Sunday, September 05, 2021

Elon Musk’s SpaceX launch site threatens wildlife, Texas environmental groups say

The site in Boca Chica, south Texas is surrounded by protected lands that host a huge range of local wildlife including turtles and hundreds of bird species

SpaceX test launches its SN15 Starship prototype on 5 May in Boca Chica, Texas. Photograph: Gene Blevins/ZUMA Wire/REX/Shutterstock

Supported by


Dianna Wray
Sun 5 Sep 2021 


Everything seemed normal as SpaceX’s Starship juddered into the sky over south Texas last March, tangerine flames and white smoke pluming behind it. But roughly six minutes into the test flight, the spacecraft thudded back to Earth.

SpaceX, the company founded by Elon Musk in 2002, has a “test, fly, fail, fix, repeat” method for its commercial space program. That approach is part of why Musk wanted to put the launch site on a tract of land just off the Gulf of Mexico, close to the Texas border with Mexico. “We’ve got a lot of land with nobody around, so if it blows up, it’s cool,” Musk reportedly said at a press conference in 2018.


How the billionaire space race could be one giant leap for pollution

But David Newstead, director of the nonprofit Coastal Bend Bays and Estuaries, felt sick as he saw the fireball explode on the launchpad. SpaceX’s site is surrounded by state and federally protected lands. The explosion littered parts of the delicate ecosystem of the Boca Chica tract of the Lower Rio Grande Valley national wildlife refuge – comprising tidal flats, beaches, grasslands and coastal dunes that host a huge range of wildlife – with rocket debris.

“I knew from the other explosions that the rocket would be scattered all over the refuge,” Newstead said. Cleanup took three months, he added.

The private space race is already causing concern about the potential climate impacts of the fuel needed to propel the rockets. But environmentalists on the ground in south Texas say SpaceX’s testing site is having more immediate impacts.

The remains of an exploded SpaceX Starship on land in Boca Chica, Texas in May. Photograph: Reginald Mathalone/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock

The refuge is made up of parcels the US Fish and Wildlife Service has been buying or leasing since 1979 when the federal agency came up with its plan to preserve as much of the land tucked against the Gulf Coast and the mouth of the Rio Grande River as possible, creating a patchwork of federally managed refuge land. As part of that, the agency has been managing Boca Chica state park, a 1,000-acre (404 hectare) site, since 2007.

Boca Chica is a key piece of the Laguna Madre hypersaline lagoon system and home to a plethora of vulnerable species. The Kemp’s Ridley sea turtles nest on the shore of Boca Chica Beach each spring, while shorebirds such as plovers peck at the tidal flats to find food. The refuge is also home to endangered ocelots, the wild cats that once roamed across the south-west.

“It’s one of the most unique places on Earth,” said Jim Chapman, a local environmentalist with Save Rio Grande Valley.

Many Texas officials consider SpaceX’s presence a coup for the state. They had been interested in wooing Musk since he first began talking about building a private space port in 2011. State legislators passed a bill in 2013, which gave SpaceX the right to close Boca Chica beach during testing and launches. They also permitted limited road closures to Texas’ Highway 4, the only road to the SpaceX site – and to the Boca Chica section of the refuge.

In 2014, the Federal Aviation Administration issued its environmental impact statement, finding that SpaceX’s proposal for the region “would have no significant impact on the environment”. It didn’t seem like a big deal at the time, Newstead said, most people assumed that the anglers and beachgoers, the US Fish and Wildlife refuge managers who monitored the sea turtles and the conservationists studying the region’s more than 200 bird species would be able to coexist with SpaceX.

When Musk formally announced Boca Chica had been selected, most people focused on the opportunity. “We were seen as a border town, with all the negative national rhetoric that goes along with that,” said Josh Mejia, executive director of the Brownsville Community Investment Corporation. “But SpaceX choosing to build here, that gave us tremendous validation. Other businesses finally started looking at us and seeing potential.”

SpaceX’s activity on the ground ramped up as rocket testing began in 2019. Dirt mounds were quickly replaced by fuel storage tanks, construction equipment, a sea of Airstream trailers, and the latest rocket gleaming on the launchpad. SpaceX employees and contractors were constantly driving up and down Texas State Highway 4 and using roadsides – technically state land managed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service – for parking.

In April, SpaceX applied to expand its current site by filling in 17 acres of wetlands, which the EPA suggested could have “substantial and unacceptable adverse impacts on aquatic resources of national importance”.
Birds pass over SpaceX’s Starship SN8 on 4 December, days before a test launch in Boca Chica, Texas.
 Photograph: Gene Blevins/Reuters

Local environmentalists have grown increasingly concerned that SpaceX is dominating the road and the refuge land around it, closing roads and beaches for longer than their 300 permitted hours. In 2019, US Fish and Wildlife sent a letter to the FAA asking that SpaceX’s road closures and testing be halted until “noncompliance issues are resolved”. In June, the agency again wrote to the FAA about SpaceX reporting “unauthorized encroachments and trespass on the refuge”, according to 60 Minutes, including parking on refuge land and installing a drainage ditch.

In 2021, Save Rio Grande Valley wrote to the Cameron county district attorney claiming that SpaceX had cut off access to the beach and the refuge for more than 1,000 hours. In response to the district attorney’s inquiries, SpaceX denied the company road closures have exceeded the permitted 300 hours stating that the local environmentalists’ claims were “not accurate”.

“It’s really been shocking to witness the way the federal government has allowed this to happen,” said Bryan Bird, of the national environmental nonprofit Defenders of Wildlife. “Elon Musk is building a space complex in one of the most environmentally diverse, and inappropriate, places in the world.”
Advertisement


Launch site ditches, both on SpaceX land and public property, have dumped runoff water directly into the tidal flats, said Newstead, where he and his fieldworkers track nesting sites for snowy plovers, a wading bird that is close to landing on the federal threatened species list.

It would take a government agency to conduct the intensive rounds of ecological monitoring and study needed to understand how local wildlife is being affected by SpaceX’s presence, Newstead said, but he’s already seen a change in the snowy plovers.

Debris is seen in the Boca Chica national wildlife refuge after the SpaceX Starship prototype rocket failed to land safely on 31 March. 
Photograph: Gene Blevins/Reuters

There used to be about a dozen nests dotting the tidal flats on the edge of Boca Chica where the refuge abuts SpaceX’s property each spring, but last year the organization found just two pairs of the snowy plovers nesting, he said. This year they only spotted one. Newstead has also scaled back the nonprofit’s annual migratory bird census and multiple other programs, because, he says, they can’t access the refuge often enough to properly conduct the survey.

“These are complex systems, some of the only ones of their kind left in the world,” Newstead said. “I never thought there would be no impact whatsoever to SpaceX being here, but I did think government agencies would do more to ensure that things like this wouldn’t happen. I’m afraid of what we’ll find when we go out looking for their nests next spring.”

