ReportWire

Tag: Green technology

  • Facing increasing pressure from customers, some miners are switching to renewable energy

    Facing increasing pressure from customers, some miners are switching to renewable energy

    [ad_1]

    SOROWAKO, Indonesia — Red hot sparks fly through the air as a worker in a heat-resistant suit pokes a long metal rod into a nickel smelter, coaxing the molten metal from a crucible at a processing facility on the Indonesian island of Sulawesi.

    The smelter run by global mining firm Vale and powered by electricity from three dams churns out 75,000 tons of nickel a year for use in batteries, electric vehicles, appliances and many other products.

    While the smelting creates heavy emissions of greenhouse gases, the power used is relatively clean. Such possible reductions in emissions come as demand for critical minerals like nickel and cobalt is surging as climate change hastens a transition to renewable energy.

    Mining operations account for some 4%-7% of global greenhouse gas emissions, according to global consulting firm McKinsey & Company. But some miners are moving to reduce use of fossil fuels in extracting and refining, partly due to pressure from downstream customers that want more sustainable supply chains.

    Located beside a crystal-blue lake in the lush jungle of Sorowako, South Sulawesi, Vale Indonesia — a subsidiary of Vale international — runs its smelters entirely from hydroelectricity. Vale says that can reduce its emissions by over 1.115 million tons of carbon dioxide equivalent a year, compared to using diesel. Vale claims it has reduced its greenhouse gas emissions nearly a fifth since 2017.

    As demand for materials needed for batteries, solar panels and other components vital for cutting global emissions rises, carbon emissions by miners and refiners will likewise rise unless companies actively work to decarbonize.

    Experts say improved technology, pressure from customers and enforcement of clean energy policies all are needed to keep moving toward more sustainable mining and refining practices while raising output to keep pace with global needs for pivoting away from reliance on polluting fossil fuels.

    Other companies and countries around the world also are reducing use of fossil fuels in their mining operations. Solar plants in Chile help power the mining sector, which consumes much of the country’s electricity demand to produce copper, lithium and other materials. In recent years, wind power has helped electrify the Raglan Mine in Canada.

    Companies are learning from past mistakes of the industrial revolution, where reliance on fossil fuels was paramount for development, said Michael Goodsite, a pro vice chancellor and professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of Adelaide in Australia.

    “I think as you see the future of certain operations, you’ll see them transitioning,” he said. “The way that they transition and how they move from fossil fuel operations to other energy sources can and should be learned from by others.”

    Indonesia is the world’s largest nickel producer and Indonesian President Joko Widodo has promoted the country developing its own industries.

    The push to cut emissions and use cleaner energy has been helped by investment and interest from governments and multinational companies. Volvo, Mercedes, Hyundai, Apple and other manufacturers need materials made in a more sustainable way to meet their own environmental, social and governance, or ESG, commitments.

    Widodo visited Vale Indonesia’s Sorowako facilities in March, the same month a deal was signed for a $4.5 billion nickel procession plant to be built by Vale Indonesia with investment by Ford Motor Co.

    “Ford can help ensure that the nickel that we use in electric vehicle batteries is mined, produced within the same ESG standards as … our business around the world,” Christopher Smith, Ford’s chief government affairs officer, said at a signing ceremony for a new $4.5 billion nickel processing plant in Indonesia with Vale Indonesia in March this year.

    Even companies already taking steps to decarbonize are still reliant on at least some fossil fuels.

    At Vale Indonesia in Sorowako, coal is still used to power drying and reduction kilns. The company’s CEO, Febriany Eddy, said she plans to switch such operations to liquefied natural gas — cleaner but still another fossil fuel.

    It’s the best option available given current technology, she said in an interview with The Associated Press.

    “I have two options in front of me: I continue to say that there is no viable option, that we will wait until that perfect solution is to come, which (could take) 15 or 20 years to come. Or I work with LNG first, knowing it is not a perfect solution, knowing it is a transition only,” Eddy said. “But with conversion to LNG, I can reduce 40% of my emissions.”

    The use as LNG as a “bridge fuel” has been contested by climate experts, as the fuel releases climate-warming methane and carbon dioxide when it’s produced, transported and burned.

    Initial costs for switching to, expanding and building new renewable infrastructure are another steep barrier.

    It took decades to recoup costs from building the three hydropower dams in the remote, sparsely populated area, that are used to power Vale’s Sorowako facilities. But now, having that infrastructure means big savings at a time when global energy prices are high.

    “Hydropower isn’t just reducing our carbon emissions, but also reducing our costs today because we are no longer that (vulnerable) to fuel and coal costs— because we have hydropower,” Eddy said.

    Having mining operations powered by renewable sources instead of fossil fuels could also help unlock green financing and attract future investors, said Aimee Boulanger, executive director of the Initiative for Responsible Mining Assurance.

    “The finance and investment sector is more tuned in than it ever has before to the environmental and social responsibility of supply chains and their investments in them. And they’re looking at greenhouse gas emissions,” she said. “When the world is recovering from a global pandemic and facing the global crisis of climate change, there’s never been a time when they’ve been more interested in these issues.”

    While many companies are stepping up efforts to decarbonize their supply chains, others — such as many of those making green energy materials in China, have less stringent requirements for their materials.

    “We can find jurisdictions around the world that — if they’re able to do things cheaply because they have access to fossil fuels and they already have the capital assets and the capital expenditures— they’re going to continue doing that,” Goodsite said when asked about Chinese businesses.

    Ultimately, investors and consumers play a vital role in getting companies to clean up their operations, he said.

    But phasing out the mining industry’s reliance on fossil fuels will be costly, especially as the United States and other countries build up the capacity to bring production of critical materials onshore.

    “If the end users care about them coming from …a green energy based process… then we all need to be prepared to pay a significant premium for that,” Goodsite said.

    ___

    Associated Press climate and environmental coverage receives support from several private foundations. See more about AP’s climate initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden calls for up to three oil and gas lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico, disappointing all sides

    Biden calls for up to three oil and gas lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico, disappointing all sides

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden’s administration on Friday proposed up to three oil and gas lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico, but none in Alaska, as it tries to navigate between energy companies seeking greater oil and gas production and environmental activists who want Biden to shut down new offshore drilling in the fight against climate change.

    The five-year plan includes proposed sales in the Gulf of Mexico — the nation’s primary offshore source of oil and gas — in 2025, 2027 and 2029. The three lease sales are the minimum number the Democratic administration could legally offer if it wants to continue expanding offshore wind development.

    Under the terms of a 2022 climate law, the government must offer at least 60 million acres of offshore oil and gas leases in any one-year period before it can offer offshore wind leases.

    The provision tying offshore wind to oil and gas production was added by Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, a top recipient of oil and gas donations and a key vote in favor of the climate law, which was approved with only Democratic votes in Congress. The landmark law, the Inflation Reduction Act, was signed by Biden as a key step to fight climate change but includes a number of provisions authored by Manchin, a centrist who represents an energy-producing state.

    For instance, if the Biden administration wants to expand solar and wind power on public lands, it must offer new oil and gas leases first.

    “The Biden-Harris administration is committed to building a clean energy future that ensures America’s energy independence,” Interior Secretary Deb Haaland said in a statement. The proposed offshore leasing program “represents the smallest number of oil and gas lease sales in history” and “sets a course for (the Interior Department) to support the growing offshore wind industry,” she said.

    The lease program will guard against environmental damage caused by oil and gas drilling and other adverse impacts to coastal communities, Haaland said.

    If completed, the sales would increase climate-changing greenhouse gas emissions, according to a 300-page environmental review by the Interior Department’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. How much they will increase is uncertain because the review considered five or 10 new sales but not the three sales proposed.

    Manchin sharply criticized the announcement and said limiting oil and gas sales would result in fewer renewable energy leases under the terms of the climate law.

    “You can’t have one without the other,” he said. “It makes no sense at all to actively be limiting our energy production.”

    Still, the plan allows drillers such as Chevron, BP and ExxonMobil to participate in as many as three oil and gas auctions over the next five years, a top priority for the industry that could lock in decades of offshore oil and gas production.

    The plan goes against Biden’s campaign promise to end new offshore drilling and could become a political liability for the Democratic president, who already faces sharp opposition from environmental groups angry at his decision earlier this year to approve ConocoPhillips’ massive Willow oil project in Alaska.

    ConocoPhillips CEO Ryan Lance called Willow “the right decision for Alaska and our nation.” But environmental groups call the $8 billion project a “carbon bomb” that would betray Biden’s pledge to cut planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030. Opponents mounted a #StopWillow campaign on social media that has been seen hundreds of millions of times.

    Dyani Chapman, the director of Alaska Environment, said she was pleased that the final plan removes a proposed Alaska lease sale from a draft version. “This is a positive wave for the belugas, otters and salmon up here, but the coast isn’t clear,” she said. “Climate change means that any more drilling anywhere can still create problems in a warming Alaska.”

    Interior Deputy Secretary Tommy Beaudreau said the administration’s options were limited by the climate law.

    “The (oil leasing) program is definitely informed by the IRA and the connection that the IRA makes between offshore oil and gas leasing and renewable energy leasing,” he said Thursday, referring to the Inflation Reduction Act.

    The Interior Department can’t sell the rights to drill for oil and gas offshore without first publishing a schedule that outlines its plans. The administration faced a Saturday deadline to release the five-year plan.

    At least two sales have been held most years over the past several decades under the federal offshore leasing program, which was established in the 1950s. While Friday’s decision means fewer sales, it will take years for oil production to be affected because companies can take up to 15 years to start drilling once a lease is awarded, said energy analyst Rene Santos, of S&P Global Commodity Insights.

    Over the long term, Santos said, that could help drive companies to other countries, such as Brazil and Guyana, where the governments are more open to drilling.

