'MAYBE' TECH

Sucking carbon out of the air promises to reverse our emissions. Will it work?

CO2 removal is proving costly and difficult to scale up.

The Orca facility, in Iceland, is intended to pull 4,000 tons of carbon dioxide out of the air each year.Halldor Kolbeins/Getty

Jackson Ryan
Nov. 8, 2021 

On March 19, the flat-topped Icelandic volcano known as Fagradalsfjall provided one of the most Instagrammable eruptions of all time. People flocked to the site to watch lava slither down the volcano's side for the first time in 800 years. The last time the volcano erupted, in the 13th century, carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere were well below 300 parts per million (ppm).

But around 100 years ago, humanity saw carbon dioxide levels breach that mark. They've continued to rise exponentially throughout the 20th century, and six years ago they smashed through the 400ppm mark.

The cause is, unequivocally, human activity. Burning fossil fuels sends carbon dioxide into the atmosphere where it lingers for centuries (maybe even millennia). The molecule is good at trapping heat and forms something of a blanket over the Earth.

The most recent report, published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in August, revealed that our excess carbon dioxide emissions have resulted in a 1.1 degree Celsius increase in temperatures since preindustrial times. Scientists say temperatures will continue to rise as carbon dioxide levels increase, resulting in more extreme weather events, more heat, more drought and a catastrophic decline in biodiversity.

The Fagradalsfjall volcano in Iceland began erupting in March. Saul Loeb/Getty

If humans have pumped all that excess carbon dioxide into the air, why don't we just try to vacuum it back up? Literally. Why not suck carbon dioxide out of the air? This concept, known as "direct air capture," or DAC, has been discussed for decades, but testing and deploying machines to perform the task has proven challenging, mostly because they are costly and inefficient.

As world leaders, activists and academics meet in Glasgow for COP26, the UN's premier climate summit, CNET Science has been examining some of the technological advances being developed to help tackle the climate crisis. While technology might help us adapt or mitigate the effects of climate change, alone it's not a solution to the problem.

With direct air capture facilities coming online and looking to expand, can we expect them to be a viable tool to reverse carbon emissions? Or are we getting sucked into the spin?

Ghost in the machine

Imagine 1 million particles of "air." The vast majority of these particles are nitrogen and, to a lesser extent, oxygen. Only about 412 particles are carbon dioxide, the heat-trapping greenhouse gas.

This is a simplistic view of air, but it helps describe the complex task a DAC machine has to carry out -- taking in millions and millions of particles of air and sifting through them to grab carbon dioxide.

To do so, DAC facilities use a series of huge fans to suck in ambient air and push it through a filter laced with chemicals that carbon dioxide reacts with and sticks to. Think of it as a specialized kind of flypaper. The CO2 gets trapped, while the other components of air pass right through.

The Climeworks system sucks in ambient air and traps CO2. The captured CO2 is mixed with water and pumped deep into the Earth where it can stay for millennia.Climeworks

Heat, pressure or other chemicals can unstick the concentrated carbon dioxide. You could squirrel away this stock of CO2 underground, mix it with water and inject it into the Earth where it mineralizes and turns to stone. Voila! You've just removed CO2 from the atmosphere.

But since carbon dioxide makes up such a tiny fraction of the air we breathe, DAC facilities need to take a whole lot in. This requires energy. The heating of the filter to free the concentrated CO2 also requires energy. If that energy is provided by fossil fuels, well… you can see the conundrum.

There are 19 direct air capture facilities in operation around the world, according to the International Energy Agency. Fifteen of these are operated by Swiss company Climeworks, and its most recent DAC facility highlights both the promise of vacuuming up CO2 and the remaining hurdles to large-scale builds.

870 cars

The crown jewel in Climeworks' operations is Orca, which lies just an hour away from Fagradalsfjall, at the Hellisheidi geothermal plant. It's the world's largest DAC facility. Orca opened two months ago, on Sept. 9, and has been sucking up CO2 ever since.

The world's largest such plant to date, Orca captures around 4,000 tons of carbon dioxide each year -- a very small amount, equivalent to taking just 870 cars off the road.

Climeworks has the backing of influential brands, like Shopify and Microsoft, which have purchased future removal of CO2 as the facility expands. The Climeworks team plans to scale up the Orca plant by 2024 and is shooting for a global rollout in 2027 which, it says, would see a hundredfold increase in removal.

Iceland is an ideal location for Orca because it sits on top of a fault line between two tectonic plates, bringing heat and magma closer to the surface. Fagradalsfjall's eruption is a beautiful consequence of this location, and it also means there's an abundance of geothermal energy -- a renewable energy source that uses heat generated within the earth. DAC uses energy supplied by the Hellisheidi Geothermal Power Plant.

The volcanic landscape also means there's basalt rock deep below the surface. Once Orca removes CO2 from the air, a nearby facility, run by Icelandic company Carbfix, injects it into this basalt layer. Within two years, the CO2 turns to stone and can be locked away for millennia.

It's important to note here that DAC is different from other carbon capture technologies, often referred to under the umbrella of "carbon capture, utilization and storage," or CCUS. These technologies have been developed and touted by fossil fuel industries as a way to try to capture carbon dioxide during burning of oil and gas -- that's a whole other issue covered very well by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Sometimes, DAC has been tarred with the same brush.