Jim Blackburn, a professor of environmental law at Rice University, said complaints about a lack of enforcement of environmental regulations are common. “A lot of people think that because we have these laws, the environment is protected, but that’s not how it works. People working on the ground for these agencies are often well meaning, but if the political will is there to allow a project like SpaceX to go through, that’s what happens.”
Advertisement


Neither SpaceX nor the US Fish and Wildlife Service responded to the Guardian’s requests for comment. The FAA told the Guardian that closures are implemented and enforced locally. It added that the 2014 environmental impact statement and the subsequent alterations remain valid, that the agency is still working on its environmental assessment of SpaceX’s revised plans for its launch testing site, and has no publication date at this time.

SpaceX has plans to launch the biggest rocket in the world, the Super Heavy booster and Starship, from Texas. SpaceX representatives have said they are eager to begin testing the new system, a process that many environmental campaigners in the community believe will ultimately see more rocket shrapnel lacerating refuge lands. The FAA is currently conducting an environmental assessment.

In 40 years of working to protect the Lower Rio Grande Valley national wildlife refuge, Chapman said he has never been more concerned. “People love space, they love the hype and glamour of rockets around here, but everything has a price,” Chapman said. “There’s always someone coming along who wants to develop the land out here. It used to be that we could rely on the government to step in, but now I’m not so sure about that.”

New study shows how engineered nanomaterials degrade, persist in environment

environment
Credit: Pixabay/CC0 Public Domain

A new study published today in the journal Environmental Science & Technology finds that exposing certain nanomaterials to light can influence their environmental transformation, fate and, ultimately, their toxicity. The discovery provides new insights into the behavior of engineered nanomaterials and how they can be better designed for numerous commercial applications without impacting the environment or human health.

"Nanomaterials are ubiquitous in our world today and can be found in common products such as our sunscreens, cosmetics and clothing," said Dr. Danmeng Shuai, an associate professor of civil and  at the George Washington University who co-led the study. "Every day, new nanomaterials are being considered for commercial use, but do we really understand how these materials break down in the environment and the implications? Our study suggests there's more to learn before setting loose another  in the world."

Environmental Working Group – Know your choices ...

2021-01-20 · The Environmental Working Group presents an innovative “water atlas” tracking phosphorous and nitrate pollution in four Upper Mississippi River Basin states. August 31, 2021. SAVE THE DATE. EWG's CleanCon™ October 19-21, 2021. Virtual. PRE-REGISTER NOW. Dirty Dozen and Clean Fifteen lists are here! Get your FREE digital copy now. Search this Site. Environmental Working Group. …

Global web icon
https://www.ewg.org

With support from the National Science Foundation's Environmental Chemical Sciences program and the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, researchers at GW, American University, the United States Naval Academy and University of Illinois at Chicago examined graphitic carbon nitride, an emerging engineered nanomaterial that has been extensively considered for water treatment, air purification, antimicrobials, energy storage, electronics, biomedical therapy and more. The nanomaterial was previously believed to be highly stable and only decomposed in the presence of hydroxyl radicals, the most powerful oxidant in water.

The research team, however, found that the nanomaterial's decomposition by hydroxyl radicals was also affected by light: the nanomaterial breaks down rapidly when exposed to light, but decomposes slowly in the absence of light. According to the researchers, this should raise concerns about the perceived stability of the nanomaterial and industry's potential use of it.

"Our study highlights how engineered nanomaterials might persist or degrade in the environment as well as their potential toxicity," Mengqiao Li, a doctoral student in civil and environmental engineering at GW and first author of the study, said. "It also highlights where more research is needed to guide the design of future nanomaterials that are more stable and don't harm the environment." Mengqiao recently received the C. Ellen Gonter Environmental Chemistry Award for this study, a  provided by American Chemical Society Division of Environmental Chemistry.Researchers reveal anticancer property of nanomaterials with mitosis-targeting mechanism

More information: Mengqiao Li et al, Radical-Driven Decomposition of Graphitic Carbon Nitride Nanosheets: Light Exposure Matters, Environmental Science & Technology (2021). DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.1c03804

Journal information: Environmental Science & Technology 

Provided by George Washington University

Bookchin M. Our Synthetic Environment - Libcom
Our Synthetic Environment Murray Bookchin 1962
https://libcom.org/files/Bookchin M. Our Synthetic Environment.pdf ·
Table of contents
Chapter 1: THE PROBLEM 
 Chapter 2: AGRICULTURE AND HEALTH 
Chapter 3: URBAN LIFE AND HEALTH

Chapter 4: THE PROBLEM OF CHEMICALS IN FOOD 
Chapter 5: ENVIRONMENT AND CANCER
 Chapter 6: RADIATION AND HUMAN HEALTH
 Chapter 7: HUMAN ECOLOGY 
Chapter 8: HEALTH AND SOCIETY 
Appendixes
German environmental NGO launches legal action against car makers and oil firm over climate impact


© Getty Images / Peter Cade

3 Sep, 2021 
RT Get short URL

German climate NGO Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH), alongside Greenpeace, launched legal action on Friday against a string of car manufacturers, as well as oil firm Wintershall Dea over concerns about their environmental impact.

In a statement released on DUH’s website, the NGO decried BMW, Daimler’s Mercedes-Benz. Volkswagen and oil firm Wintershall Dea for engaging in “climate-damaging activities,” pledging to take legal action to restrict the CO2 emissions the companies can release.

For decades there have been companies doing their climate-damaging business at the expense of our future. The time for fossil industries is now up.

Through its legal efforts, the climate groups are hoping to secure commitments from the named companies that they will not consume more than the remaining CO2 budget to which they are entitled according to the IPCC and the Paris climate limit, phase out combustion engines worldwide by 2030 and no longer develop any new natural gas or oil fields by 2026 at the latest. Should the companies refuse these pledges, the group has stated it will “hold those responsible to justice in court.

The NGOs will be represented by legal duo Remo Klinger and Roda Verheyen, who, earlier this year, convinced a German court to rule that the country’s government must update its climate law by the end of 2022, showing how officials will meet a target of almost zero carbon emissions by 2050.

Responding to the legal threat, Daimler defended its commitment to reduce carbon emissions in line with the Paris climate accord, stating that it is on course to achieve climate neutrality. BMW, Volkswagen, and Wintershall have not yet publicly responded to the lawsuit.

Climate groups to sue German carmakers

Following the success of their case against the German government's underwhelming climate plans, environmental NGOs are now going after companies with big carbon footprints.




The groups argue automakers are bound by a ruling giving future generations the right to climate protection


Environmental organizations Greenpeace and Environmental Action Germany (DUH) said Friday that they will sue German carmakers BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Volkswagen, as well as oil and gas company Wintershall Dea, over the negative impact the companies have had on the climate.