    Environmentalists said the leasing will worsen climate change impacts and leave coastal communities in Louisiana and other states exposed to spills that occur regularly in the Gulf of Mexico. Beth Lowell, with the group Oceana, said Biden’s proposal was “showing the world that it’s OK to prioritize polluters over real climate solutions.”

    Any individual sales held under the proposal will likely face legal challenges. “We will continue to work alongside Gulf Coast communities to challenge new leasing and transition beyond a fossil economy that is poisoning people and driving climate change,” Earthjustice president Abigail Dillen said in a statement.

    The oil industry and its allies have called for more leasing, not less.

    The American Petroleum Institute, the top lobbying group for the oil and gas industry, said Biden was “choosing failed energy policies that are adding to the pain Americans are feeling at the pump.”

    Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, said Biden’s announcement was “an affront to working Americans who are struggling to pay their bills as this administration continues its dangerous crusade to appease radical activists and shut down American energy.”

    At the last lease sale, in March, companies including Chevron, BP and ExxonMobil bid $264 million for drilling rights in the Gulf, a sharp rise from the previous auction in 2021.

    ___

    Brown reported from Billings, Mont. Associated Press writer Becky Bohrer in Juneau, Alaska, contributed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Climate change and the shift to cleaner energy push Southeast Asia to finally start sharing power

    Climate change and the shift to cleaner energy push Southeast Asia to finally start sharing power

    [ad_1]

    Hanoi, VIETNAM — The urgency for Southeast Asian nations to switch to clean energy to combat climate change is reinvigorating a 20-year-old plan for the region to share power.

    Malaysia and Indonesia inked a deal in Bali, Indonesia last month to study 18 potential locations where cross-border transmission lines can be set up.

    Those links could eventually generate power roughly equivalent to what 33 nuclear power plants would produce in a year. They are economically and technically feasible, and now are supported by regional governments, said Beni Suryadi a power expert at the ASEAN Centre for Energy in Jakarta, Indonesia.

    The Association of Southeast Asian Nations or ASEAN is a political and economic gathering of 10 countries across a vast region, from tiny Brunei and Singapore to military-controlled Myanmar and fast-rising economic power Vietnam.

    Experts describe imports by Singapore of hydroelectric-generated power from Laos via transmissions through Thailand and Malaysia as a “pathfinder” project, marking the first time that four countries in the region have agreed to trade electricity.

    Cross-border power purchases accounted for just 2.7% of the region’s capacity in 2017, according to the Global Interconnection Journal. But those were between two countries, such as Thailand and Laos. Now, more countries are looking at power sharing as a way to wean their economies off coal and other fossil fuels. Vietnam would like a regional grid so it could sell clean energy, such as from offshore wind, to its neighbors while the Malaysian province of Sarawak is looking to sell its hydropower to neighboring Indonesia.

    The plan for a regional grid between the 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations was conceived two decades ago, but progress has been stalled by various problems including technical barriers and political mistrust.

    The region now recognizes it must move faster. Climate change could reduce the region’s economic potential by more than a third by the middle of the century, according to a report presented at the 2021 U.N. climate conference in Glasgow, Scotland. Demand for electricity is rising, and governments have realized the transition away from fossil fuels requires an interconnected grid, Suryad said.

    “It has become a crucial need for every country,” he said.

    In the past, countries in the region were focused more on energy security, relying heavily on fossil fuels and often building more capacity than they needed. But renewable energy costs are falling, making hydroelectric, solar and wind power more affordable. And all ASEAN countries apart from the Philippines have pledged to stop adding carbon to the atmosphere by 2050.

    So, arguments in favor of an interconnected grid appear to be prevailing.

    Tiny, landlocked Laos, with a population of only 7 million, has built more than 50 dams in the past 15 years, relying on its status as the “battery of Southeast Asia” to profit from sales of power to Thailand, Vietnam, and China.

    It still has surplus power it needs to sell to others in the region.

    Singapore — a small city-state of 6 million with nearly no natural resources — must import clean energy to meet its renewable energy goals.

    Regional grids can help bridge gaps between where power is needed and where it can be generated, helping countries adjust to outside shocks like big jumps in oil prices. They also can help cut costs: In 2021, for instance, Europe saved $36 billion by trading power, European regulators have estimated.

    Interconnected grids can also deliver reliable electricity to communities in remote regions like West Kalimantan, on the island of Borneo. A life punctuated by rolling blackouts that forced shops to shutter and people to use diesel generators was the norm until a 170-kilometer (105-mile) long cross-border power line coming from neighboring Malaysia’s Sarawak province changed that in 2016.

    “This is a no-brainer way to do it … because it’s been done elsewhere and the benefits are obvious,” said Rena Kuwahata, an energy analyst at the Paris-based International Energy Agency.

    But issues remain.

    One of ASEAN’s core policies is non-interference, which means members tend to shy away from joint projects. Domestic energy priorities are sometimes at odds with the potential benefits of an interconnected grid. Nadhilah Shani, another expert at the ASEAN Center for Energy said that this creates a “dilemma” for countries: they could sell clean energy to neighbors for the region to wean itself off fossil fuels, or they could use those resources towards meeting their own climate targets.

    Malaysia gets only 1% of its electricity annually from clean sources. It banned the export of renewables in 2021 to try and develop a domestic clean energy industry. That ban was lifted this year but an Indonesian ban on clean energy exports imposed last year remains in effect.

    The region’s lack of a regulatory framework for such things as installing submarine power cables is another stumbling block.

    Not all the technical problems have been ironed out. Voltages used by each country can vary, as do the capacities of their grids. Even countries whose grids span borders, like Thailand, need to upgrade them, Harald Link, owner of B.Grimm Power and president of Thailand’s Association of Private Power Producers, said in an interview.

    Projections of where power will be needed must be factored in, for example, plans for power-hungry data centers.

    “You need a huge amount of electricity— and they want it green. And where do you get it from? For some countries, it is more difficult to make it green,” Link said.

    Costs are high: at a minimum some $280 billion in power sector investments are required, according to the ASEAN Center for Energy.

    China’s involvement in building much of the region’s energy infrastructure via its Belt and Road Initiative could also be a concern. In 2021, Laos, under pressure from its mounting debts, granted a 25-year concession to operate its power grid to a majority Chinese-owned company.

    But despite intermittent tensions between China and some of its neighbors over territorial disputes and other issues, generally Beijing and ASEAN are working on the basis of “mutual interests and benefits,” said Nadhilah Shani, another expert at the ASEAN Center for Energy.

    Given how expensive it is to build power grids, the private financing needed to build it can influence how and where projects are built, said Shani. Still, she said, national priorities play a bigger role than Chinese investments in how electricity is transmitted.

    “We are in good place in ASEAN to have this kind of collaboration in terms of trading and we have reached a common understanding,” she said.

    ___

    Milko reported from Nusa Dua, Indonesia. Jintamas Saksornchai in Bangkok, Thailand, and Eileen Ng in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, contributed to this report.

    ___

    Associated Press climate and environmental coverage receive support from several private foundations. See more about AP’s climate initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden plan would overhaul 151-year-old mining law, make companies pay royalties for copper and gold

    Biden plan would overhaul 151-year-old mining law, make companies pay royalties for copper and gold

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The Biden administration is recommending changes to a 151-year-old law that governs mining for copper, gold and other hardrock minerals on U.S.-owned lands, including making companies for the first time pay royalties on what they extract.

    A plan led by the Interior Department also calls for the creation of a mine leasing system and coordination of permitting efforts among a range of federal agencies. This comes as The White House has been pushing to boost domestic mining for minerals needed for electric vehicles, solar panels and other clean energy.

    Under terms of an 1872 law, the U.S. does not collect royalties on minerals extracted from federal lands, a fact Democratic lawmakers and environmental groups have long lamented. The White House plan would impose a variable 4% to 8% net royalty on hardrock minerals produced on federal lands. The proposal needs approval by Congress — unlikely when the House is controlled by Republicans who have long opposed such fees.

    Undeterred by such political reality, an interagency working group — led by Interior — touted the benefits of imposing royalties on about 750 hardrock mines on federal lands, mostly in the West. The figure does not include about 70 coal mines whose owners must pay federal royalties.

    “A royalty would ensure that American taxpayers receive fair compensation for minerals extracted from federal lands,″ the working group said in a report Tuesday. The fee also could pay for programs to boost mining permits, clean up abandoned mine lands and help states and tribal governments that provide infrastructure and services to mining-dependent communities, the report said.

    The U.S. stands out among other countries, such as Australia, Canada and Chile, that collect royalties on minerals. At least a dozen Western states also collect royalties on hardrock mining.

    “Although thoughtful concerns were raised by the mining industry regarding the existing hardrock leasing system that is used on certain federal lands,” the working group “did not receive any arguments as to why a properly designed leasing system could not be equally successful in the United States,” the report said.

    Deputy Interior Secretary Tommy Beaudreau, who chaired the working group, called the plan released Tuesday “a modernized approach” that would “meet the needs of the clean energy economy while respecting our obligations to tribal nations, taxpayers, the environment and future generations.”

    “Securing a safe, sustainable supply of critical minerals will support a resilient manufacturing base for technologies at the heart of the president’s investing-in-America agenda, including batteries, electric vehicles, wind turbines and solar panels,” said Joelle Gamble, deputy director of the White House National Economic Council.

    Tribes and environmental groups welcomed the report but urged President Joe Biden to go further to protect communities, sacred places and water resources. The White House formed the working group last year as Biden pledged to boost production of lithium, nickel and other minerals used to power electric vehicles and other clean energy.

    “These modest reforms are a good first step, but they’re not enough to safeguard our water and communities,” said Allison Henderson, southern Rockies director at the Center for Biological Diversity, an Arizona-based nonprofit. “The Biden administration should use its full authority to update these antiquated mining laws, prevent more mining industry devastation and preserve a livable planet for future generations.”

