:

Buildings everywhere need to get off fossil fuels in order to help the world avoid climate catastrophe. Yet owners of large commercial buildings in New York City are especially feeling the pressure: The groundbreaking Local Law 97 takes effect this year, requiring buildings of more than 25,000 square feet to meet specific emissions limits, which become more stringent in 2030, or face hefty fines.

One cutting-edge retrofit project is underway at the corner of Hudson and Charlton streets in lower Manhattan. The 17-story Art Deco office building, built in 1931, is ditching its fossil-gas boiler for uber-efficient electric heat pumps that are both heaters and air conditioners. They’re key components of a system that aims to heat and cool the building more efficiently by capturing thermal energy that would otherwise be wasted.

The state is backing the demonstration project, which could serve as a model to decarbonize the more than 6,000 high-rises that punctuate New York City’s skyline. As part of the Empire Building Challenge, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) awarded $5 million to the 345 Hudson project in 2022, which also has more than $30 million in private funding.

Project leader Benjamin Rodney estimates that once the project is complete in 2030, the building will use 25 percent less energy than a conventional design and reduce greenhouse gas pollution by 70 percent relative to 2019 levels. As the grid cleans up, he expects the figure to climb to 90 percent by 2035. The deep emissions cuts will allow the building owner, Hudson Square Properties — a joint venture of Hines, Trinity Church Wall Street, and Norges Bank Investment Management — to avoid more than $200,000 in fines annually starting in 2030.

But more importantly, it could help other building owners determine how best to eliminate emissions — a crucial task given that nearly 70 percent of the city’s carbon pollution stems from the fossil fuels used to heat and power its buildings.

[allthegeopolitics]

Keir Starmer has arrived in Downing Street with his new Cabinet. So what are their first priorities? Big-ticket items include decarbonizing the electricity grid by 2030, building 1.5 million homes over five years, hitting long-missed health service waiting time targets by 2029 and hiring 6,500 teachers, 5,000 tax investigators, 3,000 fully-trained police officers and 8,500 mental health staff.

Continue Reading

[bumblebeeappletree]

The shipping industry is responsible for three percent of global emissions. One of its best bets to get these down is fueling their vessels with ammonia. It releases no carbon when burnt and is cheaper than other alternative fuels like methanol. The catch: building a specialized engine is extremely difficult – and there's pretty much no green ammonia production today. So can it really fix shipping's emission problem?

#PlanetA #Ammonia #Shipping

Credits:

Reporter: Kai Steinecke

Camera & Video Editor: Neven Hillebrands

Supervising Editor: Malte Rohwer-Kahlmann, Kiyo Dörrer, Joanna Gotschalk

Factcheck: Aditi Rajagopal

Thumbnail: Em Chabridon

Special thanks to Dr. Nicole Wermuth who double checked critical parts of the video and gave background information about the engine concept as well as its current weaknesses.

Read More:

Ammonia as a fuel in shipping:

https://www.emsa.europa.eu/newsroom/l...

Role of efuels in decarbonizing transport:

https://www.iea.org/reports/the-role-...

Deep dive on ammonia as a shipping fuel:

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/sta...

The future of marine fuels:

https://maritime.lr.org/l/941163/2023...

Chapters:

00:00 Intro

00:39 Ammonia 101

01:25 How ammonia engines work

04:23 The oxides problem

07:42 False promises?

08:31 What's next for ammonia engines?

09:17 The space challenge

11:22 Green ammonia challenge

14:22 Conclusion

[jcmarchi]

Study finds health risks in switching ships from diesel to ammonia fuel

New Post has been published on https://thedigitalinsider.com/study-finds-health-risks-in-switching-ships-from-diesel-to-ammonia-fuel/

Study finds health risks in switching ships from diesel to ammonia fuel

As container ships the size of city blocks cross the oceans to deliver cargo, their huge diesel engines emit large quantities of air pollutants that drive climate change and have human health impacts. It has been estimated that maritime shipping accounts for almost 3 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions and the industry’s negative impacts on air quality cause about 100,000 premature deaths each year.

Decarbonizing shipping to reduce these detrimental effects is a goal of the International Maritime Organization, a U.N. agency that regulates maritime transport. One potential solution is switching the global fleet from fossil fuels to sustainable fuels such as ammonia, which could be nearly carbon-free when considering its production and use.

But in a new study, an interdisciplinary team of researchers from MIT and elsewhere caution that burning ammonia for maritime fuel could worsen air quality further and lead to devastating public health impacts, unless it is adopted alongside strengthened emissions regulations.

Ammonia combustion generates nitrous oxide (N2O), a greenhouse gas that is about 300 times more potent than carbon dioxide. It also emits nitrogen in the form of nitrogen oxides (NO and NO2, referred to as NOx), and unburnt ammonia may slip out, which eventually forms fine particulate matter in the atmosphere. These tiny particles can be inhaled deep into the lungs, causing health problems like heart attacks, strokes, and asthma.