Two lawyers — Remo Klinger and Roda Verheyen — who helped environmental activists force the German government to commit to more detailed plans of how it will reduce carbon emissions to near zero by 2050 will also represent the plaintiffs in this case, DUH said.

Following the success of the case against the government, the NGOs are hoping to pursue the precedent set by Germany's Federal Constitution Court (BverfG) and uphold the rights of future generations.

"The BVerfG concluded in its groundbreaking climate decision that future generations have a basic right to climate protection. Large corporations are also bound by this!" the BUH said in a tweet.

Companies to be 'held responsible'


The plaintiffs' demands include ending the sale of climate-damaging combustion engines by German automakers by 2030 — five years earlier than an EU ruling imposed — and stopping Wintershall Dea from developing new oil and gas fields by 2026 at the latest.

They say these deadlines are necessary to stay within the limits of the 2015 Paris agreement. The legal action will go ahead if the companies fail to respond to the demands in the next few weeks, the NGOs said.

DUH said the "current and planned measures by the four companies are inconsistent with the Paris climate goals and are therefore unlawful."

The legal team also referred to the decision by a Dutch court in May that companies have to oblige by the Paris climate agreement. The court ruled that Shell must cut its emissions by 45% by 2030 from its 2019 levels.

"Climate protection is the protection of basic rights. This sentence was confirmed by the Federal Constitutional Court. With this in mind, these companies that produce more CO2 emissions than entire countries are now being held responsible," Remo Klinger said at the press conference announcing their legal intention.

All three of the German car manufacturers have previously announced plans to transition to producing more eco-friendly electric cars, but environmentalists have said these plans are vague and non-binding.

"The companies' electrification plans are not ambitious enough and too slow. They won't be enough to avert the climate crisis," said Greenpeace's Martin Kaiser.

Daimler, the maker of the Mercedes-Benz brand, said it saw "no basis" for the legal action against them and that it would defend itself "through all legal means."

BMW said in response to the announcement that it was already committed to the Paris climate agreement. Volkswagen, which owns several car brands including Audi, Porsche and Skoda, did not comment.

The threat of legal action against the car companies came days before the IAA auto show, one of the biggest in the world, was set to begin in Munich. Climate activists have said they will protest the event.

German carmakers reject environmental groups' climate demand


The Associated Press Staff
 Friday, September 3, 2021 

In this July 16, 2009 file photo, an employee of the Daimler AG mounts the Mercedes star on the hood of a car of the Mercedes-Benz E-class on the production line in the Mercedes-Benz site in Sindelfingen, Germany. (AP / Thomas Kienzle, File)

BERLIN -- German automaker Daimler on Friday dismissed a "cease and desist" demand from two environmental groups to commit to ending the sale of combustion engine vehicles by 2030.

Lawyers for Greenpeace and the group Deutsche Umwelthilfe have threatened to sue Daimler, BMW and Volkswagen unless they sign a legal pledge not to put new gas-fueled vehicles onto the market from the end of this decade.

The groups argue that companies are bound by the same rules as governments when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to combat climate change. The same lawyers successfully sued the German government earlier this year, forcing it to adjust its emissions reduction plans to shift more of the burden onto older generations.

In a letter addressed to Volkswagen, Greenpeace said it believes VW "poses a threat to the absolute rights, such as the property, health, and life of our clients" by being responsible for the release of large amounts of planet-warming carbon dioxide.

Daimler said in a statement that it saw "no basis" for the groups' demand.

"If it comes to a lawsuit, we will use all legal means to defend ourselves," the company said.

Daimler said it is committed to the goals of the 2015 Paris climate accord and aims to make its entire vehicle fleet climate-neutral by 2039, more than a decade before current European Union rules require it.

BMW said it would examine the legal threat from the environmental groups, but said it was likewise already committed to the Paris accord's goal of capping global warming at 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit). The luxury carmaker said it wants to put 10 million fully electric cars on the road over the coming decade. BMW sold more than 2.3 million cars in 2020.

Deutsche Umwelthilfe also sent a cease and desist demand to the oil and natural gas company Wintershall Dea, one of the investors in the Nord Stream 2 pipeline being built from Russia to Germany.
BAALZEBUB AND ASHTORETH 
Bitcoin miners and oil and gas execs mingled at a secretive meetup in Houston – here’s what they talked about
WIN/WIN


CRYPTO DECODED
PUBLISHED SAT, SEP 4 20218:33 AM EDT
MacKenzie Sigalos@KENZIESIGALOS

KEY POINTS

On a residential back street of Houston, in a 150,000 square-foot warehouse safeguarding high-end vintage cars, 200 oil and gas execs and bitcoin miners mingled, drank beer, and talked shop on a recent Wednesday night in August.

One big topic of discussion: Using “stranded” natural gas to power bitcoin mining rigs, which both reduces greenhouse gas emissions and makes money for the gas providers, as well as the miners.

Exercising political influence to educate legislators about bitcoin was also on the agenda.



Bitcoin enthusiasts, miners, and oil & gas execs gathered at a meetup in Houston to talk about the future of bitcoin mining.

HOUSTON – On a residential back street of Houston, in a 150,000 square-foot warehouse safeguarding high-end vintage cars, 200 oil and gas execs and bitcoin miners mingled, drank beer, and talked shop on a recent Wednesday night in August.

These two groups of people may seem as though they are at opposite ends of the professional and social spectrums, but their worlds are colliding – fast. As it turns out, the industries make for compatible bedfellows.

Just take Hayden Griffin Haby III, an oilman turned bitcoiner. The Texas native and father of three has spent 14 years in oil and gas, and he epitomizes what this monthly meetup is all about.

Haby started as a surface landman where he brokered land contracts, and later, ran his own oil company. But for the last nine months, he’s exclusively been in the business of mining bitcoin.

As Haby describes it, he was “orange pilled” in November 2020 – a term used to describe the process of convincing a fiat-minded person that they are missing out by not investing in bitcoin. A month later, he co-founded Limpia Creek Technologies, which powers bitcoin mining rigs with flared, vented, and stranded natural gas assets.

“When I heard that you could make this much money per MCF (a metric used to measure natural gas), instead of just burning it up into the atmosphere, thanks to the whole ‘bitcoin mining thing,’ I couldn’t look away,” Haby said. “You can’t unsee that.”

When China kicked out all its crypto miners this spring – an exodus which Haby calls the “Chexit” – that poured kerosene on the flames. “This is an opportunity we didn’t think was coming,” he said.

Haby tells CNBC they are already seeing demand rushing to Texas, and he is convinced that the state is poised to capture most of the Chinese hashrate looking for a new home on friendlier shores.

Bitcoin miners care most about finding cheap sources of electricity, so Texas – with its crypto-friendly politicians, deregulated power grid, and crucially, abundance of inexpensive power sources – is a virtually perfect fit. The union becomes even more harmonious when miners connect their rigs to otherwise stranded energy, like natural gas going to waste on oil fields across Texas.