Nevertheless, large-scale facilities are being planned in the US and Scotland. A rival DAC company, Carbon Engineering, is hoping to eventually suck 1 million metric tons of CO2 out of the air at its facility in the US Permian Basin, the equivalent of taking around 200,000 cars off the road.

That's a big number, but as of 2020 global emissions were still reaching around 31.6 billion metric tons per year, and it's not clear they've peaked.

The spin and the cost

When Orca came online in September, climate scientist Peter Kalmus tweeted that he was rooting for it, but "only a fool would bet the planet on it."

Direct air capture is a promising technology, but there are a few major hurdles. The first is that the technology is prohibitively expensive. Taking one ton of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere can cost between $100 and $600 -- or as much as $1,000. Carbon pricing, which forces fossil fuel polluters to pay for their emissions, is much cheaper.

That means that, at present, it's more cost-effective to emit carbon dioxide than to pull it out of the air. "It's really not good bang for your buck," says Alia Armstead, a climate researcher at the Australia Institute, a Canberra-based think tank.

To make DAC truly carbon negative, you also need to find good renewable sources of energy to power your removal plants. That's easy in highly volcanic Iceland, but access to renewables isn't as easy across the world. Some critics suggest the money invested in DAC would be better going directly to renewable projects -- preventing carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere in the first place.

Mark Jacobson, a civil and environmental engineer at Stanford University, told CNET in February that lobbyists for carbon capture technologies, including DAC removal, are "basically lying to the public about the benefits." He's also said government support for the tech is a subsidy that would keep the fossil fuel industry in business.

But support from governments and private organizations is growing. Two weeks ago, the US Department of Energy announced $14.5 million to scale up DAC facilities, stating in a release that DAC is "critical to combatting the current climate crisis and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050." On Nov. 5, it announced a "Carbon Negative Earthshot" to accelerate research and innovation and to drive down removal costs. And earlier this year, Elon Musk's XPrize foundation fronted $100 million to help develop carbon capture technologies, with a winner expected to be announced in April 2025.

While there is growing support for carbon removal technologies, scientists widely recognize that DAC cannot replace the need to decarbonize. In addition, technological progress has been slow. Even with increased support, it remains too slow to keep us from overshooting the climate targets set out in the Paris Agreement.

"We need to invest in technologies that do work, and that can reduce emissions today, not in five or 10 years," says Armstead.

'MAYBE' TECH

AUSTRALIA

Can Moomba live up to the hype? Santos’ $220m carbon capture storage project

The first project registered for the government’s CCS carbon credits program is also claimed to be one of the world’s biggest

A model of Santos’ Moomba carbon capture storage project was on display in the Australian government’s pavilion at Cop26. 

Photograph: Santos Ltd/PR IMAGE

Supported by
A

Graham Readfearn
@readfearn
Mon 8 Nov 2021 16.30 GMT


About 800km north of Adelaide in the middle of the South Australia desert, an oil and gas company is working on a high-profile project to capture and store carbon dioxide.

It’s claimed to be one of the world’s biggest carbon capture projects and lauded by the federal government, but what is actually going on at Moomba?

Can this $220m project led by Santos really live up to the hype and will it store enough CO2 to make a difference?

What’s the hype?

The Santos chief executive, Kevin Gallagher, travelled to Glasgow for the start of the international climate talks to stand alongside Australia’s emissions reduction minister, Angus Taylor, and confirm the company’s investment in the project.

Gallagher said: “This carbon reduction project in the South Australian outback will be one of the biggest and lowest cost in the world and will safely and permanently store 1.7m tonnes of carbon dioxide per year in the same reservoirs that held oil and gas in place for tens of millions of years.”

The project is the first carbon capture and storage scheme to be registered as eligible to generate carbon credits under the Morrison government’s emissions reduction fund (ERF).

A model of the project was on display at the government’s pavilion during the first days of the Cop26 climate talks.

How will it work?

According to an environmental report submitted to the South Australian government in March, Santos will look to capture CO2 currently being vented to the atmosphere from its existing gas plant at Moomba.

That gas will be compressed and transported through new or existing pipelines “to suitable locations where it will be injected into target geological formations deep underground”.


Australia’s emissions from land clearing likely far higher than claimed, analysis indicates

Last year, the company told an industry roundtable it had identified six sites up to 60km away from Moomba that could be used for CO2 storage. Santos has said in the future it could store CO2 from other sources and third parties.
Will the project actually cut emissions?

Santos claims Moomba will be one of the world’s largest CCS projects and will store 1.7m tonnes of CO2-equivalent a year with the potential to scale up to 20m tonnes a year.

For context, 1.7m tonnes of CO2 is about 0.35% of Australia’s current annual emissions of 494.2m tonnes.

Operators of Australia’s biggest CCS scheme, Gorgon Carbon Dioxide Injection project, off the north-west coast of WA, say it can store 4m tonnes of CO2 a year but has missed targets.

According to Santos’ latest climate change report, the company emitted 5m tonnes of CO2-equivalent in the financial year 2019-20 when all its direct and indirect energy use was added up.