    Rich Nolan, president and CEO of the National Mining Association, said the report did little to advance Biden’s stated goal to secure domestic mineral supplies while supporting responsible mining.

    Creation of a leasing system, imposition of a punitive “dirt tax” and proposed royalties as high as 8% “will throw additional obstacles in the way of responsible domestic projects, forcing the U.S. to double-down on our already outsized import reliance from countries with questionable labor, safety and environmental practices,” Nolan said in a statement.

    Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso, the top Republican on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources panel, said Biden was “taking a sledgehammer to affordable, reliable energy.”

    If enacted, the proposed mining reforms “will force us to buy more critical minerals” from China and other countries that use forced or child labor “instead of harnessing our abundant resources here at home,” Barrasso said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden goes west to talk about his administration’s efforts to combat climate change

    Biden goes west to talk about his administration’s efforts to combat climate change

    [ad_1]

    President Joe Biden will travel to Arizona, New Mexico and Utah next week and is expected to talk about his administration’s efforts to combat climate change as the region endures a brutally hot summer with soaring temperatures

    President Joe Biden leaves St. Edmund Roman Catholic Church in Rehoboth Beach, Del., after attending a Mass, Saturday, July 29, 2023. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

    The Associated Press

    WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden will travel to Arizona, New Mexico and Utah next week and is expected to talk about his administration’s efforts to combat climate change as the region endures a brutally hot summer with soaring temperatures, the White House said Monday.

    Biden is expected to discuss the Inflation Reduction Act, America’s most significant response to climate change, and the push toward more clean energy manufacturing. The act aims to spur clean energy on a scale that will bend the arc of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.

    July has been the hottest month ever recorded. Biden last week announced new steps to protect workers in extreme heat, including measures to improve weather forecasts and make drinking water more accessible.

    Members of Biden’s administration also are fanning out over the next few weeks around the anniversary of the landmark climate change and health care legislation to extol the administration’s successes as the Democratic president seeks reelection in 2024.

    Vice President Kamala Harris heads to Wisconsin this week with Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo to talk about broadband infrastructure investments. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack goes to Oregon to highlight wildfire defense grants, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg will go to Illinois and Texas, and Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona heads to Maryland to talk about career and technical education programs.

    The Inflation Reduction Act included roughly $375 billion over a decade to combat climate change and capped the cost of a month’s supply of insulin at $35 for older Americans and other Medicare beneficiaries. It also helps an estimated 13 million Americans pay for health care insurance by extending subsidies provided during the coronavirus pandemic.

    The measure is paid for by new taxes on large companies and stepped-up IRS enforcement of wealthy individuals and entities, with additional funds going to reduce the federal deficit.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • One year old, US climate law is already turbocharging clean energy technology

    One year old, US climate law is already turbocharging clean energy technology

    [ad_1]

    FRANKFORT, Ky. — On a recent day under the July sun, three men heaved solar panels onto the roof of a roomy, two-story house near the banks of the Kentucky River, a few miles upstream from the state capitol where lawmakers have promoted coal for more than a century.

    The U.S. climate law that passed one year ago offers a 30% discount off this installation via a tax credit, and that’s helping push clean energy even into places where coal still provides cheap electricity. For Heather Baggett’s family in Frankfort, it was a good deal.

    “For us, it’s not politically motivated,” said Baggett. “It really came down to financially, it made sense.”

    On August 16, after the hottest June ever recorded and a scorching July, America’s long-sought response to climate change, the Inflation Reduction Act, turns one year old. In less than a year it has prompted investment in a massive buildout of battery and EV manufacturing across the states. Nearly 80 major clean energy manufacturing facilities have been announced, an investment equal to the previous seven years combined, according to the American Clean Power Association.

    “It seems like every week there’s a new factory facility somewhere” being announced, said Jesse Jenkins, a professor at Princeton and leader of the REPEAT Project which has been deeply involved in analysis of the law.

    “We’ve been talking about bringing manufacturing jobs back to America for my entire life. We’re finally doing it, right? That’s pretty exciting,” he said.

    The IRA is America’s most significant response to climate change, after decades of lobbying by oil, gas and coal interests stalled action, while carbon emissions climbed, creating a hotter, more dangerous world. It is designed to spur clean energy buildout on a scale that will bend the arc of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. It also aims to build domestic supply chains to reverse China’s and other nations’ early domination of this vital sector.

    One target of the law is cleaner transportation, the largest source of climate pollution for the U.S. Siemens, one of the biggest tech companies in the world, produces charging stations for EVs. Executives say this alignment of U.S. policy on climate is driving higher demand for batteries.

    “When the federal government makes an investment, we get to the tipping point faster,” said Barbara Humpton, CEO of Siemens USA, adding that the company has invested $260 million in battery or battery storage projects in recent years.

    The law also encourages more of the type of batteries that feed electricity to the grid when the wind is slack, or at night when the sun isn’t hitting solar panels. It could put the storage business on the same upward trajectory that solar blazed a decade ago, said Michael McGowan, head of North American infrastructure private markets for Mercer Alternatives, a consulting firm.

    Derrick Flakoll, North America policy associate at Bloomberg NEF, pointed out that sales at the largest manufacturer of solar panels in the U.S., First Solar, skyrocketed after the law passed, creating a big backlog of orders.

    “This is years and years of manufacturing capacity that is already booked out because people are bullish about the U.S.-produced solar market,” he said.

    The IRA is also helping technologies that are expensive, but promising for near-term decarbonization.

    Jason Mortimer is senior vice president of global sales at EH2, which makes large, low-cost electrolyzers — machines that split hydrogen from water. Hydrogen as clean energy is still in its infancy. “The IRA accelerates the implementation of hydrogen at scale by about four to five years,” making the U.S. competitive with Europe, he said.

    But these changes, significant as they are, may just be the beginning, experts say.

    “I think we’re about to see a quite a flood of investment in wind and solar-related manufacturing in the U.S.,” Jenkins said, adding that 2026 to 2028 is when the country will see the law’s full impact.

    Other countries, some of them ahead of the U.S. in addressing climate change, have enacted their own further efforts to speed the changeover to clean energy. Canada has announced a matching policy and Europe has its own measures to attract manufacturing, similar to the IRA.

    “European and Japanese automakers are trying to think about how to change supply chains in order to try and compete,” said Neil Mehrotra, assistant vice president and policy advisor at the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis and contributor to a report about the U.S. law published by the Brookings Institution.

    The Congressional Budget Office initially estimated the IRA’s tax credits would cost about $270 billion over a decade, but Brookings says businesses might take advantage of the credits far more aggressively and the federal government could pay out three or four times more.

    The law is supposed to reduce the emissions of the U.S. — the country most responsible for greenhouse gases historically — by as much as 41% by 2030, according to a new analysis by Princeton researchers. That’s not enough to hit U.S. goals, but is a significant improvement.

    But those crucial greenhouse gas cuts are partially at risk if the U.S. electric grid cannot grow enough to connect new wind and solar farms and handle new demands, like mass vehicle charging.

    Despite the new investment in red states, not everyone likes it. Republicans recently proposed repealing major elements of the law. And Frankfort resident Jessie Decker, whose neighbor has solar panels, said he wouldn’t consider them, and doesn’t think the federal government should be “wasting money” on dubious climate programs.

    Nor does the law mean climate-warming oil and gas are going away.

    “Frankly, we are going to be using fossil fuels for many decades to come,” said Fred Eames, a regulatory attorney with the law firm Hunton Andrews Kurth.

    Up on Baggett’s roof, Nicholas Hartnett, owner of Pure Power Solar, is pleased that business is up and homeowners are opening up to solar once they see how they can financially benefit.

    “You have the environmental side, which handles the left, and then you have the option to use your own tax money that the government would have otherwise taken, which gets the right checked off,” he said.

    ___

    The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Kimberly Palmer: Creative ways to cut your energy costs this summer

    Kimberly Palmer: Creative ways to cut your energy costs this summer

    [ad_1]

    Blasting the air conditioning to counteract stifling heat can provide much-needed relief this summer, but the utility bills that follow might not be as pleasant. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the price of electricity has been steadily climbing over the past two years.

    “Most U.S. households will continue to pay high costs for energy throughout the summer because of high energy prices and the anticipated hot temperatures,” says Courtney Klosterman, home insights expert at insurer Hippo.

    The good news is you might have more control over your energy usage than you think. Paula Glover, president of the Alliance to Save Energy, a nonprofit that advocates for energy efficiency policy, estimates that based on numbers from the Energy Department, consumers could save 10% to 20% a year on energy bills just by shifting habits and making some energy-efficient investments. But, she adds, “You have to be diligent.”

    Here are five steps you can follow to lower your energy bill this summer:

    TAKE A BASELINE

    Before making any changes, it’s helpful to examine how much energy you currently use, says Angie Hicks, co-founder of Angi, a website that provides information on home services. Hiring a professional to give your home an energy audit typically costs between $200 and $700 and gives you helpful information about where your home might be leaking, she adds. You can find one through local home service provider listings, and some utilities offer the service for free.

    In certain cases, electronics themselves might be leaking, says Ethan O’Donnell, digital editor of FamilyHandyman.com, a website about home improvement projects. Televisions, appliances and all kinds of other electronics can use energy even when they are turned off, he says. A tool called an electricity usage monitor, which can be found for under $15, helps determine exactly how much.

    O’Donnell discovered that his lamp, appliances and phone chargers were using more electricity than he realized even when powered off, so he made an effort to unplug them when possible and estimates he saves at least $50 a month from those changes.

    ESTABLISH EFFICIENT HABITS

    Simple changes like adjusting your thermostat, turning lights off when you leave the room and keeping windows and doors shut when the air conditioning is on can go a long way, Glover says. Installing a smart thermostat, which automatically adjusts the temperature based on time, your habits and the season, can also help, she adds.

