The Top Five Nations Leading in Solar Energy Generation

CONTRIBUTOR
Prableen Bajpai

NASDAQ
PUBLISHED AUG 17, 2021

`

CREDIT: MILOS MULLER / GETTY IMAGES

All-new World Reimagined podcast
Listen Now
China to bring solar and wind power generation to 11% of total electricity use in 2021



It is estimated that the amount of sunlight that hits the Earth's surface in one and a half hours is enough to power the entire world's electricity consumption for a year.

For centuries, the world has used energy generated from fossil fuels. However, fossil fuels have imposed enormous environmental and economic costs. Amid rising awareness and efforts to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, solar energy has risen as one of the most popular alternatives. Countries are starting to adopt renewable energy as they work towards cutting carbon emissions.

Here’s a look at the top five nations leading in solar energy generation.

1. China

China is a leader in solar industry. China added 48.2 gigawatts (GW) during 2020, bringing its cumulative installed capacity to 253.4 GW. It now dominates 35% of the global market. The country’s annual PV installations grew 60% year-over-year in 2020, representing more than one-third of annual global deployment.


The country is the world’s largest energy market and the highest emitter of GHG. China alone is responsible for more than 27% of total global GHG emissions.

The country has set ambitious goals for its climate action.

In September 2020, the United Nations General Assembly, President Xi Jinping said, “We aim to have CO2 emissions peak before 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality before 2060.”

This was followed by an announcement in December 2020 to enhance its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) under the Paris Agreement for 2030. China announced that it will lower its carbon dioxide emissions per unit of GDP by over 65% from the 2005 level and increase the share of non-fossil fuels in primary energy consumption to around 25%.


2. United States

In the U.S., solar has experienced an average annual growth rate of 42% in the last decade. The U.S. stood second with a cumulative installed capacity of 93.2 GW at the end of 2020. Policies like the solar investment tax credit, declining costs, and rising demand across the private and public sector for clean electricity have spurred the solar industry. The installed solar capacity of U.S. increased from just 0.34 GW in 2008 to more than 100 GW (as of June 2021).

Today, more than 3% of U.S. electricity comes from solar energy, a sector which provides employment to around 230,000 Americans. According to Wood Mackenzie’s 10-year forecast, the U.S. solar industry will install a cumulative 324 GW of new capacity to reach a total of 419 GW over the next decade. The U.S. is the second highest GHG emitter, responsible for 11% of the global emissions.

3. Japan

Japan ranks third in terms of GW cumulative capacity. The country installed an estimated 8.2 GW annual installed capacity, taking the total installed capacity to 71.4 GW.

In a policy speech made in October 2020, Prime Minister Suga Yoshihide announced Japan’s resolve to reduce GHG emissions to zero, making Japan a carbon-neutral and decarbonized society by 2050. In April 2021 at the climate summit in the U.S., Prime Minister Suga said that Japan will aim for a 46% cut in GHG emissions from 2013 levels by 2030.


According to Japan’s Minister of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI) Kajiyama Hiroshi, “Japan has adopted a new growth strategy of taking on the challenges of carbon neutrality to maximize our resources to create a virtuous economic and environmental cycle.”

4. Germany

Germany, the largest economy of Europe, ranks fourth in terms of installed solar capacity. During 2020, Germany added 4.9 GW of installed capacity, taking the total installed capacity to 53.9 GW.

In May 2021, Germany revised the Climate Change Act by setting a target to become climate neutral by 2045, which is five year earlier than its previous target of 2050, and has outlined a path to achieve this with binding targets for the 2020s and 2030s. The interim target for 2030—currently 55%—has been increased to a 65% GHG reduction compared to 1990, while a new interim reduction target of 88% has been set for 2040. The market for solar energy in Germany is expected to grow at a CAGR of more than 6.12% in the forecast period of 2020 to 2025.

The European Union (EU), as a part of the European Green Deal, has raised the target for 2030 GHG emissions to at least 55% compared to 1990.


5. India

Globally, India stands fifth in solar power installed capacity. In 2020, India added 4.4 GW capacity, bringing the total installed capacity to 47.4 GW. Under the NDC under the Paris Agreement for 2021 to 2030, India aims to reduce the emissions intensity of its GDP by 33% to 35% by 2030 from 2005 level and achieve about 40% cumulative electric power installed capacity from non-fossil fuel-based energy resources by 2030.

Back in 2015, India set a target of installing 175 GW of renewable energy capacity by the year 2022, which included 100 GW from solar power. The target has now been raised to 227 GW by 2022, which includes 114 GW from solar energy. India ranks third in terms of highest global GHG emitters at 6.6%, slightly above the EU at 6.4%.

Italy, Australia, Vietnam, South Korea and the United Kingdom are also part of the list of top ten nations in terms of cumulative installed solar capacity.

Disclaimer

The report has been based on data and inputs from International Energy Agency (IEA), U.S. EIA, IRENA, Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA). The report has been carefully prepared, and any exclusions or errors in it are totally unintentional. The author has no position in the index or stocks mentioned. Investors should consider the above information not as a de facto recommendation, but as an idea for further consideration.

Arctic Ocean fossils suggest climate change might not be so great for plankton

Some scientists have predicted shrinking sea ice and more light reaching the Arctic Ocean's surface could mean more plankton. New research suggests otherwise.


Abrar Al-Heeti

CNET SCIENCE
Aug. 16, 2021 


Shrinking sea ice may not benefit plankton after all.