Santos has a target to cut these emissions by 26% by 2030 and to reach net zero by 2040, but this aim excludes emissions from burning the fossil fuels the company sells to customers.

According to Santos, these emissions – known as scope 3 – added another 24.3m tonnes of CO2e to the atmosphere in 2019-20.

But the climate impact of those scope 3 emissions will continue to grow because the company has a target to double its production of fossil fuels between 2018 and 2025.

Santos has a 66.7% share in the Moomba project, with the rest owned by Beach Energy. Both companies have said the project will help them cut their own emissions.

Capturing, processing and transporting the CO2 will also use extra energy. The Guardian asked Santos how this would affect the overall emissions reductions from injecting the CO2, but the company did not respond before publishing.
Is this a new plan?

Santos has been talking about capturing and storing CO2 from its gas processing plant at Moomba since at least 2006.


Australia considering more than 100 fossil fuel projects that could produce 5% of global industrial emissions


A 2007 information sheet from Santos describes how a demonstration phase “could commence as early as 2010” to capture CO2 from gas operations at Moomba and pump it into partly depleted fossil fuel reservoirs.

This, the document said, would “re-pressurise the reservoirs and sweep residual oil left behind by traditional recovery methods (this is called enhanced oil recovery)”.

The Guardian asked Santos if pumping CO2 into its reservoirs would push out extra oil or gas and, if it did, what the company would do with those fossil fuels. Santos did not respond before publishing.

Just days before the 2007 federal election, the Coalition led by John Howard promised it would give Santos $10m to fast-track a “‘Moomba Carbon Storage Concept” if it was elected. Howard lost the election to Kevin Rudd.

In 2009, Santos put the project “on hold” but by 2018 it was carrying out engineering studies, modelling and looking for potential sites for CO2 injection.

In June this year, the project was given a $15m grant from a $50m federal government program to support CCS.

But Santos had said the project’s future hinged on CCS being accredited by the government’s emissions reduction fund, meaning they could generate carbon credits that could be sold to the government or private industry.

In early 2021, the government installed several fossil fuel industry leaders and supporters to the panel that would decide if CCS should be added to the ERF.

In October, the government made CCS eligible for carbon credits and the Moomba project has now become the first project to be registered.

'MAYBE' TECH

US outlines vision for cheap, large-scale carbon capture technology
By Nick Lavars
November 07, 2021

Capturing carbon dioxide from the air is currently expensive, but a new venture from the US Department of Energy aims to change that

Preventing global warming from reaching dangerous levels will require dramatic steps to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide pouring into the atmosphere, but many see removing and safely storing what is already there as another critical part of the solution. A new initiative from the US Department of Energy (DOE) makes these technologies a key pillar in its plan to tackle climate change, outlining ambitions to significantly drive down the cost and foster innovations that allow for storage on a mass scale by mid-century.

Though the idea has been around for decades, the idea of extracting carbon dioxide from the air has gathered momentum in the past few years, largely on the back of startups making some key inroads in the space. A notable example is Swiss startup Climeworks, whose Direct Air Capture (DAC) systems collect CO2 from the ambient air and turn it into solid minerals that can be stored underground.

This technology was brought to life in the world's first negative emission power plant in 2017, and earlier this year the company opened the world's largest DAC plant in Iceland. Called Orca, the plant has the capacity to harvest around 4,000 tons of CO2 from the air each year. For context, humans pump out more than 30 billion tons, or 30 gigatons, into the air on a yearly basis.

So while the technology has been successfully demonstrated on a small scale, the world would need many Orcas to properly put a dent in the problem. And then comes the cost. Climeworks was able capture a ton of CO2 for around US$600 when it first opened its negative emissions plant in 2017, but by using a modular design for its DAC systems, expects this cost to come down toward $100 per ton as it scales up operations.

And this price point is a commonly held target among carbon capture startups. Canadian company Carbon Engineering is currently working on a large-scale DAC plant capable of capturing up to one million tons of CO2, and hopes to do so for a cost of $94 to $232 per ton. Australian startup Southern Green Gas plans to tap into the country's abundant sunlight to fuel solar-powered DAC plants that collect tons of carbon for as little as $72 a piece.

The US Department of Energy has been making moves to help things along, last year investing $22 million into research efforts that advance carbon capture technology, followed by a further $24 million this year. Its latest venture in this space is called the “Carbon Negative Shot" and is described as the US government's first major effort in carbon dioxide removal, and key to its plans of achieving net zero emissions by 2050.

The initiative centers on the ambition of deploying carbon capture technologies on a gigaton scale by 2050. According to the DOE, a gigaton of CO2 is around the amount generated by 250 million vehicles, or the US's entire light-duty fleet, each year. Getting the technology to this point would require some significant developments both in the technology itself and the capacity to deploy it on a massive, unprecedented scale.

The DOE hopes that through its Carbon Negative Shot program, it can give this burgeoning industry the shot in the arm it needs. Part of its efforts to accelerate innovation in the area will involve working with individual communities that might benefit from or be willing to take part in carbon capture programs. Ultimately, the venture aims to reduce the cost of carbon removal and storage to less than $100 per ton.