“This is Texas, boys. We got what you need, so come on down,” said Haby. “We are sitting on the energy capital of the world.”

“I think Kevin Costner said it best: ‘If you build it, they will come,’” said Haby.



An underground meetup of bitcoin miners and oil & gas execs was held at a 150,000 square-foot warehouse safeguarding high-end vintage cars.

Mobilizing a movement

Parker Lewis is one of Texas’ de facto bitcoin ambassadors. Everyone knows him. Everyone likes him. And virtually any bitcoiner you ask refers to him as the future mayor of Austin.

Lewis is an executive at Unchained Capital, a bitcoin-native financial services firm. He isn’t in politics – yet — but he is hustling across the state of Texas to spread the good word on the world’s biggest cryptocurrency. In May, the Houston Bitcoin Meetup consisted of only 20 people in a fluorescent-lit conference room in an office. Then Lewis decided to get involved.

“I just knew Houston would be prime to explode because of the energy connection to mining – if we organized a good meetup,” Lewis told CNBC. “It’s also key to Texas being the bitcoin capital of the world.”

His efforts are paying off. Wednesday’s meetup drew more than 200 attendees from across the state of Texas, as well as California, Colorado, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, New York, Australia and the UK.

The buzz was electric on Wednesday night. You had to shout to be heard. And no one in the room mentioned any cryptocurrency beside bitcoin. There was also an unmistakable air of stealth – and FOMO. The people who showed up to this event did so, at least in part, because they didn’t want to get left behind.

Capturing excess and otherwise wasted natural gas from drilling sites and then using that energy to mine bitcoin is still firmly in the category of avant-garde tech.

Haby, who’s affable and an open book on most things, clams up when it comes to sharing the location of his company’s mining sites. “West Texas” is as much as Haby would give CNBC, though if the name “Limpia Creek” is any indication, that would place them 100 miles due north of Big Bend National Park.

His secrecy was par for the course that evening.


Oilmen, turned bitcoin miners, Griffin Haby with Conner Murphree and Jordan Kuntz at one of their bitcoin mining sites in Texas.

Bitcoin miner Alejandro de la Torre was born in Spain, but he’s spent years minting bitcoin all over the world, most recently in China. When Beijing cracked down on all things crypto, De La Torre got a call from his boss at 3 A.M. telling him he had to go to Texas. He was in Austin the next day.

Since then, he’s been shipping his new-generation mining gear to the U.S. in bulk.

“It’s all through ships and from the Pacific side,” De La Torre told CNBC. “The port depends on the location of where the rigs will end up.”

That was as much as De La Torre would divulge, because, as he explains it, any further details about the destination, or the gear itself, could give his competitors an edge.

Bitcoin believers care a lot about privacy, as do the oil and gas guys. Some cited non-disclosure agreements as a reason to speak to CNBC in vague platitudes about business deals. Others were only willing to share their thoughts on the condition of anonymity. And some attendees worried about their job security should their employer find out they were there.

These weren’t tycoons -- they were mostly up-and-coming young execs, hungry to get ahead and make a name by taking a gamble on bitcoin mining.

Oil and gas meets bitcoin


For years, oil and gas companies have struggled with the problem of what to do when they accidentally hit a natural gas formation while drilling for oil. Whereas oil can easily be trucked out to a remote destination, gas delivery requires a pipeline.

If a drilling site is right next door to a pipeline, they chuck the gas in and take whatever cash the buyer on the other end is willing to pay that day. “There’s no choice. There’s no middle finger. Whatever gas comes out that day has to be sold,” explained Haby.

But if it’s 20 miles from a pipeline, things start to get more complicated.

More often than not, the gas well won’t be big enough to warrant the time and expense of building an entirely new pipeline. If a driller can’t immediately find a way to sell the stash of natural gas, most look to dispose of it on site.

One method is to vent it, which releases methane directly into the air – a poor choice for the environment, as its greenhouse effects are shown to be much stronger than carbon dioxide. A more environmentally friendly option is to flare it, which means actually lighting the gas on fire.

“Chemistry is amazing,” explained Adam Ortolf, who heads up business development in the U.S. for Upstream Data, a company that manufactures and supplies portable mining solutions for oil and gas facilities.

“When CH4, or methane, combusts, the only exhaust is CO2 and H2O vapor. That’s literally the same thing that comes out of my mouth when I exhale,” continued Ortolf.

But Ortolf points out, flares are only 75 to 90% efficient. “Even with a flare, some of the methane is being vented without being combusted,” he said.

This is when on-site bitcoin mining can prove to be especially impactful.

When the methane is run into an engine or generator, 100% of the methane is combusted and none of it leaks or vents into the air, according to Ortolf.

“But nobody will run it through a generator unless they can make money, because generators cost money to acquire and maintain,” he said. “So unless it’s economically sustainable, producers won’t internally combust the gas.”


A panel of bitcoin miners and oil & gas execs share what it’s like to mine bitcoin in Texas.


Bitcoin makes it economically sustainable for oil and gas companies to combust their methane rather than externally combust it with a flare.

“There is no such thing as stranded gas anymore,” said Haby.

But Ortolf has taken years to convince people that parking a trailer full of ASICs on an oil and gas field is a smart and financially sound idea.

“In 2018, I got laughed out of the room when I talked about mining bitcoin on flared gas,” said Ortolf. “The concept of bringing hydrocarbons to market without a counterparty was laughable.”

Fast forward three years, and business at Upstream, a company founded by lead engineer Steve Barbour, is booming. It now works with 140 bitcoin mines across North America.

“This is the best gift the oil and gas industry could’ve gotten,” said Ortolf. “They were leaving a lot of hydrocarbons on the table, but now, they’re no longer limited by geography to sell energy.”

It is also helping to curtail the overall carbon footprint of some of these oil and gas sites. Recent production stats show that in the U.S. alone about 1.5 billion cubic feet of natural gas is wasted on a daily basis. And these are just the reported numbers, so the actual figures are likely higher.

Meanwhile, bitcoin miners get what they want most: cheap electricity.

Voting out the haters

The thing about all these grand visions for bitcoin mining – to stay the course, it requires some manpower on Capitol Hill to safeguard its plan to scale. And right now, politicians in Washington are scrambling to figure out what and how to regulate cryptocurrencies and all the ancillary services that make up the wider ecosystem for digital currencies.

That’s why another big topic of conversation at the Houston Bitcoin Meeting was political activism.

“Who knows a staffer or a representative?” one member of the crowd posed to the group. At least half a dozen people raised their hands and one stepped up to confirm they would reach out to their contact in Senator Cruz’s office.

There was a sense of momentum in the audience. Several people made the point that the bitcoin contingent across the country had paralyzed a $1 trillion rubber-stamped, bipartisan bill, no small feat for a voting bloc which hitherto hadn’t been viewed as much of a threat on the Hill.