The new study indicates that, under current legislation, switching the global fleet to ammonia fuel could cause up to about 600,000 additional premature deaths each year. However, with stronger regulations and cleaner engine technology, the switch could lead to about 66,000 fewer premature deaths than currently caused by maritime shipping emissions, with far less impact on global warming.

“Not all climate solutions are created equal. There is almost always some price to pay. We have to take a more holistic approach and consider all the costs and benefits of different climate solutions, rather than just their potential to decarbonize,” says Anthony Wong, a postdoc in the MIT Center for Global Change Science and lead author of the study.

His co-authors include Noelle Selin, an MIT professor in the Institute for Data, Systems, and Society and the Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences (EAPS); Sebastian Eastham, a former principal research scientist who is now a senior lecturer at Imperial College London; Christine Mounaïm-Rouselle, a professor at the University of Orléans in France; Yiqi Zhang, a researcher at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology; and Florian Allroggen, a research scientist in the MIT Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics. The research appears this week in Environmental Research Letters.

Greener, cleaner ammonia

Traditionally, ammonia is made by stripping hydrogen from natural gas and then combining it with nitrogen at extremely high temperatures. This process is often associated with a large carbon footprint. The maritime shipping industry is betting on the development of “green ammonia,” which is produced by using renewable energy to make hydrogen via electrolysis and to generate heat.

“In theory, if you are burning green ammonia in a ship engine, the carbon emissions are almost zero,” Wong says.

But even the greenest ammonia generates nitrous oxide (N2O), nitrogen oxides (NOx) when combusted, and some of the ammonia may slip out, unburnt. This nitrous oxide would escape into the atmosphere, where the greenhouse gas would remain for more than 100 years. At the same time, the nitrogen emitted as NOx and ammonia would fall to Earth, damaging fragile ecosystems. As these emissions are digested by bacteria, additional N2O  is produced.

NOx and ammonia also mix with gases in the air to form fine particulate matter. A primary contributor to air pollution, fine particulate matter kills an estimated 4 million people each year.

���Saying that ammonia is a ‘clean’ fuel is a bit of an overstretch. Just because it is carbon-free doesn’t necessarily mean it is clean and good for public health,” Wong says.

A multifaceted model

The researchers wanted to paint the whole picture, capturing the environmental and public health impacts of switching the global fleet to ammonia fuel. To do so, they designed scenarios to measure how pollutant impacts change under certain technology and policy assumptions.

From a technological point of view, they considered two ship engines. The first burns pure ammonia, which generates higher levels of unburnt ammonia but emits fewer nitrogen oxides. The second engine technology involves mixing ammonia with hydrogen to improve combustion and optimize the performance of a catalytic converter, which controls both nitrogen oxides and unburnt ammonia pollution.

They also considered three policy scenarios: current regulations, which only limit NOx emissions in some parts of the world; a scenario that adds ammonia emission limits over North America and Western Europe; and a scenario that adds global limits on ammonia and NOx emissions.

The researchers used a ship track model to calculate how pollutant emissions change under each scenario and then fed the results into an air quality model. The air quality model calculates the impact of ship emissions on particulate matter and ozone pollution. Finally, they estimated the effects on global public health.

One of the biggest challenges came from a lack of real-world data, since no ammonia-powered ships are yet sailing the seas. Instead, the researchers relied on experimental ammonia combustion data from collaborators to build their model.

“We had to come up with some clever ways to make that data useful and informative to both the technology and regulatory situations,” he says.

A range of outcomes

In the end, they found that with no new regulations and ship engines that burn pure ammonia, switching the entire fleet would cause 681,000 additional premature deaths each year.

“While a scenario with no new regulations is not very realistic, it serves as a good warning of how dangerous ammonia emissions could be. And unlike NOx, ammonia emissions from shipping are currently unregulated,” Wong says.

However, even without new regulations, using cleaner engine technology would cut the number of premature deaths down to about 80,000, which is about 20,000 fewer than are currently attributed to maritime shipping emissions. With stronger global regulations and cleaner engine technology, the number of people killed by air pollution from shipping could be reduced by about 66,000.

“The results of this study show the importance of developing policies alongside new technologies,” Selin says. “There is a potential for ammonia in shipping to be beneficial for both climate and air quality, but that requires that regulations be designed to address the entire range of potential impacts, including both climate and air quality.”

Ammonia’s air quality impacts would not be felt uniformly across the globe, and addressing them fully would require coordinated strategies across very different contexts. Most premature deaths would occur in East Asia, since air quality regulations are less stringent in this region. Higher levels of existing air pollution cause the formation of more particulate matter from ammonia emissions. In addition, shipping volume over East Asia is far greater than elsewhere on Earth, compounding these negative effects.

In the future, the researchers want to continue refining their analysis. They hope to use these findings as a starting point to urge the marine industry to share engine data they can use to better evaluate air quality and climate impacts. They also hope to inform policymakers about the importance and urgency of updating shipping emission regulations.

This research was funded by the MIT Climate and Sustainability Consortium.