    Hicks suggests leaving window coverings closed during the day to help keep the sun’s heat out of your home and getting a seasonal tuneup to your air-conditioning system to make sure it’s working efficiently. Changing your air filter monthly or quarterly also helps it run better, she adds.

    MAKE SMALL UPGRADES

    Small home improvement projects, such as adding or replacing weather stripping that seals leaks around doors and windows, can significantly reduce your energy consumption, Hicks says. “Walk around your house with a lit candle and if the flame flickers, that’s where drafts are coming in. That’s a good candidate for weather stripping,” she says.

    Another simple job involves swapping out incandescent bulbs for LED light bulbs, which use at least 75% less energy, according to the Energy Department. “It seems like nothing but has an enormous impact when we do it collectively,” Glover says.

    UPDATE YOUR APPLIANCES

    While purchasing new appliances can be expensive, the investment can pay off in energy savings, especially when you select products with the Energy Star certification, a program run by the Environmental Protection Agency. “If you have an old appliance and you can afford to upgrade to something energy-efficient, do that,” Glover says, but notes that you should also prioritize other home updates such as better insulation.

    TACKLE HOME IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS

    According to Angi’s State of Home Spending in 2022 survey, 29% of homeowners say they plan to add solar panels to their home within the next five years. Updating the heating, ventilating and air conditioning system, or HVAC, was another popular choice (23%). Those kinds of big investments can pay off over the long run, says Hicks, who adds that federal income tax credits are available to help offset some of those costs.

    Installing doors as a barrier to different zones in the house can help improve efficiency by letting you control what gets warm and what stays cool, says Jonathan Flynn, a senior building analyst with Home Energy Consultants in Pleasant Valley, New York, and a certified Home Energy Rating System rater. “One of the big flaws in most two-story homes is that there is a stairway that leads up and no door at the top or bottom,” he says.

    To prevent that energy leakage, Flynn installed a sliding door at the bottom of the stairs in his own home, but he recognizes that doing so might not be practical or desired by all homeowners with open floor plans. Still, he encourages homeowners to at least consider making these kinds of changes, even if they aren’t currently popular.

    After all, he adds: “Energy efficiency work in your home is one of the few investments you can make that will actually pay you back.”

    _________________________________

    This column was provided to The Associated Press by the personal finance website NerdWallet. Kimberly Palmer is a personal finance expert at NerdWallet and the author of “Smart Mom, Rich Mom.” Email: kpalmer@nerdwallet.com. Twitter: @KimberlyPalmer.

    RELATED LINK:

    NerdWallet: How to Lower Your Bills: 38 Ways to Save https://bit.ly/nerdwallet-how-to-lower-your-bills

    METHODOLOGY

    The State of Home Spending in 2022 survey was conducted by Angi on Oct. 21, 2021. It surveyed 5,000 consumers representative of the general population.

    Angi The State of Home Spending in 2022 https://research.angi.com/research/reports/spending/

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Deep sea mining permits may be coming soon. What are they and what might happen?

    Deep sea mining permits may be coming soon. What are they and what might happen?

    [ad_1]

    JAKARTA, Indonesia — The International Seabed Authority — the United Nations body that regulates the world’s ocean floor — is preparing to resume negotiations that could open the international seabed for mining, including for materials critical for the green energy transition.

    Years long negotiations are reaching a critical point where the authority will soon need to begin accepting mining permit applications, adding to worries over the potential impacts on sparsely researched marine ecosystems and habitats of the deep sea.

    Here’s a look at what deep sea mining is, why some companies and countries are applying for permits to carry it out and why environmental activists are raising concerns.

    WHAT IS DEEP SEA MINING?

    Deep sea mining involves removing mineral deposits and metals from the ocean’s seabed. There are three types of such mining: taking deposit-rich polymetallic nodules off the ocean floor, mining massive seafloor sulphide deposits and stripping cobalt crusts from rock.

    These nodules, deposits and crusts contain materials, such as nickel, rare earths, cobalt and more, that are needed for batteries and other materials used in tapping renewable energy and also for everyday technology like cellphones and computers.

    Engineering and technology used for deep sea mining are still evolving. Some companies are looking to vacuum materials from seafloor using massive pumps. Others are developing artificial intelligence-based technology that would teach deep sea robots how to pluck nodules from the floor. Some are looking to use advanced machines that could mine materials off side of huge underwater mountains and volcanoes.

    Companies and governments view these as strategically important resources that will be needed as onshore reserves are depleted and demand continues to rise.

    HOW IS DEEP SEA MINING REGULATED NOW?

    Countries manage their own maritime territory and exclusive economic zones, while the high seas and the international ocean floor are governed by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas. It is considered to apply to states regardless of whether or not they have signed or ratified it. Under the treaty, the seabed and its mineral resources are considered the “common heritage of mankind” that must be managed in a way that protects the interests of humanity through the sharing of economic benefits, support for marine scientific research, and protecting marine environments.

    Mining companies interested in deep sea exploitation are partnering with countries to help them get exploration licenses.

    More than 30 exploration licenses have been issued so far, with activity mostly focused in an area called the Clarion-Clipperton Fracture Zone, which spans 1.7 million square miles (4.5 million square kilometers) between Hawaii and Mexico.

    WHY IS THERE PRESSURE ON THE ISA TO ESTABLISH REGULATIONS NOW?

    In 2021 the Pacific island nation of Nauru — in partnership with mining company Nauru Ocean Resources Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Canada-based The Metals Company — applied to the ISA to exploit minerals in a specified deep sea area.

    That triggered a clause of the U.N. treaty that requires the ISA to complete regulations governing deep sea exploitation by July 2023. If no regulations are finalized, Nauru can submit an application to conduct the mining without any governing regulations.

    Other countries and private companies can start applying for provisional licenses if the U.N. body fails to approve a set of rules and regulations by July 9. Experts say its unlike it will since the process will likely take several years.

    WHAT ARE THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS?

    Only a small part of the deep seabed has been explored and conservationists worry that ecosystems will be damaged by mining, especially without any environmental protocols.

    Damage from mining can include noise, vibration and light pollution, as well as possible leaks and spills of fuels and other chemicals used in the mining process.

    Sediment plumes from the some mining processes are a major concern. Once valuable materials are taken extracted, slurry sediment plumes are sometimes pumped back into the sea. That can harm filter feeding species like corals and sponges, and could smother or otherwise interfere with some creatures.

    The full extent of implications for deep sea ecosystems is unclear, but scientists have warned that biodiversity loss is inevitable and potentially irreversible.

    “We’re constantly finding new stuff and it’s a little bit premature to start mining the deep sea when we don’t really understand the biology, the environments, the ecosystems or anything else,” said Christopher Kelley, a biologist with research expertise in deep sea ecology.

    WHAT’S NEXT?

    The ISA’s Legal and Technical Commission, which oversees the development of deep sea mining regulations, will meet in early July to discuss the yet-to-be mining code draft.

    The earliest that mining under ISA regulations could begin is 2026. Applications for mining must be considered and environmental impact assessments need to be carried out.

    In the meantime, some companies — such as Google, Samsung, BMW and others — have backed the World Wildlife Fund’s call to pledge to avoid using minerals that have been mined from the planet’s oceans. More than a dozen countries—including France, Germany and several Pacific Island nations— have officially called for a ban, pause or moratorium on deep sea mining at least until environmental safeguards are in place, although it’s unclear how many other countries support such mining. Other countries, such as Norway, are proposing opening their waters to mining.

    ___

    Associated Press climate and environmental coverage receives support from several private foundations. See more about AP’s climate initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Deep sea mining permits may be coming soon. What are they and what might happen?

    Deep sea mining permits may be coming soon. What are they and what might happen?

    [ad_1]

    JAKARTA, Indonesia — The International Seabed Authority — the United Nations body that regulates the world’s ocean floor — is preparing to resume negotiations that could open the international seabed for mining, including for materials critical for the green energy transition.

    Years long negotiations are reaching a critical point where the authority will soon need to begin accepting mining permit applications, adding to worries over the potential impacts on sparsely researched marine ecosystems and habitats of the deep sea.

    Here’s a look at what deep sea mining is, why some companies and countries are applying for permits to carry it out and why environmental activists are raising concerns.

    WHAT IS DEEP SEA MINING?

    Deep sea mining involves removing mineral deposits and metals from the ocean’s seabed. There are three types of such mining: taking deposit-rich polymetallic nodules off the ocean floor, mining massive seafloor sulphide deposits and stripping cobalt crusts from rock.

    These nodules, deposits and crusts contain materials, such as nickel, rare earths, cobalt and more, that are needed for batteries and other materials used in tapping renewable energy and also for everyday technology like cellphones and computers.

    Engineering and technology used for deep sea mining are still evolving. Some companies are looking to vacuum materials from seafloor using massive pumps. Others are developing artificial intelligence-based technology that would teach deep sea robots how to pluck nodules from the floor. Some are looking to use advanced machines that could mine materials off side of huge underwater mountains and volcanoes.

    Companies and governments view these as strategically important resources that will be needed as onshore reserves are depleted and demand continues to rise.

    HOW IS DEEP SEA MINING REGULATED NOW?

    Countries manage their own maritime territory and exclusive economic zones, while the high seas and the international ocean floor are governed by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas. It is considered to apply to states regardless of whether or not they have signed or ratified it. Under the treaty, the seabed and its mineral resources are considered the “common heritage of mankind” that must be managed in a way that protects the interests of humanity through the sharing of economic benefits, support for marine scientific research, and protecting marine environments.

    Mining companies interested in deep sea exploitation are partnering with countries to help them get exploration licenses.