“By slashing the costs and accelerating the deployment of carbon dioxide removal – a crucial clean energy technology – we can take massive amounts of carbon pollution directly from the air and combat the climate crisis,” says Secretary of Energy Jennifer M. Granholm. “With our Carbon Negative Shot, we can help remove the greenhouse gases already warming our planet and affecting our health – positioning America as a net-zero leader and creating good-paying jobs for a transitioning clean energy workforce. The combination of the Carbon Negative Shot with our massive investments in hydrogen, battery storage, renewables and decarbonized fossil energy, can make net-zero emissions a reality here and abroad.”

Source: US Department of Energy

 

'We're Here To Call For Climate Justice,' Say Glasgow Protesters

"We're drops in the ocean, but eventually, those drops add up to something big."

Climate protesters gather for the Global Day of Action for Climate Justice march on November 6, 2021 in Glasgow, Scotland. Jeff J Mitchell / Getty Images

Mark Hertsgaard

This story is part of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism collaboration strengthening coverage of the climate story.

GLASGOW, SCOTLAND — "I'd feel ridiculous if I weren't here," said Tom Birch, a teacher from Edinburg, as he carried a sign reading "Soon Humanity Will Be Net-Zero." Birch was among the many tens of thousands of marchers who filled the streets of Glasgow, host of the United Nations COP26 climate conference, on Saturday as part of a Global Day for Climate Justice. "You get lifted up seeing all these people who care, who aren't just sitting at home in our silos complaining," he added. "This is the moment to make our voices heard. It's our last chance."

"Pledges are not action," read the back of Birch's sign, summarizing many activists' critique of the net-zero emissions pledges that governments and corporations have made at COP26. Eva Wewgorski, a librarian from Edinburgh who created the sign, said that "World leaders are acting like these pledges will solve the problem. But there've been countless pledges over the decades that haven't been kept, so why should we believe them now?"

Coming at the midway point of the two-week COP 26 conference, the Global Day for Climate Justice also featured demonstrations in London, Paris, South Korea, Indonesia, and the Philippines. The Guardian reported that there were more than 300 protests worldwide, with 100 in the United Kingdom alone.

Although the Glasgow march included representatives of Indigenous peoples from South America and youth activists such as Vanessa Nakate of Uganda, most of the crowd were locals judging from the paucity of umbrellas, despite bursts of heavy rain and gusty winds. "We're used to the rain," a local soccer coach and shopkeeper who gave only his first name, Niall, said with a grin.

Wearing uniforms of sparkling gold lamé, a dozen musicians with a local brass band called "Brass, Aye?" got marchers dancing with pulsing renditions of "When the Saints Go Marching In" and other New Orleans standards. "We're here to call for climate justice and bring a bit of joy and vibrancy to this march," said Scott, a blonde trombone player who directed the group.

A second group of street artists dressed head to toe in blood red, with faces painted white and set in grim expressions, stayed completely silent as they marched through Nelson Mandela Place in the heart of the city on their way to the march's terminus on the Glasgow Green.

"Inside that conference of polluters, the climate criminals are hiding behind barbed wire and fences and lines of police," Asad Rehman of the COP26 Coalition of activist groups, told the crowd on Glasgow Green. "We're not going to accept their suicide pact."

Police officers in yellow vests were especially noticeable around an office building of Scottish Power, the electric utility, at the intersection of St. Vincent and North streets. Positioned 10 paces apart behind metal barriers that confined the marchers to the middle of the street, the officers stood with hands folded across their waists, watchful but not aggressive. As the crowd passed by at 2pm, a rainbow briefly illuminated the northern sky, leading a mother pushing a toddler in a stroller to remark, "That's a nice omen, isn't it?"

"The right to protest is a cornerstone of democracy; it's a direct way to speak to your leaders without having to wait for an election," said Danielle, 19, a Glasgow resident marching with a contingent from Tear Fund, a Christian NGO working to alleviate poverty in the Global South through advancing social justice rather than conventional foreign aid. "Movements develop over time," she added. "Generations of people have been doing this kind of witnessing for years, and world leaders are starting to listen because of that. Eventually, you reach a watershed moment, and that's what's happening now."

Carrying signs quoting a verse from the Old Testament book of Micah—"Act justly, love mercy, walk humbly," Danielle and three other young women with Tear Fund set off from a muddy hillside in Kelvingrove Park where long strips of yellow cloth spelled out, "Amazonia For Life: Protect 80% by 2025."

"Countries in the Global South are paying more to service their debt than the $100 billion a year in climate reparations they're supposed to get at COP," said Mollie Somerville, a grandmother marching with a group whose yellow vests read, "Cancel the Debt for Climate Justice." "That debt is owed mostly to private banks that are making huge profits and don't need that money," she said. "No, I haven't heard COP leaders talk about this issue yet, but there's still time, so I'm hoping that this march will put pressure on them."

"Protests like this, it gives people a feeling of solidarity, knowing that we're not alone," added Somerville, who said she was "extremely worried" about the future awaiting her three grandchildren and a fourth expected next week. "I think government and business leaders see that these protests are getting bigger and the time for action is now. Standing here in the cold and the rain, that's why we do this. At times, it feels like we're drops in the ocean. But eventually, those drops add up to something big."