[allthebrazilianpolitics]

See how Brazil is benefiting from the Industrial Deep Decarbonization Initiative 

The Industrial Deep Decarbonization Initiative offers Brazil's industries a pathway for a just and equitable transition to net zero through technological innovation, capacity building and policy development.

The Initiative enables Brazil to navigate challenges in sectors such as cement, steel, aluminium and petrochemicals, while prioritizing social safety nets, community engagement and workforce reskilling.

International examples showcase successful models that balance economic growth, environmental sustainability and social fairness, this reinforces the potential impact of the Initiative on Brazil's low-carbon future.

Continue reading.

[mariacallous]

Central banks from eight countries—Mexico, the UK, France, Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Singapore, and China—formed the Network of Central Banks and Supervisors for Greening the Financial System (NGFS) in 2017 to investigate and coordinate a response to climate change. By the end of 2022, the NGFS had over 120 members. However, among these central banks, there were considerable differences in the strategies adopted to account for and address climate change. Most strikingly, climate change has emerged as an unusual area of divergence between the European Central Bank (ECB) and the U.S. Federal Reserve (Fed), despite their historical tendency to adopt similar policy tools, frameworks, and objectives. The Fed limited its approach to climate change to basic climate policy standards or “norms” that recognized some relevance of climate change to achieving its monetary and prudential objectives but avoided any support for decarbonization. In contrast, the ECB better appreciated that climate change raised profound challenges for achieving its central banking objectives. As a result, the ECB adopted proactive climate policy norms that, for example, put in place climate-related criteria for asset purchase programs and far-reaching supervisory interventions to ensure that financial institutions accounted for climate risk.

To understand the ECB-Fed divergence on climate policy, we develop a theoretical framework that describes how new central banking norms are created and become influential in the context of domestic and international pressures. In the initial stage of climate policy norm emergence, broad support across the EU for climate action along with persuasive think tanks, researchers, and other policy entrepreneurs helped push the ECB to endorse new climate-related norms. The founding of the NGFS and the associated cascade of climate-related norms exerted significant pressure towards climate policy convergence across many central banks. However, the deeply polarized and partisan U.S. debate on climate change, stoked by an influential domestic fossil fuel industry, led the Fed to adopt only a modest version of the foundational climate norms—a stark divergence from the proactive climate stance of the ECB.

Given the deep differences in domestic political pressures, it seems unlikely that the climate policy differences between the ECB and the Fed will soon disappear. However, given the international connectedness of central banking, we expect global policy norms to provide sustained pressure towards convergence. In this context, the ECB might scale back some proactive commitments, although it seems unlikely to entirely disavow its current forward-leaning stance. The Fed may also seek a more favorable compromise, such as assuring domestic audiences of climate policy restraint, while cooperating with international peers on less overt regulatory interventions.

Download the full paper here»

[man-and-atom]

I had to send a comment in response to this piece.

Listening to this segment, I was dismayed to hear no mention of the energy source which the IPCC ranks as having the lowest life-cycle global warming potential, an energy source which supplies approximately twice the fraction of world energy that wind and solar do, an energy source which is already affordable and reliable. I mean, of course, nuclear fission. It’s all very well to say that wind and solar have fallen in price, and can be made reliable with batteries and upgraded power grids, but in most places that have tried it, the price of power has soared, and there has been very little decarbonization achieved. And that is the key consideration : a climate policy which costs too much or causes too much hardship to implement, won't be implemented. So we see that Germany, despite vast investments in wind and solar, has this past month reactivated a three-gigawatt coal-fired power station. French energy-sector greenhouse-gas emissions are half those of Germany, and electricity prices in France are about half what they are in Germany, too. Nuclear energy is such an effective competitor to fossil fuels that, in the 1970s, companies such as Gulf Oil and Exxon invested heavily in nuclear technology, in order not to be left behind. Considering how fragile power grids are across much of the USA, it’s important that nuclear power plants can be located near the cities they serve, reducing the need for (and cost of) grid upgrades. With “breeder” reactors, like the one which generated the first nuclear electricity back in 1951, the uranium and thorium already mined can provide more energy than all the fossil fuels that can ever be extracted. And, to bring us back to the subject of COP28, the UAE (which has three big power reactors in operation now, and one more under construction) and 21 other countries, including the USA, have just pledged to triple nuclear power by 2050. It’s not enough, but it looks more like real progress than any number of vague “net zero” pledges. People are hardly accustomed to hearing about nuclear, and what they do hear tends to be negative. That doesn’t reflect the reality at all. And it’s that reality that we need to talk about.

[beardedmrbean]

Norwegian company Blastr has announced plans to establish a green steel plant with an integrated hydrogen production facility in Inkoo, Finland.

Blastr agreed a letter of intent with Finland's Fortum energy company that provides exclusive rights to utilize an existing industrial site located in Inkoo, on the Finnish south coast.

Decarbonized steel, also known as "green steel", uses local and renewable energy as the basis for heating, reduction and melting, rather than fossil fuels. The plant planned for Inkoo is to produce two and a half million tons of high-quality hot and cold-rolled green steel annually.