    More than 30 exploration licenses have been issued so far, with activity mostly focused in an area called the Clarion-Clipperton Fracture Zone, which spans 1.7 million square miles (4.5 million square kilometers) between Hawaii and Mexico.

    WHY IS THERE PRESSURE ON THE ISA TO ESTABLISH REGULATIONS NOW?

    In 2021 the Pacific island nation of Nauru — in partnership with mining company Nauru Ocean Resources Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Canada-based The Metals Company — applied to the ISA to exploit minerals in a specified deep sea area.

    That triggered a clause of the U.N. treaty that requires the ISA to complete regulations governing deep sea exploitation by July 2023. If no regulations are finalized, Nauru can submit an application to conduct the mining without any governing regulations.

    Other countries and private companies can start applying for provisional licenses if the U.N. body fails to approve a set of rules and regulations by July 9. Experts say its unlike it will since the process will likely take several years.

    WHAT ARE THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS?

    Only a small part of the deep seabed has been explored and conservationists worry that ecosystems will be damaged by mining, especially without any environmental protocols.

    Damage from mining can include noise, vibration and light pollution, as well as possible leaks and spills of fuels and other chemicals used in the mining process.

    Sediment plumes from the some mining processes are a major concern. Once valuable materials are taken extracted, slurry sediment plumes are sometimes pumped back into the sea. That can harm filter feeding species like corals and sponges, and could smother or otherwise interfere with some creatures.

    The full extent of implications for deep sea ecosystems is unclear, but scientists have warned that biodiversity loss is inevitable and potentially irreversible.

    “We’re constantly finding new stuff and it’s a little bit premature to start mining the deep sea when we don’t really understand the biology, the environments, the ecosystems or anything else,” said Christopher Kelley, a biologist with research expertise in deep sea ecology.

    WHAT’S NEXT?

    The ISA’s Legal and Technical Commission, which oversees the development of deep sea mining regulations, will meet in early July to discuss the yet-to-be mining code draft.

    The earliest that mining under ISA regulations could begin is 2026. Applications for mining must be considered and environmental impact assessments need to be carried out.

    In the meantime, some companies — such as Google, Samsung, BMW and others — have backed the World Wildlife Fund’s call to pledge to avoid using minerals that have been mined from the planet’s oceans. More than a dozen countries—including France, Germany and several Pacific Island nations— have officially called for a ban, pause or moratorium on deep sea mining at least until environmental safeguards are in place, although it’s unclear how many other countries support such mining. Other countries, such as Norway, are proposing opening their waters to mining.

    ___

    Associated Press climate and environmental coverage receives support from several private foundations. See more about AP’s climate initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Deep sea mining permits may be coming soon. What are they and what might happen?

    Deep sea mining permits may be coming soon. What are they and what might happen?

    [ad_1]

    JAKARTA, Indonesia — The International Seabed Authority — the United Nations body that regulates the world’s ocean floor — is preparing to resume negotiations that could open the international seabed for mining, including for materials critical for the green energy transition.

    Years long negotiations are reaching a critical point where the authority will soon need to begin accepting mining permit applications, adding to worries over the potential impacts on sparsely researched marine ecosystems and habitats of the deep sea.

    Here’s a look at what deep sea mining is, why some companies and countries are applying for permits to carry it out and why environmental activists are raising concerns.

    WHAT IS DEEP SEA MINING?

    Deep sea mining involves removing mineral deposits and metals from the ocean’s seabed. There are three types of such mining: taking deposit-rich polymetallic nodules off the ocean floor, mining massive seafloor sulphide deposits and stripping cobalt crusts from rock.

    These nodules, deposits and crusts contain materials, such as nickel, rare earths, cobalt and more, that are needed for batteries and other materials used in tapping renewable energy and also for everyday technology like cellphones and computers.

    Engineering and technology used for deep sea mining are still evolving. Some companies are looking to vacuum materials from seafloor using massive pumps. Others are developing artificial intelligence-based technology that would teach deep sea robots how to pluck nodules from the floor. Some are looking to use advanced machines that could mine materials off side of huge underwater mountains and volcanoes.

    Companies and governments view these as strategically important resources that will be needed as onshore reserves are depleted and demand continues to rise.

    HOW IS DEEP SEA MINING REGULATED NOW?

    Countries manage their own maritime territory and exclusive economic zones, while the high seas and the international ocean floor are governed by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas. It is considered to apply to states regardless of whether or not they have signed or ratified it. Under the treaty, the seabed and its mineral resources are considered the “common heritage of mankind” that must be managed in a way that protects the interests of humanity through the sharing of economic benefits, support for marine scientific research, and protecting marine environments.

    Mining companies interested in deep sea exploitation are partnering with countries to help them get exploration licenses.

    More than 30 exploration licenses have been issued so far, with activity mostly focused in an area called the Clarion-Clipperton Fracture Zone, which spans 1.7 million square miles (4.5 million square kilometers) between Hawaii and Mexico.

    WHY IS THERE PRESSURE ON THE ISA TO ESTABLISH REGULATIONS NOW?

    In 2021 the Pacific island nation of Nauru — in partnership with mining company Nauru Ocean Resources Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Canada-based The Metals Company — applied to the ISA to exploit minerals in a specified deep sea area.

    That triggered a clause of the U.N. treaty that requires the ISA to complete regulations governing deep sea exploitation by July 2023. If no regulations are finalized, Nauru can submit an application to conduct the mining without any governing regulations.

    Other countries and private companies can start applying for provisional licenses if the U.N. body fails to approve a set of rules and regulations by July 9. Experts say its unlike it will since the process will likely take several years.

    WHAT ARE THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS?

    Only a small part of the deep seabed has been explored and conservationists worry that ecosystems will be damaged by mining, especially without any environmental protocols.

    Damage from mining can include noise, vibration and light pollution, as well as possible leaks and spills of fuels and other chemicals used in the mining process.

    Sediment plumes from the some mining processes are a major concern. Once valuable materials are taken extracted, slurry sediment plumes are sometimes pumped back into the sea. That can harm filter feeding species like corals and sponges, and could smother or otherwise interfere with some creatures.

    The full extent of implications for deep sea ecosystems is unclear, but scientists have warned that biodiversity loss is inevitable and potentially irreversible.

    “We’re constantly finding new stuff and it’s a little bit premature to start mining the deep sea when we don’t really understand the biology, the environments, the ecosystems or anything else,” said Christopher Kelley, a biologist with research expertise in deep sea ecology.

    WHAT’S NEXT?

    The ISA’s Legal and Technical Commission, which oversees the development of deep sea mining regulations, will meet in early July to discuss the yet-to-be mining code draft.

    The earliest that mining under ISA regulations could begin is 2026. Applications for mining must be considered and environmental impact assessments need to be carried out.

    In the meantime, some companies — such as Google, Samsung, BMW and others — have backed the World Wildlife Fund’s call to pledge to avoid using minerals that have been mined from the planet’s oceans. More than a dozen countries—including France, Germany and several Pacific Island nations— have officially called for a ban, pause or moratorium on deep sea mining at least until environmental safeguards are in place, although it’s unclear how many other countries support such mining. Other countries, such as Norway, are proposing opening their waters to mining.

    ___

    Associated Press climate and environmental coverage receives support from several private foundations. See more about AP’s climate initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tribal activists oppose Nevada mine key to Biden’s clean energy agenda as ‘green colonialism’

    Tribal activists oppose Nevada mine key to Biden’s clean energy agenda as ‘green colonialism’

    [ad_1]

    OROVADA, Nevada — Just 45 miles (72 kilometers) from the Fort McDermitt Indian Reservation where Daranda Hinkey and her family corral horses and cows, a centerpiece of President Joe Biden’s clean energy plan is taking shape: construction of one of the largest lithium mines in the world.

    As heavy trucks dig up the earth in this remote, windswept region of Nevada to extract the silvery-white metal used in electric-vehicle batteries, the $2.2 billion project is fueling a backlash. “No Lithium. No mine!″ proclaims a large hand-painted sign in Hinkey’s front yard.

    The Biden administration says the project will help mitigate climate change by speeding the shift away from fossil fuels. But Hinkey and other opponents say it is not worth the costs to the local environment and people.

    Similar disputes are taking place around the world as governments and companies advancing renewable energy find themselves battling communities opposed to projects that threaten wildlife, groundwater and air quality.

    Hinkey, 25, is a member of the Fort McDermitt Paiute and Shoshone Tribe and a leader of a group known as People of Red Mountain — named after the scarlet peak that overlooks her house. The group says that in addition to environmental impacts, the Thacker Pass mine would desecrate a site where the U.S. Cavalry massacred their ancestors after the Civil War.

    “Lithium mines and this whole push for renewable energy — the agenda of the Green New Deal — is what I like to call green colonialism,″ Hinkey said. “It’s going to directly affect my people, my culture, my religion, my tradition.”

    Protests near the mining site have flared up for more than two years, and the project has sparked legal challenges, including an appeal that a federal court will hear this month.

    Hinkey had hoped Interior Secretary Deb Haaland — the first Native American Cabinet member — might rally to the side of opponents. But that has not happened.

    Haaland, whose department oversees Thacker Pass, said that while she supports the right to peaceful protests, her agency is in favor of the mine because “the need for our clean energy economy to move forward is definitely important.”

    The project was approved in the waning days of the Trump administration but is central to Biden’s goal for half of all new vehicles sold in the U.S. to be electric by 2030. Lithium batteries are also used to store wind and solar power.

    Haaland told The Associated Press that when her agency inherits a project from a previous administration, “It’s our job to make sure we’re doing things according to the science, to the law.”

    Hinkey sees her activism as a continuation of her leadership on basketball teams in high school and in college, where she guided her Southern Oregon Raiders to a 20-win season as a senior point guard.

    “Corporations are scared of an educated Indian,″ said Hinkey, who hopes to become a teacher. Her athletic experience, education and tribal background make her “someone who can stand up against them,″ she said.