Getty Images

Climate change is warming the Arctic Ocean and causing sea ice to shrink. Some of these changes will be irreversible but scientists have predicted the lack of sea ice could see more light reach the ocean's surface, unwittingly leading to a boon in plankton. The tiny organisms sit at the bottom of the food web and are critical for fish and other sea life to feed on.

In 2020, huge blooms of one type of plankton were spotted in the open Arctic. Researchers have recorded an increase in plankton productivity and shown climate change is providing a lot more space to expand into as sea ice diminishes. Sounds good? It might not be.

According to a study published in Nature Geoscience on Monday, shrinking sea ice may spell doom for plankton.

A team of scientists led by Princeton University and the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry used fossilized plankton and ice cores to examine the history of sources and supply rates of nitrogen, a vital nutrient for plankton, to the western and central open Arctic Ocean.

Their research suggests with global warming, these waters will have less nitrogen -- negatively affecting plankton productivity.

"Looking at the Arctic Ocean from space, it's difficult to see water at all, as much of the Arctic Ocean is covered by a layer of sea ice," said Jesse Farmer, lead author of the study, geoscientist at Princeton University and visiting postdoctoral fellow at the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry, in a statement. That sea ice naturally expands in the winter and contracts in the summer. In recent decades, global warming has led to a rapid drop in summer sea ice coverage, with that ice cover now being around half of what it was in 1979.

While melting sea ice should mean photosynthesizing plankton making up the base of Arctic food webs could reap the benefits of having more light, there's a catch, according to contributing author Julie Granger, an associate professor of marine sciences at the University of Connecticut.

"These plankton also need nutrients to grow and nutrients are only abundant deeper in the Arctic Ocean, just beyond the reach of the plankton," Granger said. Whether plankton can get those nutrients is a matter of how "stratified" the upper ocean is, or how much it's separated into layers. The upper 600 feet of the ocean is made up of layers of water with varying densities, based on temperature and saltiness.

"When the upper ocean is strongly stratified, with very light water floating on top of dense deep water, the supply of nutrients to the sunlit surface is slow," Farmer said.

New research found the amount of nitrogen in the Arctic has changed since the last ice age, showing the history of stratification in the Arctic Ocean. The Arctic is where the Pacific and Atlantic oceans meet. Fresh Pacific water flows over the saltier water from the Atlantic, which leaves the western Arctic packed with nitrogen flowing in from the Pacific.

It wasn't always like that.

"During the last ice age, when the growth of ice sheets lowered global sea level, the Bering Strait didn't exist," Daniel Sigman, professor of geological and geophysical sciences at Princeton, said in a statement. Back then, the Bering Strait was instead the Bering Land Bridge, which connected Asia and North America and allowed humans to migrate to the Americas.

At the end of the ice age 11,500 years ago, when ice sheets melted and sea levels went up, the Bering Land Bridge was submerged, allowing nitrogen from the Pacific to creep into the open western Arctic basin.

During the last ice age and under colder climate, stratification in the Arctic was weak. After the ice age, central Arctic stratification became stronger, peaking during a time of naturally warmer Arctic summer temperatures some 10,000 and 6,000 years ago, a time known as the Holocene Thermal Maximum. Since then, stratification in the central Arctic has grown weaker, which has allowed the deeper nitrogen to move up towards the surface, where it can be used by plankton.

The climate crisis is seeing warmer temperatures in the Arctic, returning it to a climate similar to the Holocene Thermal Maximum. Although some scientists have suggested increasing amounts of sunlight touching the ocean could make Arctic plankton more productive, scientists from Monday's study found this isn't likely because of nitrogen availability in open regions of the Arctic. Low nitrogen means poor plankton productivity and hurts one of the foundational organisms in the ecosystems food web.

"Given our data, a rise in open Arctic productivity seems unlikely," Farmer said. "The best hope for a future rise in Arctic productivity is probably in the Arctic's coastal waters."

First published on Aug. 16, 2021 

The Arctic Ocean's deep past provides clues to its imminent future

by Princeton University

Global climate change is warming the Arctic Ocean and shrinking sea ice. Here, the blue-white ice cap shows the coverage of sea ice at its smallest extent in summer 2020, and the yellow line shows the typical Arctic sea ice minimum extent between 1981 and 2010. Some have proposed that the newly exposed sea surface will lead to a plankton population boom and a burgeoning ecosystem in the open Arctic Ocean, but a team of Princeton and Max Planck Institute for Chemistry scientists say that’s not likely. They have examined the history and supply rate of nitrogen, a key nutrient. Their recent work finds that stratification of the open Arctic waters, especially in the areas fed by the Pacific Ocean via the Bering Strait, will prevent surface plankton from receiving enough nitrogen to grow abundantly. Credit: Jesse Farmer, Princeton University; modified from Rebecca Lindsey and Michon Scott, “Climate change: Arctic sea ice,” NOAA Climate.gov

As the North Pole, the Arctic Ocean, and the surrounding Arctic land warm rapidly, scientists are racing to understand the warming's effects on Arctic ecosystems. With shrinking sea ice, more light reaches the surface of the Arctic Ocean. Some have predicted that this will lead to more plankton, which in turn would support fish and other animals.

Not so fast, says a team of scientists led by Princeton University and the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry.

They point to nitrogen, a vital nutrient. The researchers used fossilized plankton to study the history of sources and supply rates of nitrogen to the western and central open Arctic Ocean. Their work, detailed in a paper in the current issue of the journal Nature Geoscience, suggests that under a global warming regime, these open Arctic waters will experience more intense nitrogen limitation, likely preventing a rise in productivity.