But it’s not just about being on the defensive for these tens of millions of voters and bitcoin faithful. They’re going on the offensive by working to install like-minded people into office so that they can do something “before they do it to us,” as one member of the audience said to the group. They’re also teaching veteran lawmakers about bitcoin, as many representatives don’t understand it.

“We need to target anyone who is anti-bitcoin. There are 45 million of us in America, and we are not silent,” said this same attendee.
'MAYBE' TECH

A Key Challenge to Harvesting Fusion Energy on Earth

Fusion Reactor

A key challenge for scientists striving to produce on Earth the fusion energy that powers the sun and stars is preventing what are called runaway electrons, particles unleashed in disrupted fusion experiments that can bore holes in tokamaks, the doughnut-shaped machines that house the experiments. Scientists led by researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) have used a novel diagnostic with wide-ranging capabilities to detect the birth, and the linear and exponential growth phases of high-energy runaway electrons, which may allow researchers to determine how to prevent the electrons’ damage. 

Initial energy

“We need to see these electrons at their initial energy rather than when they are fully grown and moving at near the speed of light,” said PPPL physicist Luis Delgado-Aparicio, who led the experiment that detected the early runaways on the Madison Symmetric Torus (MST) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. “The next step is to optimize ways to stop them before the runaway electron population can grow into an avalanche,” said Delgado-Aparicio, lead author of a first paper that details the findings in the Review of Scientific Instruments.

Fusion reactions produce vast amounts of energy by combining  light elements in the form of plasma — the hot, charged state of matter composed of free electrons and atomic nuclei that makes up 99 percent of the visible universe.  Scientists the world over are seeking to produce and control fusion on Earth for a virtually inexhaustible supply of safe and clean power for generating electricity 

Luis Delgado-Aparicio, Madison Symmetric Torus

Physicist Luis Delgado-Aparicio with figure of Madison Symmetric Torus from his paper. Credit: Photo and collage by Elle Starkman/Office of Communications

PPPL collaborated with the University of Wisconsin to install the multi-energy pinhole camera on MST, which served as a testbed for the camera’s capabilities. The diagnostic upgrades and redesigns a camera that PPPL had previously installed on the now-shuttered Alcator C-Mod tokamak at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and is unique in its ability to record not only the properties of the plasma in time and space but its energy distribution as well.

That prowess enables researchers to characterize both the evolution of the superhot plasma as well as the birth of runaway electrons, which begin at low energy. “If we understand the energy content I can tell you what is the density and temperature of the background plasma as well as  the amount of runaway electrons,” Delgado Aparicio said. “So by adding this new energy variable we can find out several quantities of the plasma and use it as a diagnostic.”

Novel camera

Use of the novel camera moves technology forward. “This certainly has been a great scientific collaboration,” said physicist Carey Forest, a University of Wisconsin professor who oversees the MST, which he describes as “a very robust machine that can produce runaway electrons that don’t endanger its operation.”

As a result, Forest said, “Luis’s ability to diagnose not only the birth location and initial linear growth phase of the electrons as they are accelerated, and then to follow how they are transported from the outside in, is fascinating. Comparing his diagnosis to modeling will be the next step and of course a better understanding may lead to new mitigation techniques in the future.”

Delgado-Aparicio is already looking ahead. “I want to take all the expertise that we have developed on MST and apply it to a large tokamak,” he said. Two post-doctoral researchers who Delgado-Aparicio oversees can build upon the MST findings but at WEST, the Tungsten (W) Environment in Steady-state Tokamak operated by the French Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission (CEA) in Cadarache, France.

Range of uses

“What I want to do with my post-docs is to use cameras for a lot of different things including particle transport, confinement, radio-frequency heating and also this new twist, the diagnosis and study of runaway electrons,” Delgado-Aparicio said. “We basically would like to figure out how to give the electrons a soft landing, and that could be a very safe way to deal with them.”

Reference: “Multi-energy reconstructions, central electron temperature measurements, and early detection of the birth and growth of runaway electrons using a versatile soft x-ray pinhole camera at MST” by L. F. Delgado-Aparicio, P. VanMeter, T. Barbui, O. Chellai, J. Wallace, H. Yamazaki, S. Kojima, A. F. Almagari, N. C. Hurst, B. E. Chapman, K. J. McCollam, D. J. Den Hartog, J. S. Sarff, L. M. Reusch, N. Pablant, K. Hill, M. Bitter, M. Ono, B. Stratton, Y. Takase, B. Luethi, M. Rissi, T. Donath, P. Hofer and N. Pilet, 2 July 2021, Review of Scientific Instruments.
DOI: 10.1063/5.0043672

Two dozen researchers participated in the research with Delgado-Aparicio and co-authored the paper about this work. Included were seven physicists from PPPL and eight from the University of Wisconsin. Joining them were a total of three researchers from the University of Tokyo, Kyushi University and the National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology in Japan; five members of Dectris, a Swiss  manufacturer of  detectors; and one physicist from Edgewood College in Madison, Wisconsin.

Support for this work comes from the DOE Office of Science.


A team of nuclear physicists are celebrating what they say is a huge step toward a practical nuclear fusion reactor.

Nuclear fusion, if scientists ever manage to figure it out, could provide a bounty of clean energy — and potentially a clear path in the transition away from fossil fuels. But the technology to recreate the sort of reaction happening inside of stars in a controlled setting on Earth has proven tricky, to say the least. That said, research published last month in the journal Nature may represent a significant step forward. The physicists demonstrated that the Wendelstein 7-X, a nuclear fusion device in Germany, can successfully contain temperatures twice as high as the core of the Sun — and they’re utterly thrilled.

“It’s really exciting news for fusion that this design has been successful,” study coauthor and Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) physicist Novimir Pablant said in a press release. “It clearly shows that this kind of optimization can be done.”

The Wendelstein 7-X is a device called a stellarator — a kind of plasma containment device that was first developed in the 1950s but largely fell out of favor because its complex, twisted design is notoriously bad at keeping the heat generated by a fusion reaction from leaking out. Because of that, most facilities are developing donut-shaped tokamaks which retain heat better and, in some tests, have generated temperatures over ten times hotter than the Sun’s core.

But a practical stellarator would let scientists circumvent some of the other headaches caused by tokamaks, which can struggle to stabilize the super-hot plasma that drives fusion reactions. And that prospect has the team extremely excited.

“It’s been very exciting for us, at PPPL and all the other US collaborating institutions, to be part of this really exciting experiment,” Advanced Projects Department head at the PPPL David Gates said in the release. “[Pablant’s] work has been right at the center of this amazing experimental team’s effort. I am very grateful to our German colleagues for so graciously enabling our participation.”