The investment value of the project is approximately four billion euros and will employ approximately 1,200 people when completed, marking one of the largest single industrial investments in Finland's history.

According to Blastr Green Steel CEO Hans Fredrik Wittusen, Inkoo was selected as as the site for the plant due to its existing infrastructure, deep harbour, access to nearby European markets, and availability of electricity from emission-free sources.

Production is set to begin from the start of 2026.

Inkoo was most recently in the headlines when Finland's first floating terminal for liquefied natural gas (LNG) arrived at the port in late December.

Attracting green investments

Finland's Economy Minister Mika Lintilä (Cen) stated in a press release that Blastr's decision to locate its new plant at Inkoo is an indication of the competitiveness of Finnish industry and infrastructure.

He described Finland as an excellent place for carbon-neutral industry and production of decarbonized steel, as the Nordic nation has a strong and reliable electricity grid, good conditions for producing emission-free energy and efficient logistics.

Risto Murro, CEO of the pension company Varma told Yle on Tuesday that the news of Blastr's planned steel mill shows that Finland is an attractive country for green investments.

"Clearly a lot of investments in heavy industry are being made in Finland now," Murto said, adding that Finland has also managed to attract other energy investments, such as wind power, with industrial projects increasingly enticed by access to those sources of renewable energy.

[renewablephilosopher]

Renewable energy storage is a crucial component of transitioning to a decarbonized energy system. Battery storage has emerged as a leading technology in this space, enabling the storage of excess energy generated by renewable sources like solar and wind for use when needed. In this reply, I will provide an overview of the current state of battery storage technology and its role in meeting our renewable energy goals.

Battery storage technology has come a long way in recent years and has become an essential part of the renewable energy landscape. One study notes that "battery storage helps make better use of electricity system assets, including wind and solar farms, natural gas power plants, and transmission lines, and that can defer or eliminate unnecessary investment in these capital-intensive assets" [1]. Storage enables electricity systems to remain in balance despite variations in wind and solar availability, allowing for cost-effective deep decarbonization while maintaining reliability [2].

Battery storage systems are being used across the world, with examples like the island of Ta'u in American Samoa which replaced diesel generators with an island-wide microgrid consisting of 1.4 MW of solar PV and 7.8 MW of lithium-ion battery storage [3]. Additionally, battery storage is changing how we meet electricity demand, enabling a greater feed-in of renewables into the grid by storing excess generation and by firming renewable energy output [4].

Battery storage works by capturing and storing excess energy generated by renewable sources like solar and wind. The stored energy can then be used to supplement electricity supply when demand exceeds the amount of energy being generated. When paired with renewable generators, batteries help provide reliable and cheaper electricity in a more sustainable way [4]. The process of energy storage can be understood by breaking it down into three simple steps: during daylight hours, sunlight captured by solar panels charges battery energy storage systems; algorithms analyze data that includes weather patterns, utility rate structures, and other factors; and electricity is then dispatched as needed [8].

Battery storage is a vital source for meeting our energy demands as it helps to balance the grid and improve power quality regardless of the generation source [7]. It has become a key component in decarbonizing our energy infrastructure and combating climate change. As the world increasingly swaps fossil fuel power for emissions-free electrification, batteries are becoming a vital storage tool to facilitate the energy transition [5].

In conclusion, battery storage technology has emerged as a critical component of the renewable energy landscape. It is used to store excess energy generated by renewable sources like solar and wind and can be used to supplement electricity supply when demand exceeds the amount of energy being generated. Battery storage is a vital source for meeting our energy demands and has become a key component in decarbonizing our energy infrastructure and combating climate change.

Sources:

[1] ""Battery storage helps make better use of electricity system assets, including wind and solar farms, natural gas power plants, and transmission lines, and that can defer or eliminate unnecessary investment in these capital-intensive assets," says Dharik Mallapragada, the paper's lead author. "Our paper demonstrates that this 'capacity ..."

URL: https://news.mit.edu/2020/assessing-value-battery-energy-storage-future-power-grids-increasing-integration-wind-and-solar-0812

[2] "Storage enables electricity systems to remain in balance despite variations in wind and solar availability, allowing for cost-effective deep decarbonization while maintaining reliability. The Future of Energy Storage report is an essential analysis of this key component in decarbonizing our energy infrastructure and combating climate change."

URL: https://energy.mit.edu/research/future-of-energy-storage/

[3] "and costs: Energy Storage Technology and Cost Characterization Report. Battery Storage for Resilience Clean and Resilient Power . in Ta'u In 2017, the island of Ta'u, part . of American Samoa, replaced . diesel generators with an island-wide microgrid consisting of 1.4 MW of solar PV and 7.8 MW of lithium-ion battery storage. The system ..."

URL: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy21osti/79850.pdf

[4] "Energy storage is changing how we meet electricity demand. Utility-scale batteries, for example, can enable a greater feed-in of renewables into the grid by storing excess generation and by firming renewable energy output. Furthermore, particularly when paired with renewable generators, batteries help provide reliable and cheaper electricity in ..."