"Looking at the Arctic Ocean from space, it's difficult to see water at all, as much of the Arctic Ocean is covered by a layer of sea ice," said lead author Jesse Farmer, a postdoctoral research associate in the Department of Geosciences at Princeton University who is also a visiting postdoctoral fellow at the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry in Mainz, Germany. This sea ice naturally expands during winters and contracts during summers. In recent decades, however, global warming has caused a rapid decline in summer sea ice coverage, with summer ice cover now roughly half that of 1979.

As sea ice melts, photosynthesizing plankton that form the base of Arctic food webs should benefit from the greater light availability. "But there's a catch," said contributing author Julie Granger, an associate professor of marine sciences at the University of Connecticut. "These plankton also need nutrients to grow, and nutrients are only abundant deeper in the Arctic Ocean, just beyond the reach of the plankton." Whether plankton can acquire these nutrients depends on how strictly the upper ocean is "stratified," or separated into layers. The upper 200 meters (660 feet) of the ocean consists of distinct layers of water with different densities, determined by their temperature and saltiness.

These white lumps are fossilized foraminifera from an Arctic Ocean sediment core, magnified 30 times. The researchers used organic material inside these “forams” — plankton that grew in surface waters, then died and sank to the sea floor — to measure the isotopic composition of nitrogen. Credit: Jesse Farmer, Princeton University

"When the upper ocean is strongly stratified, with very light water floating on top of dense deep water, the supply of nutrients to the sunlit surface is slow," said Farmer.

New research led by scientists from Princeton University shows how the supply of nitrogen to the Arctic has changed since the last ice age, which reveals the history of Arctic Ocean stratification. Using sediment cores from the western and central Arctic Ocean, the researchers measured the isotopic composition of organic nitrogen trapped in the limestone fossils of foraminifera (plankton that grew in surface waters, then died and sank to the sea floor). Their measurements reveal how the proportions of Atlantic- and Pacific-derived nitrogen changed over time, while also tracking changes in the degree of nitrogen limitation of plankton at the surface. Ona Underwood of the Class of 2021 was a key member of the research team, analyzing western Arctic Ocean sediment cores for her junior project.

Where the oceans meet: Pacific waters float above saltier, denser Atlantic waters

The Arctic Ocean is the meeting place of two great oceans: the Pacific and the Atlantic. In the western Arctic, Pacific Ocean waters flow northward across the shallow Bering Strait that separates Alaska from Siberia. Arriving in the Arctic Ocean, the relatively fresh Pacific water flows over saltier water from the Atlantic. As a result, the upper water column of the western Arctic is dominated by Pacific-sourced nitrogen and is strongly stratified.

However, this was not always the case. "During the last ice age, when the growth of ice sheets lowered global sea level, the Bering Strait didn't exist," said Daniel Sigman, Princeton's Dusenbury Professor of Geological and Geophysical Sciences and one of Farmer's research mentors. At that time, the Bering Strait was replaced by the Bering Land Bridge, a land connection between Asia and North America that allowed for the migration of humans into the Americas. Without the Bering Strait, the Arctic would only have Atlantic water, and the nitrogen data confirm this.

Study co-author Julie Granger sampled water from the Arctic Ocean aboard the US Coast Guard icebreaker Healy. Credit: Julie Granger, University of Connecticut

When the ice age ended 11,500 years ago, as ice sheets melted and sea level rose, the data show the sudden appearance of Pacific nitrogen in the open western Arctic basin, dramatic evidence of the opening of the Bering Strait.

"We had expected to see this signal in the data, but not so clearly!" Sigman said.

This was just the first of the surprises. Analyzing the data, Farmer also realized that, prior to the opening of the Bering Strait, the Arctic had not been strongly stratified as it is today. Only with opening the Bering Strait did the western Arctic become strongly stratified, as reflected by the onset of nitrogen limitation of plankton in the surface waters.

Heading eastward away from the Bering Strait, the Pacific-sourced water is diluted away, so that the modern central and eastern Arctic are dominated by Atlantic water and relatively weak stratification. Here, the researchers found that nitrogen limitation and density stratification varied with climate. As in the western Arctic, stratification was weak during the last ice age, when climate was colder. After the ice age, central Arctic stratification strengthened, reaching a peak between about 10,000 and 6,000 years ago, a period of naturally warmer Arctic summer temperatures called the "Holocene Thermal Maximum." Since that time, central Arctic stratification has weakened, allowing enough deep nitrogen to reach surface waters to exceed the requirements of plankton.

Global warming is quickly returning the Arctic to the climate of the Holocene Thermal Maximum. As this warming continues, some scientists have predicted that reduced ice cover would enhance the productivity of Arctic plankton by increasing the amount of sunlight reaching the ocean. The new historical information acquired by Farmer and his colleagues suggests that such a change is unlikely for the open basin waters of the western and central Arctic. The western Arctic will remain strongly stratified due to persistent inflow of Pacific water through the Bering Strait, while the warming will strengthen stratification in the central Arctic. In both of these open ocean regions, slow nitrogen supply is likely to limit plankton productivity, the researchers concluded.

"A rise in the productivity of the open Arctic basin would likely have been seen as a benefit, for example, increasing fisheries," said Farmer. "But given our data, a rise in open Arctic productivity seems unlikely. The best hope for a future rise in Arctic productivity is probably in the Arctic's coastal waters."