READ MORE: PPPL physicist helps confirm a major advance in stellarator performance for fusion energy [Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory]

More on nuclear fusion: Scientists Are On the Edge of a Fusion Power Breakthrough

Negative triangularity—a positive for tokamak fusion reactors


by US Department of Energy

Tokamaks, such as the Tokamak Configuration Variable (TCV) shown here, are donut-shaped devices that confine plasma to produce fusion reactions. The shape of the plasma cross-section affects the quality of the containment.
 Credit: CRPP-EPFL, Association Suisse-Euratom

Tokamak devices use strong magnetic fields to confine and to shape the plasma that contains the fuel that achieves fusion. The shape of the plasma affects the ease or difficulty of achieving a viable fusion power source. In a conventional tokamak, the cross-section of the plasma is shaped like the capital letter D. When the straight part of the D faces the "donut hole" side of the donut-shaped tokamak, this shape is called positive triangularity. When the plasma cross-section is in a backwards D shape and the curved part of the D faces the "donut hole" side, then this shape is called negative triangularity. New research shows that negative triangularity reduces how much the plasma interacts with the plasma-facing material surfaces of the tokamak. This finding points to critical benefits for achieving nuclear fusion power.

One of the challenges in fusion energy science and technology is how to build future power plants that control plasmas many times hotter than the sun. At these extreme temperatures, interactions of the plasma with the material walls of the power reactor must be controlled and minimized. Unwanted interactions occur due to turbulence in the boundary region of the plasma. This research shows that the boundary turbulence in negative triangularity plasmas is much reduced when compared with that occurring in plasmas with a positive triangularity shape. As a result, the unwanted interactions with the plasma-facing walls are also much reduced, leading in principle to longer lifetimes for the wall and a reduction in the risk of damage to the wall, something that could shut down a reactor.

Scientists know that, in tokamak fusion devices, core plasma shapes with negative triangularity exhibit a substantial increase in energy confinement compared to plasmas with positive triangularity. Negative triangularity plasma shapes also show reductions in the fluctuation levels of the core electron temperature and density. This by itself makes negative triangularity plasmas promising candidates for a future fusion power reactor.

The new research reported here shows that the sign and degree of triangularity also have a large effect on plasma edge dynamics and power and particle exhaust properties, but scientists know relatively little about such effects. These experiments at the Tokamak à Configuration Variable (TCV), located at the École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) in Lausanne, Switzerland, revealed a strong reduction of boundary-plasma fluctuations and plasma interaction with the facing wall for sufficiently negative triangularity values. The researchers observed the effects across a wide range of densities in both inner-wall-limited and diverted plasmas. This strong reduction in plasma-wall interaction at sufficiently negative triangularity strengthens the prospects of negative triangularity plasmas as a potential reactor solution.

The research was published in Nuclear Fusion.
Cross-pollinating physicists use novel technique to improve the design of facilities that aim to harvest fusion energy
More information: W. Han et al, Suppression of first-wall interaction in negative triangularity plasmas on TCV, Nuclear Fusion (2021). DOI: 10.1088/1741-4326/abdb95
Provided by US Department of Energy
The six problems aviation must fix to hit net zero

Illustration by Philip Lay.


With passenger numbers growing and time to slash emissions dwindling fast, the industry must tackle urgent stumbling blocks on fuel, frequent flyers and more


Jocelyn Timperley
Sun 5 Sep 2021

Aviation tanked in 2020. The number of people taking flights fell by three quarters compared with 2019 levels and as a result there was a significant drop in greenhouse gas emissions from aviation. But as countries open up and people begin to fly again, aviation is expected to see a slow climb back to previous levels. The industry anticipates a return to 2019 passenger numbers globally by 2023 and to be back on track with previous growth projections within a couple of decades.

All this is bad news for the planet. CO2 emissions from the industry are likely to triple by 2050. But if the world is to limit global heating to 1.5C, it needs to have hit net zero CO2 emissions by this time. Aviation is a complicated sector to decarbonise. It has some prickly ingredients: difficult technological solutions, hidden extra climate effects, an association with personal freedoms and a disproportionately wealthy and powerful customer base. Here are just a few of the big hurdles the sector will need to overcome if it is ever to be carbon neutral.


1. The fuel problem

For a long time, jet kerosene from fossil fuels was the only available option for aeroplanes. “Flying through air essentially requires a lot of energy, so planes have to rely on fuels that have high energy density,” says Jagoda Egeland, an aviation policy expert at the OECD. “We haven’t had many substitutes with those kinds of properties.”
Advertisement

The fuel efficiency of aircraft improves over time. For example, switching from an older four-engine jumbo aircraft to a more efficient twin-engine aircraft can reduce carbon emissions by up to 30% for each flight, says Emma Harvey, a sustainability consultant who was previously the head of sustainability at Virgin Atlantic. Therefore renewing and upgrading fleets can have an impact on emissions. However, the savings are not enough to keep up with the growth in flight numbers. Before the pandemic, aviation was becoming about 3% more efficient each year, while passenger demand was increasing at about 5% a year.

But after years of development, alternative low-carbon fuels known as sustainable aviation fuels, or SAFs, are now beginning to reach the market. These accounted for less than 0.1% of aviation fuel consumption in 2018, but the hope is that this can be ramped up over time.

In the short term, the most promising are advanced waste biofuels made from things like used cooking oils. “That is pretty cheap and has pretty good life-cycle emissions, but its supply is limited,” says Dan Rutherford, director of aviation at the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT). Using these fuels exclusively for aviation would provide for only about 2% of jet fuel use in the EU and US, he says.

Biofuels can also be made from crops such as palm, soya and corn. However, environmental groups have been arguing against these for years because they can compete with food production and drive deforestation – proposed EU legislation that aims to ramp up SAFs specifically excludes their use. Other kinds of “advanced biofuels” made from cellulosic plants and agricultural and forestry waste show more promise, says Rutherford.

A final type of fuel that could be used in current aircraft is “electrofuel”, made using clean electricity and hydrogen. In theory, these could have an “almost unlimited supply”, says Rutherford, but they are currently very expensive to make.
The debut flight of the hybrid electric Cessna Sky Master, from Exeter Airport, Devon. Photograph: Jim Wileman/The Guardian

There are also completely different kinds of aircraft on the horizon. Electric planes are promising for shorter routes, and battery technology is improving all the time, says Ruth Wood, a senior lecturer in environment and climate change at Manchester University. However, the size and weight of current battery technology mean electric propulsion is still a long way off for larger aircraft, she adds.

Some companies are working on new kinds of aeroplanes designed to run on hydrogen gas, which could also be produced using clean electricity. Last year, Airbus revealed its concept for a hydrogen aircraft that it said could enter service by 2035, although it has also admitted such planes won’t be widely used until after 2050.

Chances of being solved? Clean fuels are likely to be used more and more but will make up only a few percent of fuel by 2030 and are unlikely to make a significant impact until after 2050.

2. The non-CO2 problem


Aviation accounts for about 2.5% of global CO2 emissions, but its warming impact is actually far larger owing to the other gases and particulates it emits at high altitudes. Often collectively called “non-CO2” impacts, these include nitrogen oxides and contrail clouds. These are rarely touched upon in aviation climate goals, but they could be tripling the climate impacts of aviation compared with CO2 alone.