URL: https://www.irena.org/news/articles/2020/Mar/Battery-storage-paves-way-for-a-renewable-powered-future

[5] "As the world increasingly swaps fossil fuel power for emissions-free electrification, batteries are becoming a vital storage tool to facilitate the energy transition. Lithium-Ion batteries first appeared commercially in the early 1990s and are now the go-to choice to power everything from mobile phones to electric vehicles and drones."

URL: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/09/batteries-lithium-ion-energy-storage-circular-economy/

[6] "Austin Energy placed a 4 MW NaS battery into service in 2009. While these and other recent energy storage investments signal an advance in the efficient management of the electric power system, additional engineering and economic analyses are required as part of grid operator energy storage planning prior to wide deployment of energy storage."

URL: https://energyenvironment.pnnl.gov/ei/pdf/Energy%20storage%20for%20variable%20renewable%20energy%20sources.pdf

[7] "Broad support for renewable energy and emissions reduction is also driving adoption of battery storage solutions. This is especially apparent within the corporate and public sectors. Participation in wholesale electricity markets. Battery storage can help balance the grid and improve power quality regardless of the generation source."

URL: https://www2.deloitte.com/nl/nl/pages/energy-resources-industrials/articles/challenges-and-opportunities-of-battery-storage.html

[8] "When used with solar panels, it's a complex process that can be most easily understood by breaking it down into three simple steps: Step 1: Sunlight captured by your company's solar panels charge your battery energy storage system during daylight hours. Step 2: Algorithms analyze data that includes weather patterns, utility rate structures ..."

URL: https://sustainablesolutions.duke-energy.com/resources/energy-storage-systems-for-renewable-energy/

[9] "emerging energy-storage technologies that may warrant action by the DOE. 2 Approach The Energy Storage Subcommittee (ESS) of the EAC formed a working group to develop this paper. Research was informed primarily by discussions conducted among working group and ESS members."

URL: https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2018/06/f53/EAC_A%20Review%20of%20Emerging%20Energy%20Storage%20Technologies%20%28June%202018%29.pdf

[10] "It also confirms that battery shelf life and use life are limited; a large amount and wide range of raw materials, including metals and non-metals, are used to produce batteries; and, the battery industry can generate considerable amounts of environmental pollutants (e.g., hazardous waste, greenhouse gas emissions and toxic gases) during ..."

URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364032119300334

[11] "As a whole, the US's utility-scale battery power is set to grow from 1.2 gigawatts in 2020 to nearly 7.5 gigawatts in 2025, according to Wood MacKenzie, a natural resources research and consulting ..."

URL: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20201217-renewable-power-the-worlds-largest-battery

[12] "DOE also launched a new $9 million effort—the Energy Storage for Social Equity Initiative—to assist as many as 15 underserved and frontline communities leverage energy storage as a means of increasing resilience and lowering energy burdens. Together, this funding will help provide the materials needed to expand the grid with new, clean ..."

URL: https://www.energy.gov/articles/doe-invests-27-million-battery-storage-technology-and-increase-storage-access

[13] "NREL is developing high-performance, cost-effective, and safe energy storage systems to power the next generation of electric-drive vehicles. Researchers evaluate electrical and thermal performance of battery cells, modules, and packs; full energy storage systems; and the interaction of these systems with other vehicle components."

URL: https://www.nrel.gov/storage/research.html

[14] "The MITEI report shows that energy storage makes deep decarbonization of reliable electric power systems affordable. "Fossil fuel power plant operators have traditionally responded to demand for electricity — in any given moment — by adjusting the supply of electricity flowing into the grid," says MITEI Director Robert Armstrong, the Chevron Professor of Chemical Engineering and chair ..."

URL: https://news.mit.edu/2022/energy-storage-important-creating-affordable-reliable-deeply-decarbonized-electricity-systems-0516

[15] "Given our energy use profiles, renewable energy with storage has a clear role in our decarbonization roadmap. While various forecasts related to lithium-ion battery storage cost indicate a reduction of more than 60% by 2030, current prices limit the application of battery storage as a commercially viable alternative."

URL: https://www.wbcsd.org/Overview/News-Insights/WBCSD-insights/Energy-storage-is-key-to-unlocking-renewable-power-s-full-potential

[16] "The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) is focused on developing and accelerating the implementation of holistic future energy systems with purpose-driven, interconnected technologies that improve flexibility and balance to maximize renewable energy generation, storage, and conversion. Over the past year, NREL researchers have pioneered ..."

URL: https://www.nrel.gov/news/program/2022/energy-storage-year-in-review.html

[17] "Renewable-energy storage is important to help humanity reduce its dependence on fossil fuels such as oil and coal, which produce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that cause climate change ..."

URL: https://www.livescience.com/renewable-energy-storage

[18] "The use of renewable energy resources, such as solar, wind, and biomass will not diminish their availability. Sunlight being a constant source of energy is used to meet the ever-increasing energy need. This review discusses the world's energy needs, renewable energy technologies for domestic use, and highlights public opinions on renewable energy. A systematic review of the literature was ..."