Rivers melt Arctic ice, warming air and ocean

More information: Arctic Ocean stratification set by sea level and freshwater inputs since the last ice age, Nature Geoscience (2021). DOI: 10.1038/s41561-021-00789-y , www.nature.com/articles/s41561-021-00789-y

Shiv Priyam Raghuraman et al, Anthropogenic forcing and response yield observed positive trend in Earth's energy imbalance, Nature Communications (2021). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-24544-4

Journal information: Nature Communications  , Nature Geoscience 

Provided by Princeton University 

 

What We Have Here is a Failure to Communicate…. in Ship Construction!

Rik van Hemmen, Contributor

Rik van Hemmen is the President of Martin & Ottaway...

August 17, 2021

The 17th Century ship Vasa. © warasit/AdobeStock

My brother, who is the executive editor of my favorite boating magazine (Soundings), and I occasionally send strange tidbits to each other by email. For some reason he sent me an email about the 17th Century ship Vasa and focused on one of the causes of the vessel’s failure to float properly.

This is the Wikipedia paragraph he focused on:

"The use of different measuring systems on either side of the vessel caused its mass to be distributed asymmetrically, heavier to port. During construction both Swedish feet and Amsterdam feet were in use by different teams. Archaeologists have found four rulers used by the workmen who built the ship. Two were calibrated in Swedish feet, which had 12 inches, while the other two measured Amsterdam feet, which had 11 inches.”

My brother more or less suggested that it might make a good column subject for me.

Since brothers mince no words when they can slag each other I was going to dismiss his idea along the line of: “Oh Please, an article on the Vasa? And next you want me to write yet another article about the cause of the loss of the Titanic?”

But I didn’t, because on rereading the note I realized he was probably referring to the Amsterdam foot, which had only 11 inches and that made me wonder. Was it shorter than other 12 inch feet (made of shorter inches) or was it actually divided in 11 inches? I checked and, I kid you not, that foot has only 11 Amsterdam inches!

Ever since coming to the United States I have had to submit to living with fractions of 12 in feet and 32nds of inches, but working in units that are fractions of a prime number? That must have started as a joke, or somebody set that measure for very nefarious purposes and then it did not disappear by common sense, just like in the US, where we are still stuck with the English system of measurement.

But that is not what this column is about. It is about ship construction. Untangling ship construction furballs has been a big part of my life, and while we can argue whether to use English units, or metric units, or warp fractions, the real cause of the Vasa failure is not measurement units; the real cause sits higher up. What it is really related to is a failure to communicate.

The Vasa Museum in Stockholm, Sweden, displays the Vasa ship, fully recovered 17th century viking warship, on October 27, 2019.

There is only one glorious truth about ship construction: 

Ship construction is a Communication Exercise

Nothing beats this glorious truth. A good spec will help, a good design will help, committed builders will help, knowledgeable purchasers will help, but, in the end, only good communications can make the project succeed.

In every single ship construction disaster that we have been involved in, the actual cause of the failure was a failure to communicate.

A cost overrun is a failure to communicate. Cost overruns are a reality in ship construction. Someday I would like to see a ship built without a cost overrun, but building one-of-a-kind ships is really really difficult, and therefore there will be cost overruns whether paid for by the builder, paid for by the purchaser or shared. Not talking about a cost overrun the moment it raises its ugly head results in after the fact hyperventilating, paranoia, polarization, and all kinds of other mean and nasty things.

An argument over the color of the curtains in a cabin is a failure to communicate. In ship construction one can never assume that the builder and the purchaser have the same esthetics and therefore the color of the curtains needs to be locked down before material is ordered.

One may conclude that the onus to communicate is on the builder, but this is untrue. It is a complete and total two way street. A purchaser and a builder need to spend a significant amount of time before construction starts to become familiar with each other’s expectations.

I am not talking about specifications; I am talking about emotional expectations. What is fair to me, and what is fair to you? Not just in terms of money, but also in terms of hull fairness. What is my biggest concern? What is your biggest concern?

Some of these discussions may be quite awkward, but once these issues have been established, it will be possible to reach back to them and develop fair and reasonable solutions when things get difficult.

When I was young, I worked with somebody who always asked very sharp, almost rude, questions at the start of the project. Even I would feel a little uncomfortable and felt it would upset the customer. Today I know that it is not important to be friends at the start of the project; what is important is to be friends at the end of the project. Therefore, ask the difficult questions at the beginning, and tell your project partners that you ask those questions so the project can be finished as friends, and siblings at arms, instead of enemies.

Ship construction projects never are easy. There will always be complications, some rational, and some totally unexpected and wackadoodle, but not talking about them will not solve them.

Getting back to the Vasa, while it may have been inefficient to use two different measurement systems in the construction of the Vasa (something we still do today in ship construction), it did not have to result in a failure to float. As long as, at some stage, somebody pointed out to everybody else that there will be two measurement systems during construction. This may have been just before contract signing, or may at the cocktail party celebrating the signing, or maybe in the sauna.

Later in the game it would have been particularly annoying, but if there was no alternative, it would not automatically result in a failure to float. Communication will save the day.

Since I started with trivia I will end with trivia. Not everyone may remember it, but in 1981, Ronald Reagan, “The Great Communicator”, pulled the plug on earlier efforts to get rid of the English Measurement System in the US. A pointless move that, among others, resulted in a failed Mars Climate Orbiter Mission in 1998. We need an actual great communicator who can get the US to finally buy into the metric system.

YOU NEED A CANADIAN!