What’s problematic, but also promising, about these effects is that they vary substantially depending on the surrounding climatic conditions. For example, one study found that just 2% of flights contribute to 80% of contrail warming effects. Night-time flights are particularly bad, because contrails produce their warming impact mainly at night.

There is still more to learn about these impacts, but policies could already be put in place to limit them, says Egeland, such as an extra charge on aeroplanes that fly at particularly bad times of the day.

It’s important to note that low-carbon fuels can still produce non-CO2 impacts, although these are expected to be lower than for kerosene for most fuels.

Chances of being solved? Unlikely in the near term given low prominence. However, the EU is beginning to pay more attention to this issue.

3. The frequent flyer problem

Some argue technological solutions will be too slow to reduce emissions in the aviation sector, and measures to reduce the amount people fly are needed to limit the damage to the climate.

But flying is not an evenly spread activity. In the UK about 15% of the population take 70% of all flights, and around half of people don’t fly at all in any given year. “That’s a pattern replicated in many other counties,” says Cait Hewitt, policy director at the Aviation Environment Federation (AEF).

The inequality in flying is even more stark at a global level. One study estimated that just 1% of the world’s population emits 50% of CO2 from commercial aviation, while just 2-4% of people fly internationally in a given year.

Some campaigners therefore support a “frequent flyer levy” as a fairer way to limit aviation emissions. The UK campaign A Free Ride argues everyone should have one annual flight free from the levy, then pay a rising charge for every extra flight taken that year. The UK’s first climate assembly also backed the idea of a frequent flyer levy.

The problem with such a levy is that many people in the frequent flyer category are likely to have the wealth to pay a moderate levy, or to have it paid by their employers, says Wood.

Manuel Grebenjak, a campaigner at the Stay Grounded network, says measures to limit flights overall, such as banning flights on certain routes, could help to stem rising emissions in a fairer way. “If a flight is banned from a certain city to another one, no one can fly, so it’s very just,” he says.

France has already moved to ban domestic flights on routes that can be travelled by train within two-and-a-half hours. Even just providing an alternative to flying can be effective: new high-speed rail lines have reduced aviation transport on the same routes by up to 80%, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).

Chances of being solved? Governments, including the UK, tend to shy away from demand management approaches to limiting aviation emissions, but France and Austria are making good first steps.

4. The policy problem

All this feeds into a wider need for strong policy to tackle aviation emissions, which has largely been lacking so far. “International aviation sits outside the Paris climate agreement, because that agreement is about a country’s domestic emissions,” says Harvey. “So there was a real push to have a scheme for international aviation.”

After years of inaction, in 2016 countries at the UN aviation agency, ICAO, agreed on the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (Corsia), a global deal to “offset” the growth in aviation emissions above the average levels in 2019 and 2020. However, when flights plummeted during the pandemic, countries changed the baseline of this scheme, which means there are currently no obligations on airlines. Egeland says Corsia’s effectiveness will “ultimately depend on the quality of carbon offsets that ICAO will accept”.

ICAO is also in discussions over a long-term climate goal for aviation for 2050, but it is not clear when this will be agreed or what the target will be.

Meanwhile, policies are being increasingly discussed at the national and regional level. In particular, the EU’s proposed “Fit for 55” climate legislation includes plans to mandate targets for SAFs and to end aviation’s fuel tax exemption. “Aviation fuel is exempt from any taxes almost everywhere,” says Grebenjak. “The EU wants to end the basically free rider status of aviation, and implement a kerosene tax that’s at the same level as other fuels.”

Chances of being solved? ICAO has been notoriously slow to act on aviation emissions, and many environmental groups criticise CORSIA for being far too weak, but recent policy moves at the EU level represent a significant step change.

5. The new middle class problem


Action at the EU level is encouraging, and the UK government even has a consultation out on its strategy for net zero aviation. However, the biggest growth in flying in the coming decades is expected outside Europe and the US, especially among the growing middle classes of developing countries.

Asia and the Pacific, Africa and the Middle East are the regions expected to see the most growth in the next 20 years, and last year China overtook the US as the world’s largest air passenger market. “The rise of a travelling middle-class in China and India has seen passenger demand grow at around 10% per annum,” says Hewitt.

Qingdao Jiaodong airport in Shandong province, China. 
Photograph: Xinhua/Rex/Shutterstock

Rutherford adds that frequent flyers look similar wherever in the world they are, namely upper-middle-class professionals. A global frequent flyer levy could therefore be one way to curb the growth, he says.

Chinese airlines will also increasingly have to meet local rules designed for climate mitigation if they want access to international airports, says Hewitt. But the vast majority of flights in China take place within its borders, which international policies would not apply to. “States will need to take domestic action to supplement international agreements in order to achieve net zero for aviation by 2050,” says Hewitt.

It’s worth noting that China also has the world’s largest high-speed rail network by far, while some developed countries, such as the US, have yet to install a single high-speed rail line. “We have to do our own homework first before talking about China,” says Grebenjak.

Chances of being solved? It’s up to developed countries to lead the way on reducing aviation emissions, which will then give more leeway to put pressure on developing countries.

6. The supersonic problem


Even amid growing efforts to reconcile aviation with a net zero world, some companies are pushing to develop aircraft that are even more polluting.

Earlier this year, United Airlines announced plans to buy 15 supersonic aircraft from Boom Supersonic, with the aim to begin using them by 2029. Rolls-Royce and the US air force also have deals with Boom.

As well as the noise issues with supersonics, these super-fast flights could consume five to seven times as much fuel for each passenger as subsonic aircrafts. There’s also a concern that supersonics, which will be operating high in the stratosphere, will have a disproportionate impact through non-CO2 emissions, says Rutherford. Developing emissions-intensive supersonic planes could also end up being a distraction from zero emission technologies such as hydrogen planes, he adds.

Rutherford says the best way to prevent climate damage from supersonics may be to simply require them to meet the same environmental standards as other aeroplanes. “That would, in essence, act like a ban,” he says. “They just can’t meet those standards.”

Chances of being solved? Supersonics are a disaster for the climate and should be made to meet the same environmental standards as normal planes.


Can Airports Afford To Transition From Fossil Fuels?

byLinnea Ahlgren
September 2, 2021

With climate change and its impact on everyday existence undeniably hurtling closer, the question should actually be – can they afford not to? As extreme weather – and turbulence – is becoming more and more common, the political will to fight global warming means that aviation needs to prove that it has a place in a sustainable future.