    Hinkey said she is especially disappointed because she voted for Biden and expected his administration to slow down the project that was fast-tracked under President Donald Trump. She and other tribal members “feel very lost, very shoved underneath the carpet,″ Hinkey said.

    The project does have the support of some leaders of Hinkey’s tribe, who point to the promise of jobs and development on a reservation where unemployment is far above the national average.

    “This could help our tribe,″ said Fort McDermitt Tribal Chairman Arlo Crutcher, who recently went to Washington with company executives to meet with the Interior Department. Still, he is skeptical about how many jobs will go to impoverished tribe members.

    Lithium Americas, the Canadian company that is developing the project, signed an agreement with the Fort McDermitt tribe — the closest to the mine among more than two dozen federally recognized tribes and bands in Nevada — to ensure local hiring, job training and other benefits. It also agreed to build a community center that includes a preschool and playground for the reservation, where close to half the population lives in poverty.

    The October 2022 agreement “is a testament to our company’s commitment to go beyond our regulatory requirements and to form constructive relationships with the communities closest to our projects,″ Lithium Americas President and CEO Jonathan Evans said in a statement. General Motors has pledged $650 million to help develop Thacker Pass, which holds enough lithium to build 1 million electric vehicles annually.

    Opponents, including other tribes and environmental groups, argue that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, an Interior Department agency, violated at least three federal laws in approving the mine.

    BLM Director Tracy Stone-Manning defended her agency’s actions, saying the Biden administration allowed construction to begin “because the proposal is solid, and the country needs that lithium.”

    The National Historic Preservation Act requires tribal consultation in all steps of a project on or near tribal land. But Hinkey and other mine opponents say the mine was hastily approved when tribal governments were largely shut down due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

    In its 2021 decision approving the project, the agency said it wrote letters in late 2019 to at least three tribes — including Fort McDermitt — inviting comments. Two online meetings were conducted in August 2020, but no objections were raised by the end of an environmental review in December 2020, the agency said.

    Michon Eben, historic preservation officer for the Reno-Sparks Indian Colony, said the agency’s actions fell far short of genuine consultation.

    “This is the biggest (lithium) mine in the country — and there’s 28 federally recognized tribes and bands in the state of Nevada that all have relationships — and you only send a letter to three tribes? There’s something wrong with that,″ Eben said.

    “The consultation kind of skipped us,” said Gary McKinney, a spokesman for People of Red Mountain and a member of the nearby Duck Valley Shoshone-Paiute Tribe. “Nobody knew about the lithium. They taped a notice on the door and called that” adequate notice,” he said.

    Asked about those claims, Stone-Manning replied: “I regret if people feel that way. I can’t control how people feel.″

    In an interview near the mine site, where workers were installing a water pipeline, McKinney said the project will cause irreparable damage. The mine will require large amounts of water, and conservationists say groundwater and soil could become contaminated with heavy metals. The area is also a nesting ground for the dwindling sage grouse.

    “The water will be lower. Life will be scared away,” he said. “Our culture, our sacred sites will be gone. We’re facing the annihilation of our identity.″

    He and other opponents say the BLM office in Nevada failed to assess the project’s likely impact on the massacre site near Sentinel Rock, which juts above sagebrush and high grass used by roaming cattle herds.

    “What happens to those who were massacred and buried here?” Eben said in an interview at Sentinel Rock.

    The exact location of the massacre, where federal soldiers killed at least 31 Paiute men, women and children, is unknown, although it is generally recognized to be within a few miles of the mine. Tribes call the site Peehee Mu’huh, or “Rotten Moon” in the Paiute language.

    A federal judge in February said construction could begin while also ruling that BLM violated federal law regarding disposal of mine waste. Conservationists have appealed, and the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals scheduled oral arguments for June 26.

    Eben said she is putting her faith in Haaland, a member of New Mexico’s Laguna Pueblo.

    “From one Native woman to another, what I am going to say is, ‘Please come and walk this land with us. Come and listen to our side of the story, our oral histories. A massacre did occur here. … Our people were killed.’”

    And, she added, “you can’t mine your way out of a climate crisis.”

    ___

    Associated Press writers Scott Sonner in Reno, Nevada and Susan Montoya Bryan in Albuquerque, New Mexico contributed to this story.

    __

    Associated Press climate and environmental coverage receives support from several private foundations. See more about AP’s climate initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Renewable energy surges, driven by solar boom and high fuel prices, report finds

    Renewable energy surges, driven by solar boom and high fuel prices, report finds

    [ad_1]

    BERLIN — The world is set to add a record amount of renewable electricity capacity this year as governments and consumers seek to offset high energy prices and take advantage of a boom in solar power, according to a new report Thursday.

    The International Energy Agency said high fossil fuel prices — resulting from Russia’s attack on Ukraine — and concerns about energy security had boosted the rollout of solar and wind power installations, which are expected to reach 440 gigawatts in 2023.

    That’s about a third more than the world added the previous year, taking the global installed capacity to 4,500 GW, roughly the combined total power output of the United States and China, the Paris-based agency said.

    “The global energy crisis has shown renewables are critical for making energy supplies not just cleaner but also more secure and affordable,” said Fatih Birol, the IEA’s executive director.

    “Governments are responding with efforts to deploy them faster,” he said. Recent incentives to install renewables introduced by the Biden administration are already driving a significant uptake in the United States.

    About two-thirds of this year’s increase in renewable power capacity will come from photovoltaic, with both large-scale solar farms and consumer rooftop installations seeing significant growth.

    IEA said manufacturing capacity for PV components was also surging, especially in China.

    Construction of new wind farms is predicted to rebound after a period of low growth. However, in contrast to solar manufacturing, the supply chains for wind turbines aren’t growing fast enough to meet demand, the agency said.

    Birol also cautioned that power grids must be upgraded and expanded to cope with the intermittent nature of solar and wind power, which require a fundamentally different approach by network operators compared with existing coal, gas or nuclear plants.

    The report forecast that several European countries, including Spain, Germany and Ireland, will see wind and solar’s combined share of their overall annual electricity generation top 40% by 2024.

    Shifting the global economy away from fossil fuels is one of the most important steps for reducing greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming.

    Experts say that to meet the Paris climate accord’s goal of limiting temperature rise since pre-industrial times to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit), emissions need to be halved by 2030 and cut to “net zero” by mid-century.

    The International Renewable Energy Agency, a separate body, has called for a major increase in wind and solar investments. Nations are expected to discuss setting an international target for the rollout of renewable energy at this year’s U.N. climate summit in Dubai.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Shift to clean energy accelerating, but coal investments too high, report says

    Shift to clean energy accelerating, but coal investments too high, report says

    [ad_1]

    JAKARTA, Indonesia — Energy security concerns — worsened by the war in Ukraine — and policy support from rich countries are likely to help investments in clean energy outpace spending on fossil fuels, the International Energy Agency said in a report issued Thursday.

    But investments in coal are on course to rise by about 10% in 2023, nearly six times what the IEA has estimated they should be for the world to end its reliance on fossil fuels and achieve emissions cut goals for countering climate change, it said.

    “We are in a significantly better place than we were a few years ago,” Tim Gould, IEA’s chief energy economist, said at the report’s launch Thursday. “There’s still a very long way to go, but there are finally some encouraging signs for us all to welcome.”

    Some $2.8 trillion is set to be invested in energy globally in 2023, of which more than $1.7 trillion is expected to go to clean technologies including modern electricity grids, energy storage, low-emissions fuels and electric vehicles, according to the organization’s latest World Energy Investment report.

    Slightly more than $1 trillion is going to coal, gas and oil — fossil fuels that are a major source of emissions that are contributing to global warming.

    Part of the problem is that demand for energy is outstripping increases in supplies in many parts of the world. Powerful energy industry interests also sway decisions about investments in future capacity, often in favor of fossil fuels.

    Global coal demand reached an all-time high in 2022 and about 40 gigawatts of new coal power plants were approved, the highest figure since 2016, with almost all in China, the report says.

    Still, the trend is shifting in favor of renewable energy. For every $1 spent on fossil fuels, $1.70 is now spent on clean energy. Five years ago the ratio was 1:1, according to the report.

    Clean energy investments have been boosted by a variety of factors in recent years, including periods of strong economic growth and volatile fossil fuel prices that raised concerns about energy security, especially following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

    Enhanced policy support such as the Inflation Reduction Act in the U.S. and initiatives in Europe, Japan, China and elsewhere have also played a role.

    “Solar is the star performer and more than $1 billion per day is expected to go into solar investments in 2023 (USD 380 billion for the year as a whole), edging this spending above that in upstream oil for the first time,” the report said, referring to crude oil output.

    Electric vehicle sales are expected to leap by a third in 2023 after surging in 2022, it said.

    More than 90% of the increase in clean energy investments comes from advanced economies and China, with much less in less wealthy nations. Factors such as high interest rates, weak electricity grid infrastructure and unclear policies are holding back investments in renewable energy in many countries, the report said.

    Vibhuti Garg, the South Asia director for the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, said that the focus for rich countries is on investing in their own economies and not on making that capital available for poorer nations.

    Since 2009, rich nations have promised to spend $100 billion in climate aid for poor nations, with most of it aimed at helping wean them away off fossil fuels like coal and to build clean energy systems. But these financial pledges haven’t been fulfilled. Garg said that this means that developing countries will continue to rely on dirty coal.

    “How do you expect these developing countries to transition when they don’t have money?” she said.

    ___

    Aniruddha Ghosal reported from New Delhi, India.

    ___

    Associated Press climate and environmental coverage receives support from several private foundations. See more about AP’s climate initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Will Biden’s hard-hat environmentalism bridge the divide on clean energy future?

    Will Biden’s hard-hat environmentalism bridge the divide on clean energy future?