For every column I write, MREN has agreed to make a small donation to an organization of my choice. For this column I nominate the US Metric Association.  https://usma.org/#information-about Metric; Let’s get it done.

GREENWASHING
Chevron and Hess see key advantages for both deep-water and shale production

Lower-carbon footprints touted as a major selling point for both sources of production


Peaceful coexistence: Chevron and Hess executives see a need for both offshore and unconventional production in the decades to come 

Photo: CHEVRON

17 August 2021 
By Mark Passwaters
UPSTREAM
in Houston

Deep-water and unconventional oil and gas production have frequently been painted as adversaries, but Hess and Chevron leaders said Monday that their companies will be utilising both in the decades to come.

Shale plays have become appealing to producers with their cheap development costs and rapid production, while deep-water plays are more expensive to start but are more productive over the longer term.

“They seem like a story in contrasts,” said Chris Powers, Chevron's general manager of Strategy and Business Performance.

But the two have a couple of critical elements in common: With reduced break-even costs and both tending to have lower carbon emissions, unconventional and deep-water production could outlast other forms of oil and gas output, the executives said.

“Both deep-water and shale are essential to our future,” said Richard Lynch, senior vice president for Technology and Services at Hess.

Hess has partnered with ExxonMobil on a major oil find off the coast of Guyana, which could help push deep-water oil production higher in the coming years. Lynch said the company estimates global deep-water production could increase by 7 million barrels per day, to 17 million bpd, by 2030 — making up 10% of total global supply.

“Growth in deep-water is very strong (through 2040),” he said. “Deep-water grows much faster than most all others in the upstream.”


Challenge: Petrobras ponders plan for ultra-deepwater gasRead more

While much has been made of low break-even costs for shale plays, Lynch said break-even prices on the Guyana project were equal or lower. He said Phase 1 of the project had a break-even price of $30 per barrel, with Phase 2’s dropping to $25. Phase 3, which is under development, is estimated to have a break-even price of $32.

Chevron is an active player in the Permian basin and the deep-water Gulf of Mexico. Powers said those two plays highlight advantages which shale and deep-water commonly share: They are in regions with stable regulatory regimes, simplifying the exploration and development processes.

As increasing pressure is put on producers to reduce emissions, the lower carbon footprints of deep-water and shale plays only increase their attractiveness, officials from both companies said.

Powers said some technological advances first used in deep-water operations had synergies with onshore programmes and are now used in shale plays as well. A remote monitoring system, pioneered for use in deep-water, is also now used in the Permian.

“Shale and deep-water have proven they can deliver returns and will be key parts of the energy equation for years to come,” Powers said.(Copyright)

 

World’s First 100% Hydrogen Fuel Cell Powered Commercial Vessel Launched

MarineLink August 18, 2021

(Photo: All American Marine)

The world's first zero-emissions, hydrogen fuel cell-powered, electric-drive ferry has been launched and is gearing up for operational trials off the U.S. West Coast.

Constructed by Bellingham, Wash. shipbuilder All American Marine, Inc. (AAM), SWITCH Maritime's 70-foot newbuild Sea Change will operate in the California Bay Area as the United States' first hydrogen fuel cell vessel, developed to demonstrate a pathway to commercialization for zero-emission hydrogen fuel cell marine technologies. While still working on permitting of hydrogen fuel systems for maritime vessels with the U.S. Coast Guard, the completed ferry will exhibit the viability of this zero-carbon ship propulsion technology for the commercial and regulatory communities.

The project is funded by private capital from SWITCH, an impact investment platform building the first fleet of exclusively zero-carbon maritime vessels to accelerate the decarbonization and energy transition of the U.S. maritime sector. “By working closely with the U.S. Coast Guard, with innovative technology partners, and with best-in-class shipyards such as All American Marine, we can make the transition to decarbonized shipping a reality today,” said Pace Ralli, Co-Founder and CEO of SWITCH. “We don’t have to wait.”

SWITCH’s mission-driven platform seeks to work with existing ferry owners and operators around the country to help facilitate their adoption of zero-carbon vessels to replace aging diesel-powered vessels, leveraging significant experience from the technologies used in the build of this first ferry.

(Photo: All American Marine)

The vessel is equipped with a hydrogen fuel cell power package provided by Zero Emissions Industries (formerly Golden Gate Zero Emission Marine), comprised of 360 kW of Cummins fuel cells and Hexagon hydrogen storage tanks with a capacity of 246 kg. This system is integrated with 100 kWh of lithium-ion battery provided by XALT and a 2x 300 kW electric propulsion system provided by BAE Systems. The hydrogen fuel cell powertrain system affords the same operational flexibility as diesel with zero emissions and less maintenance. The vessel design originates from Incat Crowther, and the construction supervision and management is led by Hornblower Group.

“Hydrogen-fuel cell technology will prove to be a robust alternative to conventional powertrain technologies,” said Ron Wille, President & COO at AAM, a leading builder of hybrid-electric vessels in the United States. “AAM is continuing our tradition of building vessels on the leading edge of technology using advanced propulsion methods, which is why we are so proud to have to completed construction on such a revolutionary vessel.”

This project has received municipal support including a $3 million grant from the California Air Resources Board (CARB), administered by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), that comes from California Climate Investments, a California statewide initiative that puts billions of Cap-and-Trade dollars to work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, strengthen the economy, and improve public health and the environment – particularly in disadvantaged communities. Additionally, the project received the first ever loan guarantee under BAAQMD’s Climate Tech Finance program, which seeks to reduce greenhouse gases by accelerating emerging climate technologies. In partnership with the California Infrastructure Economic Development Bank and the Northern California Financial Development Corporation (NorCal FDC), the Climate Tech Finance team led a technology qualification and greenhouse gas analysis that deemed SWITCH eligible for a loan guarantee. This loan guarantee supported SWITCH in securing a $5 million construction and term loan with KeyBank, which enables SWITCH to bring this important project to completion.