URL: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8721134/

[19] "A few battery energy storage systems are currently being demonstrated, some with U.S. DOE Energy Storage Systems (ESS) Program funding. Crescent Electric Membership Cooperative (CEMC) has been using a 500 kW lead-aci d battery energy storage system for peak shaving purposes since 1987. CEMC has been able to significantly reduce the"

URL: https://www1.eere.energy.gov/ba/pba/pdfs/appendix.pdf

[20] "This is only a start: McKinsey modeling for the study suggests that by 2040, LDES has the potential to deploy 1.5 to 2.5 terawatts (TW) of power capacity—or eight to 15 times the total energy-storage capacity deployed today—globally. Likewise, it could deploy 85 to 140 terawatt-hours (TWh) of energy capacity by 2040 and store up to 10 ..."

URL: https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/sustainability/our-insights/net-zero-power-long-duration-energy-storage-for-a-renewable-grid

[21] "This first-of-its-kind artificial electrode will allow researchers to manipulate the model to evaluate opportunities for battery design improvements. "This breakthrough allows NREL to perform single-particle characterization for Li-ion cells," said Donal Finegan, an NREL energy storage researcher and staff scientist leading the project."

URL: https://www.nrel.gov/news/program/2021/building-better-batteries-architecture-for-energy-storage.html

[man-and-atom]

Well, that’s at least less unreasonable than I was thinking.

It appears that the idea of large–scale carbon capture for sequestration is not something that one can say much of anything sensible about at the present time.

The economics of any kind of peaking plant, on the other hand, always have to compete with part–loading a baseload–capable power plant. This is, I hasten to observe, true because we have a zero–emissions baseload power technology available and well proven. In other words, to minimize emissions of CO₂ to the atmosphere, the much–discussed “transition to renewable energy” is not the only option.

Now, in a scenario where nuclear is allowed, the relevant cost comparison may well be, not between solar plus “Terraformer” plus gas turbine and solar plus battery, but between nuclear plus “Terraformer” plus gas turbine and part–loaded nuclear. Now, we can reasonably expect any nuclear power plant of established types, built at the present time, to operate 60 years (unless shut down by political mandate), with a major refurbishment at 30 years.

Unfortunately, the question of how much a new nuclear plant costs is hard to settle. There are not enough current projects to supply meaningful data. Suppose $60 per watt installed, which is on the high end, although not the absolute highest (thus giving a generous allowance for the mid–life refurbishment and other costs). Then straight–line depreciation for 60 years gives $1 per annual watt–year. Part–loading that plant at 50% annual load factor would only double that cost. $2 per annual watt–year is somewhat higher than the figures being advanced for the carbon–capture/gas–turbine system, and which option is really preferable probably ends up being a matter of the specific situation. At $15 per watt (at the low end for current projects, but there is good reason to think that costs could be reduced substantially from there), baseload is 25¢ per annual watt–year, 50¢ at half load, and the case for the peaker is difficult to make out.

It certainly does not appear that there is an overwhelming case that can be made for using the “Terraformer” system, as compared to equipment which is already well proven in service. And for my part, I tend to view all carbon–capture schemes, and especially schemes for compensating for the intermittency of wind and solar with combustion equipment, as ways to justify not taking rapid effective steps away from fossil fuels.

when will we see the first reverse coal baron (negacoal?) who owns vast pits that armies of filthy labourers carefully stack full of carbon bricks spat out of vast capture machines sucking in CO2 from the sky

[tritonmarketresearch]

Carbon Capture and Storage: A Key to Achieve Net-Zero Targets

Amidst rising CO2 emissions, renewable energy sources and improving energy efficiency are critical components of climate change solutions. One of the most promising technologies to mitigate industrial carbon emissions is Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). This innovative technology provides a pathway to capture CO2 emissions before they enter the atmosphere, significantly reducing their impact on the environment. According to the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) Sustainable Development Scenario, Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS) technology could account for nearly 15% of the total emissions reduction needed to achieve global net-zero targets by 2070. This highlights CCUS as a key component in addressing climate change and meeting long-term sustainability goals.

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is no longer a far-off vision of the future but a practical solution to today’s climate crisis. CCS is also recognized as an essential tool to meet the Paris Agreement’s target of limiting global temperature rise to below 2°C. According to the Global CCS Institute, to meet these goals, the world would need to increase CCS capacity from the current 40 million tons annually to around 5.6 billion tons per year by 2050.

What is Carbon Capture and Storage?

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is a carbon emissions reduction technology designed to capture and securely store CO2 produced by industries. It is utilized in industries like steel, cement, and power generation, where emissions are difficult to decarbonize. The CCS process can be broken down as follows:

Capture: CO2 is separated from other gases in industrial processes using advanced carbon capture technology.

Transport: Captured CO2 is then transported via pipelines, ships, or other means to a designated storage site.