Mark Hertsgaard is the co-founder and executive director of Covering Climate and the environment correspondent for The Nation.

• 'Shame on You!': Climate Activists Confront World Leaders at Lavish ... ›
• U.S. Doesn't Sign Pact to Quit Coal at COP26 - EcoWatch ›
• Logistical Nightmares Hamper COP26 Negotiations - EcoWatch ›
• Indigenous Groups Officially Excluded From COP26, Continue ... ›
• 'Test for Humanity': What's at Stake at COP26? - EcoWatch ›

covering climate now cop26 activism climate crisis 

 GREAT BARRIER REEF

Only Two Percent of the Great Barrier Reef Has Escaped Coral Bleaching

 Olivia Rosane 

Nov. 05, 2021 

Coral bleaching in the Great Barrier Reef. Brett Monroe Garner / Getty Images

The Great Barrier Reef is in trouble.

It has experienced five mass bleaching events since 1998, three of them in the last five years. Now, new research published in Current Biology Thursday finds that only two percent of the reef escaped some bleaching during that time.

"This is one of the most confronting results of my career," study lead author Terry Hughes, from the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies at James Cook University, Tweeted.

Coral bleaching occurs when higher than average water temperatures force coral to expel the algae that provide them with nutrients and color, Phys.org explained. As the climate crisis persists, marine heat waves are leading to more frequent, intense and widespread bleaching events.

"Five bouts of mass bleaching since 1998 have turned the Great Barrier Reef into a checkerboard of reefs with very different recent histories, ranging from two percent of reefs that have escaped bleaching altogether, to 80 percent that have now bleached severely at least once since 2016," Hughes told Phys.org.

The researchers found that corals did have a better chance of adapting to higher temperatures if they survived a previous bleaching event, CNN explained. However, the time between bleaching events has decreased, giving corals less time to recover. Recent bleaching events occurred in 2016, 2017 and 2020, according to Phys.org.

Another paper also published in Current Biology Thursday shows another way in which these bleaching events have made the reef more vulnerable over time. The last three major bleaching events may have reduced the reefs' larvae supply by 26, 50 and 71 percent, in chronological order. This has made it harder for the reef to recover, but there are potential coral "refugia" in 13 percent of the reef, which have avoided temperature spikes. These refugia could spread larvae to 58 percent of the total reef, the study found.

Both studies come as the COP26 climate conference is taking place in Glasgow, and the authors warned that protecting the reef means sticking to the most ambitious Paris agreement goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels.

"We don't yet know how long those thermal refuges will exist. They won't last forever," University of Queensland Professor Peter Mumby, a co-author on the second study, told The Guardian. "There are still healthy reefs producing larvae, but if we see these patterns [of warming] continue you would expect it would affect rates of coral recovery. One of the biggest concerns is even if we can stick to the 1.5C target, we still have committed warming."

The most recent analyses show that the promises world leaders have made so far at COP26 could put the world on track for 1.9 or 1.8 degrees Celsius of warming. But Hughes told The Guardian that likely won't be enough to save the Great Barrier Reef.

"So far 1.1C [of warming] has been sufficient to trigger five mass bleaching events," he said. "The higher the temperature goes, the more difficult it will be. I am confident [corals reefs] could handle another 0.3C of warming, but they will struggle at 1.9C and there's a lot of optimism in that 1.9C figure."

Big Finance commits $100tn-plus to tackle net-zero challenge

Carney-led GFANZ under pressure to dispel greenwashing concerns

A giant Earth looms over a meeting hall at the United Nations' COP26 climate change conference in Glasgow, Scotland, on Nov. 2. The financial sector has been playing a growing role in the global push to decarbonize. © Reuters

KYOHEI SUGA, 

Nikkei staff writer

November 8, 2021

TOKYO -- Banks, insurers, asset managers and others worldwide have committed more than $100 trillion in private capital to achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions over the next three decades as the financial sector takes a leading role in advancing technological and societal shifts.

More than 450 companies and other organizations now aim for net-zero emissions across their portfolios by 2050, according to the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero. GFANZ was launched in April by former Bank of England Gov. Mark Carney, the United Nations special envoy for climate action and finance.

The framework so far has served mainly to demonstrate a commitment to net zero, an executive at an asset manager said. But with members now responsible for more than $130 trillion in global financial assets -- almost doubling compared with the start -- they face growing pressure to turn talk into action.

Overall, GFANZ holds roughly 40% of the world's global financial assets. Members include some of the world's biggest financial companies, such as Bank of America, BNP Paribas, Citi, HSBC, Morgan Stanley and UBS. Eighteen Japanese institutions have also signed up, including the three megabanks -- Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group and Mizuho Financial Group -- as well as Nippon Life Insurance and Nomura Asset Management.

Moving forward, members will work toward such goals as reducing emissions by around 50% over 10 years, updating environmental targets every five years and disclosing progress annually. This is expected to put greater pressure on businesses that receive financing or investment from these institutions to disclose their own emissions and reduction plans.

About 30 asset managers that have been with GFANZ from the beginning had already set new interim targets through 2030 as of mid-October. Japan's Asset Management One said it will dedicate more than half of its portfolio to companies that either have or plan to achieve net-zero emissions. It will consider divesting from companies that refuse climate-related engagement.