(Photo: All American Marine)

 

Maersk Signs First Green Methanol Deal in Step Toward Dropping Fossil Fuels

 August 18, 2021

© Gestur / Adobe Stock

A.P. Moller-Maersk said on Wednesday it had signed a contract securing green methanol as the world's largest shipping firm gears up to operate its first carbon-neutral ship in 2023.

With about 90% of world trade transported by sea, global shipping accounts for nearly 3% of the world's CO2 emissions. Maersk needs to have a carbon-neutral fleet by 2030 to meet its target of net-zero emissions by 2050.

"Yes, it's one vessel, but it's a prototype for a scalable carbon-neutral solution for shipping," Morten Bo Christiansen, Maersk's head of decarbonization, told Reuters.

Maersk said it had signed its first deal with Denmark's REintegrate to produce roughly 10,000 tonnes of carbon neutral e-methanol, which the vessel will need to operate each year.

The company is also working on tackling challenges in securing the supply of fuel, which Christiansen pegged it at 20 million tonnes for the entire fleet. As the name suggests, green methanol is produced by using renewable sources such as biomass and solar energy.

"Let's stop talking about fossil fuels and instead focus on scaling this prototype because it's actually solving the problem," he said, while declining to give a time frame for when such a market would be realistic.

Future vessels fitted with engines that can run on green methanol will be 10-15% more expensive for the first years, while the cost of the fuel would cost more than twice as much as conventional bunker fuel, Christiansen said.

"The good news is that because of the amount of oil we consume we can actually start shaping a market just on our demand," Christiansen said.

He said while Maersk would carry the costlier vessels on its balance sheets, the additional fuel cost would be shared with its customers.

"But it's actually not that much more expensive, because even if we double our fuel cost, the impact on a pair of sneakers is less than five cents," Christiansen added.

Study finds blue hydrogen worse than gas or coal

 BLUE HYDROGEN IS A BIG OIL GIMMICK

'Expensive distraction': Chair of UK Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Association resigns citing blue hydrogen concerns

Cecilia Keating

18 August 2021 • 

• 
  

Image: 

A 3D rendering of a hydrogen storage tank | Credit: iStock

Protium CEO Chris Jackson claims blue hydrogen risks locking UK into reliance on fossil fuels as he quits the trade body

Chris Jackson has stepped down from his role as chair of the UK Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Association (UKHFCA), arguing that he is no longer able to advocate in good faith on behalf of 'blue' hydrogen made using fossil fuel gas coupled with carbon capture technology.

Jackson announced his resignation on Monday, just prior to the publication of the long-awaited UK Hydrogen Strategy, which confirmed the government's intention to take a "twin track" approach to scaling the low carbon fuel that will see support provided to both blue hydrogen as well as 'green' hydrogen, which is broadly regarded as more climate-friendly as it is produced using renewable energy.

Advocates of blue hydrogen argue that it is a critical transition energy source that would enable a raft of industries and processes - from home heating, transport, energy and heavy manufacturing - to decarbonise over the medium term while electrolyser capacity for producing green hydrogen is scaled up to meet growing demand. Several governments around the world have announced they intend to subsidise production of the low carbon fuel over the coming years as they seek to wean hard-to-abate industries off fossil fuels. In the UK, oil and gas giant BP is aiming to produce 1GW of the fuel at its H2 Teesside project by the end of this decade.

However, in a statement provided to trade publication H2 View earlier this week, Jackson expressed fears that the roll out of blue hydrogen could derail the UK's climate goals, because it risks keeping the country reliant on fossil fuel infrastructure and exploration for years to come, right when emissions need to be rapidly reduced to hit net zero targets. Blue hydrogen is produced using a process known as steam reforming, which splits methane from natural gas plants into its component parts of hydrogen and carbon, with most - but not all - of the resulting CO2 emissions mopped up using CCS.

"I believe passionately that I would be betraying future generations by remaining silent on that fact that blue hydrogen is at best an expensive distraction, and at worst a lock-in for continued fossil fuel use that guarantees we will fail to meet our decarbonisation goals," he said, echoing growing concerns raised by green groups in recent months.

Jackson, who is also the CEO and founder of green hydrogen outfit Protium, reiterated this sentiment in a statement provided to BusinessGreen on Wednesday, arguing his personal views on blue hydrogen meant that he could no longer "in good conscience" represent the interests of all players across the UK's fledgling hydrogen industry.

"Our industry is at a very important crossroad, one where the decisions we make will have long-lasting effects," he said. "I fully appreciate the energy transition cannot be achieved by one silver bullet, and green hydrogen alone cannot solve all the worlds challenges. Equally, I cannot ignore or make arguments for blue hydrogen being a viable and ‘green' energy solution (a fact also validated by external studies)."

"As chair of the UKHFCA, my role has been to represent the interests of all, even when I disagree," he added. "However, I feel I can no longer do this in good conscience. "There is a hugely important role for a trade group like the UKHFCA that can be a bridge between different interests, perspectives and companies. But it is also one that requires its leaders to hold positions of neutrality on some of the biggest questions the sector must answer. And I no longer feel that is consistent with my personal views on the role of hydrogen in the transition to a net zero world."