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — When John Podesta left his job as an adviser to President Barack Obama nearly a decade ago, he was confident that hundreds of miles of new power transmission lines were coming to the Southwest, expanding the reach of clean energy throughout the region.

    So Podesta was shocked to learn last year, as he reentered the federal government to work on climate issues for President Joe Biden, that the lines had never been built. They still hadn’t even received final regulatory approval.

    “These things get stuck and they don’t get unstuck,” Podesta said in an interview with The Associated Press.

    Podesta is now the point person for untangling one of Biden’s most vexing challenges as he pursues ambitious reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. If the president cannot streamline the permitting process for power plants, transmission lines and other projects, the country is unlikely to have the infrastructure needed for a future powered by carbon-free electricity.

    The issue has become an unlikely feature of high-stakes budget talks underway between the White House and House Republicans as they try to avoid a first-ever default on the country’s debt by the end of the month.

    Whether a deal on permitting can be reached in time is unclear, with Republicans looking for ways to boost oil drilling and Democrats focused on clean energy. But its mere presence on the negotiating table is a sign of how political battle lines are shifting. Although American industry and labor unions have long chafed at these kinds of regulations, some environmentalists have now grown exasperated by red tape as well.

    That represents a stark change for a movement that has been more dedicated to slowing development than championing it, and it has caused unease among longtime allies even as it creates the potential for new partnerships. Still, this transformation is core to Biden’s vision of hard-hat environmentalism, which promises that shifting away from fossil fuels will generate blue-collar jobs.

    “We have to start building things again in America,” Podesta said. “We got too good at stopping things, and not good enough at building things.”

    What gets built, of course, is the question that’s the central hurdle for any agreement.

    The issue of permitting emerged last year during negotiations with Sen. Joe Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat who was a key vote for the Inflation Reduction Act, far-reaching legislation that includes financial incentives for clean energy.

    Manchin pushed a separate proposal that would make it easier to build infrastructure for renewable energy and fossil fuels. His focus has been the Mountain Valley Pipeline, which would carry natural gas through his home state.

    Republicans called the legislation a “political payoff.” Liberal Democrats described it as a “dirty side deal.” Manchin’s idea stalled.

    Nonetheless, Elizabeth Gore, senior vice president for political affairs at the Environmental Defense Fund, said the senator “gets a lot of credit for really elevating this.”

    “It was his effort that really put this issue on the map,” she said.

    Since then, the Capitol has been awash in proposals to alleviate permitting bottlenecks. House Republicans passed their own as part of budget legislation last month, aiming to increase production of oil, natural gas and coal. Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., recently introduced another proposal geared toward clean energy.

    “I think there is a path forward,” Gore said, describing all the ideas “as stepping stones.”

    Neil Bradley, executive vice president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, was also optimistic.

    “The hurdle isn’t whether people think it’s a good idea or not,” he said. “The hurdle is getting the details worked out.”

    Despite broad interest in permitting changes, reaching a deal will likely involve trade-offs that are difficult for Democrats and environmentalists to stomach.

    Republicans want to see more fossil fuels and, now that they control the House, no proposal will advance without their consent. But too many concessions to Republicans in the House could jeopardize support in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

    Biden has frustrated environmentalists by approving Willow, an oil drilling project in an untouched swath of Alaskan wilderness. After Podesta finished a speech on permitting at a Washington think tank this month, activists rushed to block his vehicle with a white banner that said “end fossil fuels” in bold black letters.

    Podesta argues that it’s impossible to immediately phase out oil and gas, and he said the status quo won’t suffice when it comes to building clean energy infrastructure. He points to federal data analyzed by the Brookings Institution that found permitting transmission lines can take seven years, while natural gas pipelines take less than half that time.

    He was circumspect when asked about where the negotiations may lead.

    “There is bipartisan interest in the topic,” Podesta said. “Where any of that ends, I can’t predict.”

    A deal could bolster Biden’s political coalition by easing tension between between environmentalists and labor unions, which have often been frustrated by objections to projects that would lead to jobs.

    “They’ve unnecessarily taken food off the table of my members,” said Sean McGarvey, president of the North America’s Building Trades Unions.

    The relationship with environmentalists “could turn into an alliance depending on how this process ends,” he said, but “we’ve got to do some good business to see if we’re inviting each other for barbecues and crab picks.”

    Other factions of the green movement have already expressed frustration.

    Brett Hartl, government affairs director for the Center for Biological Diversity, said the administration made a mistake by allowing Manchin’s proposal to be a starting point. The White House, he said, “negotiated away the game at the beginning and put the football on the 2-yard line.”

    He also criticized Podesta’s approach to permitting.

    “He’s dogmatically saying that environmentalists are the problem here,” he said. “It’s easy to caricature environmental legislation as the boogeyman.”

    Historians trace the American regulatory system to a backlash against massive infrastructure initiatives in the middle of the 20th century, such as the interstate highway system and a series of dams. The projects raised concerns about environmental impacts and left local communities feeling steamrolled. More fears about ecological damage were sparked by an oil spill off the coast of Santa Barbara, California, and fires on the polluted Cuyahoga River in Ohio.

    The result was the National Environmental Policy Act, signed by President Richard Nixon in 1970 to require federal agencies to consider the environmental ramifications of their decisions. State-level laws, such as the California Environmental Quality Act, proliferated at the same time.

    “We have a system that works for what it was designed to do,” said Christy Goldfuss, chief policy impact officer at the Natural Resource Defense Council. “What we’re looking at doing is optimizing that system for the future we need. And that’s a fundamentally different conversation than anything we’ve had before.”

    “It’s an incredibly difficult shift to make for the environmental movement,” she added. “And I don’t think everybody is going to make it. Some organizations are going to continue to stand in the way of development.”

    And what about that transmission lines in the Southwest that Podesta was counting on?

    The goal is to span about 520 miles, carrying electricity from a series of turbines in New Mexico that’s being billed as the largest wind project in the hemisphere. The lines were rerouted to satisfy the Department of Defense, which tests weapons in the area, but local conservationists still say that natural habitats will be threatened by construction.

    On Thursday, nearly two decades after the initial proposal, the federal government announced it had approved the project.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Planned Senate bill would counteract Mining Law ruling

    Planned Senate bill would counteract Mining Law ruling

    [ad_1]

    RENO, Nev. — A Nevada Democratic U.S. senator is looking to Congress to ensure mining companies can use established mineral claims to dump waste on neighboring federal lands as they always had before a federal appeals court adopted a stricter interpretation of a 150-year-old law.

    Environmentalists widely praised the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ more restrictive ruling, which blocked the Rosemont copper mine in southern Arizona last year because the company hadn’t proven it had mineral rights on the adjacent land where the waste rock was to be buried.

    The ramifications of the ruling are worrisome, however, for President Joe Biden’s clean energy agenda and for key projects to mine lithium, cobalt and other materials needed to manufacture batteries for electric vehicles.

    In response, Nevada U.S. Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto drafted a bill she intends to introduce Tuesday with Republican Sen. James Risch of Idaho, her office told The Associated Press on Monday. The bill would amend a 1993 budget reconciliation act but primarily clarifies definitions of activities and rights central to the 1872 Mining Law.

    The language is intended to insulate mines from the more onerous and likely most expensive standards imposed on the industry by the 9th Circuit ruling, which was a significant departure from long-established mining practices that environmentalists have fought for decades.

    Two U.S. judges in Nevada have since enforced it — one in a complicated way that nevertheless allowed construction to begin at what would be the largest lithium mine in the nation near the Oregon line.

    Without congressional action, Cortez and other senators say critical mineral projects across the West are threatened, including those needed to expedite the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy and to bolster national defense.

    “This misguided decision would force all mining activities, even the storage of waste, to happen on mineral-rich land, which could impede critical mineral production all across the country,” Cortez Masto said in a statement emailed to AP.

    Nevada is the biggest gold-producing state and home to some of the nation’s largest lithium deposits.

    Republican Sen. Mike Crapo of Idaho and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, an independent, have signed on to the bill as co-sponsors.

    The measure is sure to meet staunch opposition from conservationists who consider the Rosemont ruling and its ripple effects one of their biggest victories in years.

    While they generally embrace Biden’s efforts to speed the transition to renewables, they continue to challenge even so-called green energy projects with lawsuits accusing the government of violating laws protecting endangered species, water resources and cultural and historical sites.

    The Rosemont ruling upended the government’s long-held position that the 1872 Mining Law — the nation’s premier regulation of mining since the Civil War — conveys the same rights established through a valid mining claim to adjacent land for the disposal of tailings and other waste.

    The 9th Circuit held that instead, the company must establish — and the government must validate — that valuable minerals are present under such lands for a claim to exist.

    Based largely on that ruling, U.S. District Judge Miranda Du in Reno ruled in February that the Bureau of Land Management had violated the law when it approved Lithium Americas’ plans for the Thacker Pass mine near the Nevada-Oregon line. But she allowed construction to begin last month while the bureau works to bring the project into compliance with federal law.

    The 9th Circuit has scheduled oral arguments June 26 on environmentalists’ appeal of Du’s refusal to halt the mine even though she found it was approved illegally.

    Last month, U.S. Judge Larry Hicks in Reno also adopted the Rosemont standard in his ruling that nullified Bureau of Land Management approval of a Nevada molybdenum mine and prohibited any construction.

    “BLM cannot skirt the Mining Law requirement that valuable mineral deposits must be found in order to occupy the land,” he wrote March 31.

    Industry leaders said Cortez Masto’s legislation is necessary to restore a regulatory landscape in place for more than a century and expedite mining of materials critical to expanding sources of renewable energy.