The International Energy Agency has estimated that the world needs around $70 trillion in investment by 2040 to meet climate targets set by the Paris Agreement. GFANZ assets could provide a major boost.

But whether members of the coalition can truly achieve net-zero emissions across their portfolios by 2050 remains unclear.

Unlike asset managers, which can reallocate money in their portfolios based on what environmentally minded asset owners want, banks will need to engage in careful dialogue to persuade borrowers to accelerate decarbonization efforts.

"We can't take actions that are too disruptive, like just pulling financing from companies," an executive at a Japanese megabank said. Banks account for $66 trillion, or about half, of GFANZ assets.

A quicker transition to net zero will curb climate-related risks. But if financial institutions turn up the pressure too fast, more businesses could give up on decarbonization altogether. "It is extremely difficult to find the right balance," MUFG President and CEO Hironori Kamezawa said.

GFANZ has also faced criticism from the nonprofit sector. In an open letter this October, 90-plus groups raised concerns that "banks and other financial institutions are using 'Net Zero' promises largely as greenwash."

"In fact, many financial institutions, since becoming members of GFANZ, have issued new financing to companies expanding fossil fuel infrastructure," the letter said.

"Financial institutions are playing a greater role in decarbonization," said Takahide Kiuchi, executive economist at the Nomura Research Institute. "These institutions will need to take measures to increase transparency if distrust persists."

 

2.5-Billion-Year-Old Rocks Reveal Volcanic Eruptions Spurred First “Whiffs” of Oxygen in Earth’s Atmosphere

By UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON NOVEMBER 6, 2021

Roger Buick in 2004 at the Mount McRae Shale in Western Australia. Rocks drilled near here show “whiffs” of oxygen occurred before the Great Oxidation Event, 2.4 billion years ago. New analyses show a slightly earlier spike in the element mercury emitted by volcanoes, which could have boosted populations of single-celled organisms to produce a temporary “whiff” of oxygen. Credit: Roger Buick/University of Washington

A new analysis of 2.5-billion-year-old rocks from Australia finds that volcanic eruptions may have stimulated population surges of marine microorganisms, creating the first puffs of oxygen into the atmosphere. This would change existing stories of Earth’s early atmosphere, which assumed that most changes in the early atmosphere were controlled by geologic or chemical processes.

Though focused on Earth’s early history, the research also has implications for extraterrestrial life and even climate change. The study led by the University of Washington, the University of Michigan and other institutions was published recently in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

“What has started to become obvious in the past few decades is there actually are quite a number of connections between the solid, nonliving Earth and the evolution of life,” said first author Jana Meixnerová, a UW doctoral student in Earth and space sciences. “But what are the specific connections that facilitated the evolution of life on Earth as we know it?”

In its earliest days, Earth had no oxygen in its atmosphere and few, if any, oxygen-breathing lifeforms. Earth’s atmosphere became permanently oxygen-rich about 2.4 billion years ago, likely after an explosion of lifeforms that photosynthesize, transforming carbon dioxide and water into oxygen.

But in 2007, co-author Ariel Anbar at Arizona State University analyzed rocks from the Mount McRae Shale in Western Australia, reporting a short-term whiff of oxygen about 50 to 100 million years before it became a permanent fixture in the atmosphere. More recent research has confirmed other, earlier short-term oxygen spikes, but hasn’t explained their rise and fall.

These are drill-cores of rocks from the Mount McRae Shale in Western Australia. Previous analysis showed a “whiff” of atmospheric oxygen preceding the Great Oxidation Event, 2.4 billion years ago. New analyses show a slightly earlier spike in minerals produced by volcanoes, which may have fertilized early communities of microbes to produce the oxygen. Credit: Roger Buick/University of Washington

In the new study, researchers at the University of Michigan, led by co-corresponding author Joel Blum, analyzed the same ancient rocks for the concentration and number of neutrons in the element mercury, emitted by volcanic eruptions. Large volcanic eruptions blast mercury gas into the upper atmosphere, where today it circulates for a year or two before raining out onto Earth’s surface. The new analysis shows a spike in mercury a few million years before the temporary rise in oxygen.

“Sure enough, in the rock below the transient spike in oxygen we found evidence of mercury, both in its abundance and isotopes, that would most reasonably be explained by volcanic eruptions into the atmosphere,” said co-author Roger Buick, a UW professor of Earth and Space Sciences.

Where there were volcanic emissions, the authors reason, there must have been lava and volcanic ash fields. And those nutrient-rich rocks would have weathered in the wind and rain, releasing phosphorus into rivers that could fertilize nearby coastal areas, allowing oxygen-producing cyanobacteria and other single-celled lifeforms to flourish.

“There are other nutrients that modulate biological activity on short timescales, but phosphorus is the one that is most important on long timescales,” Meixnerová said.

Today, phosphorus is plentiful in biological material and in agricultural fertilizer. But in very ancient times, weathering of volcanic rocks would have been the main source for this scarce resource.