In a statement, UKHFCA CEO Celia Greaves thanked Jackson for his work as chair of the association and emphasised the body represented companies engaged in all types of hydrogen production. "We would like to thank Chris for his hard work on behalf of the association over the past 10 months and welcome his continued involvement on our executive committee," she said. "As the oldest and largest pan UK association, dedicated to the hydrogen sector and the fuel cell industry, our duty is to support stakeholders across the entire value chain and across all hydrogen production methods."

Jackson's resignation comes just a few days after a controversial academic study into the full lifecycle emissions of hydrogen produced by fossil fuel gas with carbon capture technology concluded its production could in some circumstances be worse for the climate than natural fossil fuelgas. The study estimated the emissions generated from the production of blue hydrogen are more than 20 per cent greater than burning natural gas or coal for heat and some 60 per cent greater than burning diesel oil for heat - although the study also drew criticism in some quarters over some of the assumptions used to draw its conclusions.

‘Blue hydrogen’ more carbon-intensive than gas and coal

By E&T editorial staff

Published Friday, August 13, 2021

A study by Cornell and Stanford University researchers has found that – despite being touted as an environmentally friendly approach to heating – blue hydrogen has a carbon footprint significantly greater than natural gas, coal and diesel.

Hydrogen is a potentially zero-carbon fuel source, producing just heat and water when burned or used in fuel cells and making it an attractive alternative to fossil fuels in transport, heating and industry. For instance, part of the UK government’s decarbonisation plan is a significant expansion in hydrogen to 5GW of capacity by 2030.

There are two approaches to producing hydrogen: blue hydrogen (produced by splitting natural gas into hydrogen and carbon dioxide) and green hydrogen (produced by splitting water via electrolysis into hydrogen and oxygen). While green hydrogen requires a large energy input, blue hydrogen cannot be described as a zero-emission fuel source, though it may be described as net-zero when used in conjunction with efficient carbon capture. Climate think tanks and campaigners have warned the UK government that blue hydrogen expansion will compromise its net-zero target.

The Cornell and Stanford researchers assessed the carbon footprint associated with blue hydrogen as defined by the US Department of Energy. The process begins by converting methane to hydrogen and carbon dioxide using heat, steam and pressure (grey hydrogen). Once some of the carbon dioxide has been captured and sequestered along with other impurities, it can be classed as blue hydrogen. This is a particularly energy-intensive process, with energy typically provided by burning more natural gas.

The researchers calculated that the carbon footprint to create blue hydrogen is more than 20 per cent greater than using either natural gas or coal directly for heat and 60 per cent greater than using diesel oil for heat.

“In the past, no effort was made to capture the carbon dioxide by-product of grey hydrogen and the greenhouse gas emissions have been huge,” said Professor Robert Howarth, a Cornell University environmental biologist. “Now the industry promotes blue hydrogen as a solution, an approach that still uses the methane from natural gas, while attempting to capture the by-product carbon dioxide. Unfortunately, emissions remain very large.”

Methane is a potent greenhouse gas: more than 100 times stronger as an atmospheric warming agent than carbon dioxide when first emitted. The UN’s recent climate change report called on governments to focus on cutting methane emissions in addition to decarbonisation efforts.

Emissions of blue hydrogen are less than for grey hydrogen by nine per cent to 12 per cent. The researchers wrote: “Blue hydrogen is hardly emissions free. Blue hydrogen as a strategy only works to the extent it is possible to store carbon dioxide long-term indefinitely into the future without leakage back to the atmosphere.”

Commenting on indiscriminate political support for hydrogen, Howarth said: “Political forces may not have caught up with the science yet. Even progressive politicians may not understand for what they’re voting. Blue hydrogen sounds good, sounds modern and sounds like a path to our energy future. It is not.”

The researchers emphasised the difference between blue hydrogen and green hydrogen, the latter of which has not yet been commercially realised.

“The best hydrogen, the green hydrogen derived from electrolysis - if used widely and efficiently - can be that path to a sustainable future,” said Howarth. “Blue hydrogen is totally different.”

UK hydrogen strategy 'needs clearer focus on renewables'

Trade body RenewableUK slams government plans for seeming to treat blue and green hydrogen as ‘interchangeable’

The UK government has launched a consultation on its new Hydrogen Strategy 

(pic credit: AsimPatel/Wikimedia Commons)


17 August 2021 by Craig Richard


The UK government aims to have 5GW of low-carbon hydrogen production capacity by 2030, but industry group Renewables UK has criticised the strategy for not focusing enough on developing a green hydrogen industry.

The government is consulting on using a business model similar to the contracts for difference (CfDs) used for renewable energy tenders in the UK in an attempt to reduce the cost gap between low-carbon hydrogen and fossil fuels.

Under the plan, the government would work with industry to assess the feasibility of mixing 20% hydrogen into the existing gas supply and determine what is needed from the UK’s network and storage infrastructure to support the hydrogen sector.

It is consulting on the design of a £240 million (€282 million) net-zero hydrogen fund to support the commercial deployment of low-carbon hydrogen production plants across the UK.

The government also plans to use a “twin track” approach to supporting multiple technologies, featuring a mix of green and blue hydrogen. Green hydrogen is made when renewable energy is fed through water, splitting oxygen from hydrogen molecules. Meanwhile, blue hydrogen is made by using methane to split natural gas to produce hydrogen and carbon dioxide, though some of the carbon dioxide is then captured.