Storage: CO2 is stored deep underground in geological formations, such as depleted oil and gas reservoirs or saline aquifers, preventing its release into the atmosphere.

The Technologies behind Carbon Capture and Storage

The most common CO2 storage methods involve geological formations. These include depleted oil and gas reservoirs, saline aquifers, and unmineable coal seams. A successful example of geological CO2 storage is Norway’s Sleipner project, which has been storing approximately 1 million tons of CO2 annually in a saline aquifer beneath the North Sea since 1996. Other carbon capture methods are generally classified into three primary approaches:

Pre-Combustion Carbon Capture: This method captures CO2 before the fuel is burned, making it particularly suitable for industries that convert coal, oil, or gas into fuel gas. Pre-combustion capture typically involves gasifying the fuel to produce a mixture of hydrogen and CO2. The CO2 is then separated and captured for storage.

Post-Combustion Carbon Capture: The method involves capturing CO2 from the flue gases emitted after fossil fuels are burned. This approach is widely applicable to power plants and various industrial facilities. A notable example is the Boundary Dam power station in Canada, which captures approximately 1 million tons of CO2 annually through post-combustion capture.

Oxyfuel Combustion Technology: This process involves burning fuels in oxygen rather than air, resulting in a concentrated stream of CO2, which makes it easier to capture. This method is still being developed and tested but holds promise for future CCS projects.

Once captured, CO2 must be transported to storage sites. Pipelines are the most common mode of CO2 transportation, particularly for large-scale carbon capture and storage systems. Currently, more than 6,500 kilometers of CO2 pipelines are in operation globally, especially in regions like the US and Canada, which have well-established infrastructure for CCS and carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS).

Real-World Applications of Carbon Capture and Storage

Around the world, CCS projects are already in action as power generation is a major source of CO2 emissions. Implementing CCS in power plants has proven effective in reducing their environmental impact. For instance, the Petra Nova power station in Texas employed a CCS system that captured over 1.6 million tons of CO2 annually during its operation from 2017 to 2020.

The Gorgon Project in Australia is one of the largest CCS initiatives in the world, aiming to store 4 million tons of CO2 annually in an offshore gas field. Such large-scale projects demonstrate the feasibility of CCS in combating industrial emissions.

Similarly, the Drax Group in the UK, which operates the country’s largest power station, plans to capture 8 million tons of CO2 annually as part of its bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) project. In January 2024, the UK government approved Drax’s plan to convert two of its biomass units into carbon capture and storage stations for bioenergy.

Challenges and Opportunities in Carbon Capture and Storage

While the potential of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is promising, several challenges remain. The cost of implementing CCS technology remains high. Estimates suggest that capturing CO2 can cost between $60 to $100 per ton, depending on the technology and source. The IEA forecasts that the cost of carbon capture and storage (CCS) could decrease significantly in the coming years, primarily due to increased deployment and technological advancements. In addition to the costs, developing the infrastructure required for CCS, such as pipelines and storage facilities, demands substantial investment. Countries without established pipelines or suitable geological storage sites face logistical challenges. Most importantly, public concern about the safety of storing CO2 underground and a lack of clear government policies have slowed the widespread adoption of CCS.

However, despite these financial and regulatory hurdles, varied opportunities are paving the way for stakeholders to explore the full potential of CCS. Active R&D efforts are leading to more efficient and cost-effective CCS technologies. Innovations in materials for CO2 capture, such as advanced solvents and membranes, are expected to further drive down costs. Governments are increasingly recognizing the role of CCS in meeting climate goals. For instance, the US Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act passed in 2021 allocated $3.5 billion for CCS projects, and similar investments are being made worldwide.

Future Prospects in Carbon Capture and Storage

Looking ahead, CCS will play a pivotal role in managing CO2 and keeping our planet’s climate in balance. As we strive toward a net-zero future, industries and governments are expected to invest heavily in CCS infrastructure. Countries like China and India, with their heavy reliance on coal, could be key players in adopting CCS to reduce their emissions while maintaining economic growth. From power generation to heavy industry, CCS is proving its ability to significantly curb CO2 emissions. However, realizing its full potential will require overcoming economic and infrastructural challenges, supported by continued innovation, government policy, and investment.

[skrillnetworkblog]

ASX Uranium Stocks: The Undiscovered Heroes of Clean Energy Investment 🌍⚡

🚀 Why Uranium is Powering Clean Energy’s Future

Stable Prices, Bright Future: Uranium prices hold steady at around USD $78 with high potential ahead.

Demand Driven by Tech & Energy: With data centers needing constant power for AI, companies like Amazon and Google are eyeing nuclear power as a sustainable option.

🔥 Top ASX Uranium Stocks Poised for Growth

Boss Energy (ASX: BOE): Major player with assets in Australia and Texas, positioned to ride the nuclear wave as demand for AI energy grows.

Paladin Energy (ASX: PDN): Expanding globally with projects like Langer Heinrich in Namibia, ready to supply a uranium-hungry world.

Deep Yellow (ASX: DYL): Building an international asset portfolio, ready to meet demand across Australia and Africa.