“During weathering under the Archaean atmosphere, the fresh basaltic rock would have slowly dissolved, releasing the essential macro-nutrient phosphorus into the rivers. That would have fed microbes that were living in the shallow coastal zones and triggered increased biological productivity that would have created, as a byproduct, an oxygen spike,” Meixnerová said.

The precise location of those volcanoes and lava fields is unknown, but large lava fields of about the right age exist in modern-day India, Canada and elsewhere, Buick said.

“Our study suggests that for these transient whiffs of oxygen, the immediate trigger was an increase in oxygen production, rather than a decrease in oxygen consumption by rocks or other nonliving processes,” Buick said. “It’s important because the presence of oxygen in the atmosphere is fundamental – it’s the biggest driver for the evolution of large, complex life.”

Ultimately, researchers say the study suggests how a planet’s geology might affect any life evolving on its surface, an understanding that aids in identifying habitable exoplanets, or planets outside our solar system, in the search for life in the universe.

Reference: “Mercury abundance and isotopic composition indicate subaerial volcanism prior to the end-Archean “whiff” of oxygen” by Jana Meixnerová, Joel D. Blum, Marcus W. Johnson, Eva E. Stüeken, Michael A. Kipp, Ariel D. Anbar and Roger Buick, 17 August 2021, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2107511118

Other authors of the paper are co-corresponding author Eva Stüeken, a former UW astrobiology graduate student now at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland; Michael Kipp, a former UW graduate student now at the California Institute of Technology; and Marcus Johnson at the University of Michigan. The study was funded by NASA, the NASA-funded UW Virtual Planetary Laboratory team and the MacArthur Professorship to Blum at the University of Michigan.

'MAYBE' TECH

Rolls-Royce consortium ‘secures funding’ for modular nuclear reactor

08 NOV 2021

 BY TIYA THOMAS-ALEXANDER


A consortium led by Rolls-Royce is poised to confirm it has secured huge backing from private investors for its small nuclear power plant plans.

Confirmation of funding from a consortium of backers is set to be announced in the next few days, according to the BBC. The government previously pledged to invest up to £210m in match funding if private investors could be found.

Rolls-Royce has been working on plans for small modular reactors (SMRs), which would cost around £2bn to build, it claims. This would be around one-tenth the cost of full-size plants such as Hinkley Point C. The announcement is expected to set out plans for four initial SMRs.

Laing O’Rourke and Bam Nuttall were part of a consortium with Rolls-Royce that invested £18m in development of the plan in 2019, with the government matching that. It is unconfirmed if they are part of the new consortium.

SMRs are designed to be built through 75 per cent modular construction, with parts assembled on site.

Rolls-Royce responded to say they had no comment as did a spokesperson for the National Nuclear Lab. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) has been approached for comment.

New nuclear power plants have become key to the government’s decarbonisation plans for the UK. At least one new full-size plant is set to be approved before the end of parliament in 2024, with Sizewell C the most likely candidate. Last month, the government announced a £120m funding boost for small and large nuclear projects.

Rolls-Royce sells nuclear controls arm, closes in on small-scale nuclear investment

A block of four small modular reactors would be capable of generating nearly 500 MWs of power

Rolls designs the power plants for the Royal Navy's nuclear submarines

Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC (LSE:RR.) said it has completed the sale of its nuclear controls business but is expected to put this deal in the shade in the coming days with confirmation that plans for a new type of smaller nuclear reactor have received investor backing.

On Monday the FTSE 100 group said its civil nuclear instrumentation & control (I&C) business is now owned by Framatome, concluding a deal first announced last December and following regulatory clearance.

The proceeds will contribute to management's pandemic target to generate at least £2bn from disposals and will be used to help strengthen its balance sheet as it looks to return to an investment grade credit profile.

There were also reports on Monday that Rolls-Royce could make the announcement as soon as Tuesday on its small-scale nuclear plans.

Downing Street previously said it would provide £210mln in funding if that could be matched by investment from other sources. A consortium of investors has agreed to provide capital, the BBC reported.

Rolls, which makes power systems for aeroplanes, ships and submarines, is thought to have developed a design using four small modular reactors (SMRs), similar to those used in nuclear-powered submarines.

A block of four SMRs would be capable of generating nearly 500 megawatts (MWs) of power.

They will cost around £2bn each, which compares to the £20bn cost of reactors at the Hinkley Point nuclear plant in development in Somerset and another plant planned at Sizewell in Suffolk.

Grossi 'absolutely confident' of nuclear's inclusion in EU taxonomy

The International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA's) Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said he is "absolutely confident" that "some arrangement" will be made to accept nuclear energy in the EU's taxonomy of sustainable investment. In an on-stage interview at COP26, he said the escalation of gas prices has increased political interest in nuclear power.

Grossi during his interview at COP26 (Image: Jonathan Cobb)

The interview at COP26 marked a new era of engagement for the IAEA in the United Nations Framework Convention of Climate Change process to address climate change. Although the agency has participated regularly in COP events, it has not previously taken a prominent position to represent nuclear energy and explain its role.

Grossi told his interviewer, the British journalist Gillian Tett, that achieving net-zero without nuclear power would be "extremely difficult, far more expensive and longer." That is one reason why, "There is an increased recognition that it is part of the solution and it will be part of the solution."