Researchers from Cornell and Stanford Universities last week said blue hydrogen may be more harmful than gas and coal.
Not green enough

RenewableUK CEO Dan McGrail today said that the government’s strategy “doesn’t focus nearly enough on developing the UK’s world-leading green hydrogen industry”.

“The government must use the current consultation period to amend its plans and set out a clear ambition for green hydrogen,” he added. “We’re urging the government to set a target of 5GW of renewable hydrogen electrolyser capacity by 2030, as well as setting out a roadmap to get us there, to show greater leadership on tackling climate change.”

Meanwhile, director of future electricity systems at RenewableUK Barnaby Wharton said that both green and blue hydrogen would be needed to meet net zero targets, as green hydrogen is “truly zero carbon”, while blue hydrogen “can provide volume”. He said the government appeared to be treating the two as interchangeable and that he was concerned that creating a single market mechanism for both would be a “struggle”.

The government believes a UK hydrogen economy could be worth £900 million and create more than 9,000 jobs by 2020. This could then grow to being worth £13 billion and creating 100,000 jobs by 2050, by which point it could account for 20-35% of the UK’s energy consumption, it believes.

Study finds blue hydrogen worse than gas or coal

 Adis AjdinAugust 16, 2021

 Xodus

The carbon footprint of creating blue hydrogen is more than 20% greater than using either natural gas or coal directly for heat, or about 60% greater than using diesel oil for heat, according to joint research by Cornell and Stanford universities in the US.

The paper, which was published in Energy Science and Engineering, warned that blue hydrogen may be a distraction or something that may delay needed action to truly decarbonise the global energy economy.

A research team claimed blue hydrogen requires large amounts of natural gas to produce and said that even with the most advanced carbon capture and storage technology, there are a significant amount of CO2 and methane emissions that won’t be caught.

Blue hydrogen sounds good, sounds modern and sounds like a path to our energy future, it is not

Professors from the universities calculated that these fugitive emissions from producing hydrogen could eclipse those associated with extracting and burning gas when multiplied by the amount of gas required to make an equivalent amount of energy from hydrogen.

The paper comes hot on the heels of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report claiming methane has contributed about two-thirds as much to global warming as CO2 and as many governments are looking to invest in hydrogen production.

Robert Howarth, a Cornell University professor and co-author of the study, said: “Political forces may not have caught up with the science yet. Even progressive politicians may not understand for what they’re voting. Blue hydrogen sounds good, sounds modern and sounds like a path to our energy future. It is not.”

The UK is high up on the list of countries aiming to put blue hydrogen at the core of its energy transition agenda. UK energy consultancy Xodus recently launched a new report urging a bolder vision to enable the country to become a global leader in the adoption of hydrogen. The researchers, on the other hand, recommended a focus on green hydrogen, which is made using renewable electricity to extract hydrogen from water, leaving only oxygen as a byproduct.

“This best-case scenario for producing blue hydrogen, using renewable electricity instead of natural gas to power the processes, suggests to us that there really is no role for blue hydrogen in a carbon-free future. Greenhouse gas emissions remain high, and there would also be a substantial consumption of renewable electricity, which represents an opportunity cost. We believe renewable electricity could be better used by society in other ways, replacing the use of fossil fuels.”

UK Government to investigate electricity deals that may not be as 'green' as they claim

The review comes after a poll showed 75% of consumers believe suppliers should be more transparent over their green tariffs.

Consumer protection advocates and price comparison services have also called for greater transparency around suppliers who market their tariffs as green (Image: PA)

The UK Government is set to review electricity tariffs that claim to be "green" over concerns some energy firms could be exaggerating their environmental benefits.

Energy minister Anne-Marie Trevelyan said nine million households across the UK are on tariffs branded "100% renewable" or "green". But industry figures have warned that the claims may be misleading and are calling for changes to rules over the labelling.

Energy companies are currently able to market tariffs as "green" even if some of the energy they supply to customers comes from fossil fuels. They do this by purchasing Renewable Energy Guarantees of Origin certificates to offset the use of fossil fuels, with each certificate guaranteeing a similar amount of green energy is produced.

READ MORE
Green and brown energy difference explained plus the top three suppliers to switch to this year

But energy companies are not compelled to reveal how much of their energy is based on the purchase of certificates against those supplying electricity directly from renewable sources, such as wind farms.

Options being explored include looking at whether the system around these certificates needs to be smarter, as well as whether suppliers need to provide clearer information to householders about their green tariffs.

MoneySavingExpert.com is currently reviewing how they rank suppliers that offer such tariffs given the concerns raised as “this is not the first time such worries have been aired”.

The UK Government is also planning to investigate third-party intermediaries in the retail energy market, including price comparison sites, auto-switching services and non-domestic brokers, after figures showed about half of households now use them when engaging with the energy market.

They currently operate outside of retail market rules, and ministers will seek views on whether a regulatory framework is needed.

Ms Trevelyan said: "Millions of UK households are choosing to make the green switch and more of our energy comes from renewables. But I want people to know that when they sign up to a green tariff, they are investing in companies that make a conscious choice to invest in renewable energy. Part of that is ensuring companies are being as transparent as possible on where their power comes from."

According to a recent YouGov poll for Scottish Power and Good Energy, nearly two thirds of UK energy consumers say their purchasing decisions are influenced by how eco-friendly an energy tariff is.

However, three quarters believe suppliers should be open and transparent about their tariffs, including how much of their renewable energy they buy from other companies

Consumer protection advocates and price comparison services have also called for greater transparency around suppliers who market their tariffs as green.