📈 Why Uranium Demand is Rising

AI Boom = Energy Surge: Data centers fueling AI need nuclear’s stable, high-output power.

Decarbonization Push: As the world pivots away from fossil fuels, uranium is regaining prominence in the clean energy sector.

🛠️ M&A Activity Signals Big Potential

Scramble for Assets: Rising demand sparks mergers and acquisitions, with companies like Paladin snapping up new uranium assets.

🌟 Key Takeaway for Investors

The ASX uranium sector is a hidden gem in the clean energy boom. With big tech and government backing nuclear power, uranium stocks like Boss Energy, Paladin, and Deep Yellow are set for major gains.

💼 Diversify Your Portfolio with ASX-listed uranium stocks and explore the untapped potential of clean, nuclear-powered growth!

Visit - https://www.skrillnetwork.com/why-asx-uranium-stocks-are-the-hidden-gems-in-clean-energy-investing

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this story from Canary Media:

Colorado just got a big boost to help slash planet-warming emissions from commercial buildings.

Last week, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced the state was selected to receive a $20 million grant to help implement its building performance standards — ambitious rules that limit the amount of carbon pollution big buildings can emit. Colorado adopted the policy, which applies to edifices 50,000 square feet or greater, last year.

The funding will be used to help buildings in marginalized communities, whose owners may be less able to afford deep carbon-cutting measures like insulation and heat pumps, meet the state’s building decarbonization targets.

“We’re really excited about this DOE award to ensure the success of Colorado’s building performance standard,” Dominique Gómez, deputy director of the Colorado Energy Office, told Canary Media.

The Colorado award was the largest among the 19 grants to state and local governments announced last week as part of a broader $1 billion Inflation Reduction Act effort to clean up the U.S. building stock. The vast majority of the new round of funding went to helping cities and states design or implement performance standards for buildings, a means of tackling emissions that’s taking root around the country. From New York City’s pioneering Local Law 97 to Seattle’s Building Emissions Performance Standards, these policies set emissions or energy-use intensity caps per square foot in large structures that become more stringent over time.

Building owners have flexibility in figuring out how to meet these standards, whether that’s switching to LED light bulbs, weatherizing, electrifying heating or all of the above. If they fall short, owners face hefty penalties that are designed to exceed retrofit costs, according to Paulina Torres, research manager at global real-estate services firm JLL.

Performance standards are sticks to the policy carrots incentivizing energy efficiency upgrades that, on their own, largely haven’t worked to reduce building sector emissions, said Marshall Duer-Balkind, policy director at the building decarbonization nonprofit Institute for Market Transformation (IMT).

Unlike building energy codes, which generally target new construction, performance standards tackle emissions from existing buildings — a massive source of climate pollution. When you include the electricity they consume, buildings are the largest source of carbon emissions in the country — more than transportation, agriculture, or industry (excluding its buildings), according to the DOE. 

[worldecologyday]

Ten principles that underpin ecosystem restoration.

Towards this end, UN Decade partners engaged in a multi-stage process to develop principles for ecosystem restoration. The process began with a synthesis of published principles for distinct types of restorative activities. The synthesis was then used during an expert consultation process, to identify priority themes and to inform an initial, draft set of principles. These were widely shared through an online global consultation process; feedback from the consultation informed the development of the final principles presented here. The principles are broadly based on the Ecosystem Approach and the Short-Term Action Plan for Ecosystem Restoration (STAPER), both adopted by the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), as well as the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)’s Principles for Nature-Based Solutions,Principles for Ecosystem-Based Approaches, Principles for a Landscape Approach, Principles for Forest and Landscape Restoration,the Society for Ecological Restoration (SER)’s International Principles and Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration, the IUCN Commission on Ecosystem Management (CEM)´s Rewilding Principles, and FAO´s Principles and Approaches for Sustainable Food and Agriculture, Agroecology, Sustainable Land Management and the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries. The ten principles for ecosystem restoration include a first principle that orients restoration in the context of the UN Decade, followed by nine best-practice principles. These best-practice principles detail the essential tenets of ecosystem restoration that should be followed to maximize net gain for native biodiversity, ecosystem health and integrity, and human health and well-being, across all biomes, sectors and regions. The principles are complementary and should, therefore, be read and considered altogether. Regardless of the type of land ownership and the types of stakeholders engaged, these principles can improve restoration outcomes for all types of projects, programmes and initiatives. As an overarching guideline, it is important to note that while ecosystem restoration and other nature based solutions are essential for, inter alia, climate change mitigation, biodiversity protection and land degradation neutrality, restoration is not a substitute solution for conservation, nor for a rapid and deep decarbonization of the world’s economy. As such, investments in restoration in the context of climate action must be based on sound science-based targets and a clear pathway towards net zero emissions. Ecosystem restoration and the sound stewardship of nature can only be successful, in the long term, in the context of a wider socio-economic transition towards a nature-positive economy, by decoupling economic growth from unsustainable use of natural resources, and detoxifying and decarbonizing economic activity.