Can airports afford not to move towards net-zero carbon emissions?
 Photo: Getty Images

Ushering aviation into a sustainable, post-fossil fuel era is a task that includes airports as much as airlines and planemakers. While the pioneers may end up paying more before innovation becomes more accessible, it is unquestionable that a transition away from reliance on fossil fuels needs to be made.
Front runner airports have clean grids

Some airport operators, such as Swedavia, which operates Stockholm Arlanda, have already reached its target of zero emissions of carbon dioxide from the airport’s own operations by 2020, showing that it is possible.

Lena Wennberg, head of Environment at Swedavia, says that the key to reaching such a goal was to first track and map the airports’ carbon footprint. Then to identify so-called low-hanging fruit to tackle, and then keep moving up the ladder, collaborating with manufacturers such as ground support equipment suppliers.

Speaking at an Aviation Week webinar on Wednesday, Wennberg stated that the key for airports moving forward towards net-zero will be to have access to cheap and clean energy. While countries such as Sweden and Norway are fortunate enough to have renewable energy sources, many other states still rely on fossil fuel to feed the electricity grid.

Stockholm Arlanda Airport and its operator Swedavia reached their target of zero carbon emissions from the airport’s own operations by 2020.
 Photo: Brorsson via Wikimedia Commons

To that effect, Juliana Scavuzzi, senior director for sustainability, environmental protection, and legal affairs at Airports Council International (ACI) says that the decarbonization of the grid will be the most important thing for airports to achieve visions of sustainable operations. Meanwhile, collaboration will also be key between front runner airports and those lagging behind.

Question of time perspective

Olav Mosvold Larsen, senior executive advisor for sustainability at Norwegian airport operator Avinor, agrees that collaboration and cooperation within the entire aviation eco-system will be the most important aspect to solve the industry’s impact on the climate.

Larsen also added that if the aviation sector cannot prove that it can function sustainably, lawmakers will keep adding taxes. As such, it is in the financial interest of airports to work towards less emissions. This includes investing in technology that may still seem expensive for the time being, such as biofuels.

“We have to start somewhere. Obviously some, the first movers, might have to pay a little bit more than the people coming later. I also think it’s a question of how you make your business cases? With what time perspective? And when do you need the return on the investment?”

Amsterdam Schiphol wants to be an emissions-free airport by 2030 and energy-positive by 2050. Photo: Amsterdam Schiphol airport


EU green taxonomy push for the region


Airports in Europe willing to make the pivot also have much to gain from the EU taxonomy and its focus on sustainable growth. This will help shift investment to where it is most needed, and support companies and operators in becoming more climate-friendly. According to ACI, 235 airports in the region have committed to net-zero by 2050.

If it wasn’t simply the right thing to do, transitioning away from fossil fuel dependent operations also makes business sense. In the words of Mosvold Larsen,

“If we have the new technologies, it’s easier also to regulate or to stimulate or to incentivize from policymakers, etc. So we can actually drive for change and be a part of the solution. It is a little bit costly to get there both in terms of calories and working hours and also money, but we have no choice.”



Linnea Ahlgren
Journalist - With a Master's in International Relations, Linnea has combined her love for current affairs with her passion for travel to become a key member of the Simple Flying team. With eight years’ experience in publishing and citations in publications such as CNN, Linnea brings a deep understanding of politics and future aviation tech to her stories. Based in Amsterdam, Netherlands.


IEEFA Says New Coal Power Plants In India Will Become Stranded Assets

IEEFA says building new coal fired plants in India is bad economics.


Air pollution is evident in Mumbai, India. Photo by Zach Shahan, CleanTechnica.


By Steve Hanley
Published15 hours ago

In theory, economics is pretty simple stuff. If Farmer A is selling apples 4 for a dollar and Farmer B is selling them 5 for a dollar, who you gonna call when you need apples? Farmer B, of course. You’d be crazy to pay more for apples than you need to, especially if you hope to resell them and become the Jeff Bezos of the apple world.

Now imagine you are a native of India and want to supply electricity to the teeming masses. You can either build coal-fired generating stations that cost more to operate or build renewable energy resources like solar and wind farms that cost less to operate. Once again, you’d be crazy to select the more expensive option, but that is just what India plans to do? Why? Because coal is like a religion and common sense rarely applies to theological discussions.

The Institute For Energy Economics And Financial Analysis says India is hell bent on building a fleet of new coal-fired generating stations — 33 gigawatts (GW) currently under construction and another 29 GW in pre-construction. All of them will wind up being stranded assets, says Kashish Shah, a research analyst at IEEFA. “Coal-fired power simply cannot compete with the ongoing cost reductions of renewables. Solar tariffs in India are now below even the fuel costs of running most existing coal-fired power plants.

“In the last 12 months no new coal-fired power plants have been announced, and there has been no movement in the 29 GW of pre-construction capacity. This reflects the lack of financing available for new coal fired power projects, and also the flattening of electricity demand growth, which has impacted coal the most.”

Despite such headwinds, the Central Electricity Authority still projects India will reach 267 GW of coal-fired capacity by 2030. That will require adding 58 GW of net new capacity additions, or about 6.4 GW annually.

IEEFA says it is “highly improbable” that the CEA’s projections will materialize, given the ongoing financial and operational stress in the thermal power sector, which means India’s coal capacity plans should be urgently revised.

“Any projections for India’s future generation mix should take into account that new coal-fired power plants are likely to become stranded assets,” says Shah. “The new capacity would only be economically viable if it replaced end-of-life, polluting power plants with outdated combustion technology and locations remote to coal mines.

“Even then, there would need to be sufficient coal plant flexibility to deliver power into periods of peak demand, and the time-of-day pricing would need to be high enough to justify the low over the day utilisation rates.”


Shah adds that without material growth in electricity demand, installing additional inflexible high-emissions baseload capacity will increase the financial distress of state-owned distribution companies by adding to their burden of paying fixed-capacity charges to thermal power plants that are used only sparingly.

The International Energy Agency’s road map for reaching net zero emissions by 2050 recommends no new investment in fossil fuel supply projects, and no further final investment decisions for new unabated coal plants. IEEFA notes there is little appetite from private investors to risk new capital in a sector that continues to carry US$40–60 billion of non-performing or stranded assets.

Only India’s state-owned Power Finance Corporation and Rural Electrification Corporation continue to tout new coal-fired power capacity, but that may have more to do with politics than economics. Nearly half of the 33 GW of capacity now under construction in India is sponsored by those state-owned companies. IEEFA suggests they should “walk away” from those “under construction” projects now to avoid the risk of them sitting idle after they are completed.

“Governments, investors and utilities across the globe are rapidly transitioning to cheaper domestic zero emissions renewable energy,” says Shah. “India should be taking advantage of the falling cost of renewables plus rising viability of battery storage, which can provide clean grid-firming, to meet incremental power demand.

“Accelerating renewable energy capacity commissioning is critical to lower India’s overall energy costs and support faster electrification of transportation and other industries. Ultra-low cost renewables would also enable development of a green hydrogen economy to strengthen India’s long-term objective of energy security.” Seems like basic economics to us.