Considering recent price rises in gas and electricity markets, Grossi said, "We have seen this movie before with oil and with other volatility of prices.

"It is obvious that what we've seen with gas prices multiplying has only increased the interest - the urgency of interest - in countries which are dependent or fragile on gas provision from other suppliers," said Grossi.

COP "is the place to have such a message [of energy security]", said Grossi, "because you are looking in the frame of political decisions that are 10-15 years down the line. But that fits perfectly well. You need to have stable markets, price-wise and also environmentally-wise and in every respect."

Tett described the European Union's debate over its taxonomy of sustainable investments as "a bout of civil war." She asked whether Grossi thought nuclear would be included. "It will be," was his answer, "I'm absolutely confident. We saw the other day the President of the European Commission (Ursula von der Leyen) saying we need it as a stable source.

"I will not meddle," said Grossi. "I was in Brussels last week. It's not that people tell me what will happen. They are going to find some arrangement to include it."

He continued, "Let's look at the science. There's a political thing, but there is also science: the Joint Research Centre - the highest scientific body of the European Commission - came to the conclusion that nuclear does not do significant harm more than the other sources.

"It will be included in one way or another, for sure," he said. "In the EU, half of the countries using nuclear want more. I'm sure they will find some consensus."

Researched and written by World Nuclear News

Chile's desert dumping ground for fast fashion leftovers

Paula BUSTAMANTE
Sun, 7 November 2021



Piles of used clothes have been discarded in Chile's Atacama Desert

 (AFP/MARTIN BERNETTI)

Women search for used clothes amid tons discarded in the Atacama desert, in Alto Hospicio, Iquique, Chile

 (AFP/MARTIN BERNETTI)

Men work at a factory that recycles used clothes discarded in the Atacama desert for housing insulation panels, in Alto Hospicio, Iquique, Chile 

(AFP/MARTIN BERNETTI)

Fast fashion advertising "has helped to convince us that clothing makes us more attractive, that it makes us stylish and even cures our anxiety," said Monica Zarini, who makes lamp shades, notebooks, containers and bags from recycled clothing (AFP/MARTIN BERNETTI)


A mountain of discarded clothing including Christmas sweaters and ski boots cuts a strange sight in Chile's Atacama, the driest desert in the world, which is increasingly suffering from pollution created by fast fashion.

The social impact of rampant consumerism in the clothing industry -- such as child labor in factories or derisory wages -- is well-known, but the disastrous effect on the environment is less publicized.

Chile has long been a hub of secondhand and unsold clothing, made in China or Bangladesh and passing through Europe, Asia or the United States before arriving in Chile, where it is resold around Latin America.

Some 59,000 tons of clothing arrive each year at the Iquique port in the Alto Hospicio free zone in northern Chile.

Clothing merchants from the capital Santiago, 1,800 kilometers (1,100 miles) to the south, buy some, while much is smuggled out to other Latin American countries. But at least 39,000 tons that cannot be sold end up in rubbish dumps in the desert.

"This clothing arrives from all over the world," Alex Carreno, a former employee in the port's import area, told AFP.

"What is not sold to Santiago nor sent to other countries stays in the free zone" as no one pays the necessary tariffs to take it away.

"The problem is that the clothing is not biodegradable and has chemical products, so it is not accepted in the municipal landfills," said Franklin Zepeda, the founder of EcoFibra, a company that makes insulation panels using discarded clothing.

"I wanted to stop being the problem and start being the solution," he told AFP about the firm he created in 2018.

- Water waste -

According to a 2019 UN report, global clothing production doubled between 2000 and 2014, and the industry is "responsible for 20 percent of total water waste on a global level."

To make a single pair of jeans requires 7,500 liters (2,000 gallons) of water.

The same report said that clothing and footwear manufacturing contributes eight percent of global greenhouse gases, and that "every second, an amount of textiles equivalent to a garbage truck is buried or burnt."

Whether the clothing piles are left out in the open or buried underground, they pollute the environment, releasing pollutants into the air or underground water channels.

Clothing, either synthetic or treated with chemicals, can take 200 years to biodegrade and is as toxic as discarded tires or plastics.

Not all the clothing goes to waste: some of the poorest people from this region of 300,000 inhabitants pick through the dumps to find things they need or can sell in their local neighborhood.

Venezuelan migrants Sofia and Jenny, who crossed into Chile only a few days earlier on a 350-kilometer journey, search through a clothing pile as their babies crawl over it.

The women are looking for "things for the cold," given the desert's nighttime temperatures drop to levels unheard of in their tropical homeland.

- Changing attitudes -

Chile, the richest country in South America, is known for the voracious consumerism of its inhabitants.

Fast fashion advertising "has helped to convince us that clothing makes us more attractive, that it makes us stylish and even cures our anxiety," said Monica Zarini, who makes lamp shades, notebooks, containers and bags from recycled clothing.

Things are changing, though, according to Rosario Hevia, who opened a store to recycle children's clothes before founding in 2019 Ecocitex, a company that creates yarn from pieces of discarded textiles and clothing in a poor state. The process uses neither water nor chemicals.

"For many years we consumed, and no one seemed to care that more and more textile waste was being generated," she said.

"But now, people are starting to question themselves."

pb/bc/to