    “Regulatory certainty, or the lack thereof, will either underpin or undermine efforts to meet the extraordinary mineral demand now at our doorstep,” said Rich Nolan, president and CEO of the National Mining Association.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Climate envoy Kerry: No rolling back clean energy transition

    Climate envoy Kerry: No rolling back clean energy transition

    [ad_1]

    SAPPORO, Japan — So much has been invested in clean energy that there can be no rolling back of moves to end carbon emissions, U.S. climate envoy John Kerry said Sunday.

    Kerry noted that if countries deliver on promises to phase out polluting fossil fuels, the world can limit average global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit), better than the worst case scenarios.

    “We’re in a very different place than where we were a year ago, let alone two and three years ago,” Kerry said in an interview with The Associated Press.

    “But we’re not doing everything we said we’d do,” he said, after attending a meeting of energy and environment ministers of the Group of Seven wealthy nations. “A lot of countries need to step up including ours to reduce emissions faster, deploy renewables faster, bring new technologies online faster all of that has to happen.”

    Kerry said the G-7 talks in northeastern Japan’s Sapporo were “really constructive” in yielding a show of unity for phasing out use of unabated fossil fuels that emit greenhouse gases.

    A meeting Thursday of President Joe Biden’s Major Economies Forum, which includes leaders of 20 nations that account for more than three-quarters of global carbon emissions, offers another opportunity for committing resources to the goal of reaching zero emissions by 2050, Kerry said.

    “The United States and all the developed world has the responsibility to help the developing world through this crisis,” he said. “Those countries will really determine what happens. If they will reduce, if they will take the lead, if they will start deploying the new technologies, if they will stop using unabated fossil fuels, we’ll up the chance of winning this battle.”

    Kerry held out hope for cooperation with China on climate despite friction over Taiwan, human rights, technology and other issues, saying he had a “very good conversation” with his Chinese counterpart, Xie Zhenhua, just days earlier.

    “We agreed that we need to get back together personally, visit and try to see what we can find to work on together to accelerate the process. Is that doable? I hope so,” Kerry said.

    The Biden administration has moved aggressively to entice companies to invest in electric vehicles and other cleaner energy technologies. While the U.S. still lags some other countries in use of EVs, the market is changing as consumer preferences evolve and manufacturers invest billions.

    No one person can roll back what’s happening in the climate sector, Kerry said, “because private companies have made major bets on the future and they’re not going to reverse them.”

    One area where much more needs to be done is in climate financing, Kerry said, even though developed countries were close to their $100 billion goal in annual support for developing nations. In 2020, $83 billion was committed.

    The annual meetings of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund last week in Washington were a start, “but they’re not enough. They didn’t produce enough of a change, in our judgement, to really unleash the kind of finance support that’s necessary.

    “Our hope … is that over the course over the next weeks and months more will be put on the table, more will be agreed upon and we can move faster,” he said.

    The hope is to reform the structure of finance to get such multilateral development banks to lend more and at better rates.

    “Anyone is going to look pretty critically at what’s going to happen with their money,” Kerry said, noting that “there’s a lot of money and it’s looking for these deals right now.”

    The Inflation Reduction Act is a major step toward incentivizing climate-friendly investments, “sending a signal to the market place that there’s money to be made by transitioning and moving in the direction of clean energy technologies,” he said.

    In the U.S., money will not be invested in new coal-fired power plants, because “there’s no such thing as clean coal,” Kerry said. “The marketplace is not supporting that. Investors are not supporting that.”

    Some countries, including Japan, have balked at setting a clear timeline for phasing out coal-fired plants, citing energy security. And for some countries, it’s a valid concern, Kerry said, though he added, “I think energy security is being exaggerated in some cases.”

    The greater imperative is to do whatever is possible to draw down carbon emissions, given the millions of people who die each year due to unclean air, extreme heat and other dire consequences of climate change.

    “If we’re going to be responsible, we have to turn around and figure out how we are going to more rapidly terminate the emissions. We have to cut the emissions that are warming the planet and heading us inexorably toward several tipping points beyond which there is no reverse,” Kerry said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Climate envoy Kerry: No rolling back clean energy transition

    Climate envoy Kerry: No rolling back clean energy transition

    [ad_1]

    SAPPORO, Japan — So much has been invested in clean energy that there can be no rolling back of moves to end carbon emissions, U.S. climate envoy John Kerry said Sunday.

    Kerry noted that if countries deliver on promises to phase out polluting fossil fuels, the world can limit average global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit), better than the worst case scenarios.

    “We’re in a very different place than where we were a year ago, let alone two and three years ago,” Kerry said in an interview with The Associated Press.

    “But we’re not doing everything we said we’d do,” he said, after attending a meeting of energy and environment ministers of the Group of Seven wealthy nations. “A lot of countries need to step up including ours to reduce emissions faster, deploy renewables faster, bring new technologies online faster all of that has to happen.”

    Kerry said the G-7 talks in northeastern Japan’s Sapporo were “really constructive” in yielding a show of unity for phasing out use of unabated fossil fuels that emit greenhouse gases.

    A meeting Thursday of President Joe Biden’s Major Economies Forum, which includes leaders of 20 nations that account for more than three-quarters of global carbon emissions, offers another opportunity for committing resources to the goal of reaching zero emissions by 2050, Kerry said.

    “The United States and all the developed world has the responsibility to help the developing world through this crisis,” he said. “Those countries will really determine what happens. If they will reduce, if they will take the lead, if they will start deploying the new technologies, if they will stop using unabated fossil fuels, we’ll up the chance of winning this battle.”

    Kerry held out hope for cooperation with China on climate despite friction over Taiwan, human rights, technology and other issues, saying he had a “very good conversation” with his Chinese counterpart, Xie Zhenhua, just days earlier.

    “We agreed that we need to get back together personally, visit and try to see what we can find to work on together to accelerate the process. Is that doable? I hope so,” Kerry said.

    The Biden administration has moved aggressively to entice companies to invest in electric vehicles and other cleaner energy technologies. While the U.S. still lags some other countries in use of EVs, the market is changing as consumer preferences evolve and manufacturers invest billions.

    No one person can roll back what’s happening in the climate sector, Kerry said, “because private companies have made major bets on the future and they’re not going to reverse them.”

    One area where much more needs to be done is in climate financing, Kerry said, even though developed countries were close to their $100 billion goal in annual support for developing nations. In 2020, $83 billion was committed.

    The annual meetings of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund last week in Washington were a start, “but they’re not enough. They didn’t produce enough of a change, in our judgement, to really unleash the kind of finance support that’s necessary.

    “Our hope … is that over the course over the next weeks and months more will be put on the table, more will be agreed upon and we can move faster,” he said.

    The hope is to reform the structure of finance to get such multilateral development banks to lend more and at better rates.

    “Anyone is going to look pretty critically at what’s going to happen with their money,” Kerry said, noting that “there’s a lot of money and it’s looking for these deals right now.”

    The Inflation Reduction Act is a major step toward incentivizing climate-friendly investments, “sending a signal to the market place that there’s money to be made by transitioning and moving in the direction of clean energy technologies,” he said.

    In the U.S., money will not be invested in new coal-fired power plants, because “there’s no such thing as clean coal,” Kerry said. “The marketplace is not supporting that. Investors are not supporting that.”

    Some countries, including Japan, have balked at setting a clear timeline for phasing out coal-fired plants, citing energy security. And for some countries, it’s a valid concern, Kerry said, though he added, “I think energy security is being exaggerated in some cases.”

    The greater imperative is to do whatever is possible to draw down carbon emissions, given the millions of people who die each year due to unclean air, extreme heat and other dire consequences of climate change.

    “If we’re going to be responsible, we have to turn around and figure out how we are going to more rapidly terminate the emissions. We have to cut the emissions that are warming the planet and heading us inexorably toward several tipping points beyond which there is no reverse,” Kerry said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Over and out: Germany switches off its last nuclear plants

    Over and out: Germany switches off its last nuclear plants

    [ad_1]

    BERLIN — BERLIN (AP) — “Nuclear power, no thanks!”

    What was once a slogan found on the bumper of many a German car became a reality Saturday, as the country shut down its three remaining nuclear power plants in line with a long-planned transition toward renewable energy.

    The shutdown of Emsland, Neckarwestheim II and Isar II shortly before midnight was cheered earlier in the day by anti-nuclear campaigners outside the three reactors and at rallies in Berlin and Munich. Inside the plants, staff held more somber ceremonies to mark the occasion.

    Decades of anti-nuclear protests in Germany, stoked by disasters at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima, had put pressure on successive governments to end the use of a technology that critics argue is unsafe and unsustainable.

    But with other industrialized countries, such as the United States, Japan, China, France and Britain, counting on nuclear energy to replace planet-warming fossil fuels, Germany’s decision to stop using both has drawn skepticism at home and abroad, as well as unsuccessful last-minute calls to halt the decision.

    Defenders of atomic energy say fossil fuels should be phased out first as part of global efforts to curb climate change, arguing that nuclear power produces far fewer greenhouse gas emissions and is safe, if properly managed.

    As energy prices spiked last year due to the war in Ukraine, some members of German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s government got cold feet about closing the nuclear plants as planned on Dec. 31, 2022. In a compromise, Scholz agreed to a one-time extension of the deadline, but insisted that the final countdown would happen on April 15.

    Still, Bavaria’s conservative governor, Markus Soeder, who backed the original deadline set in 2011 when Chancellor Angela Merkel was Germany’s leader, this week called the shutdown “an absolute mistaken decision.”

    “While many countries in the world are even expanding nuclear power, Germany is doing the opposite,” Soeder said. “We need every possible form of energy. Otherwise, we risk higher electricity prices and businesses moving away.”

    Advocates of nuclear power worldwide have slammed the German shutdown, aware that the move by Europe’s biggest economy could deal a blow to a technology they tout as a clean and reliable alternative to fossil fuels. On Friday, dozens of scientists including James Hansen, a former NASA climate expert credited with drawing public attention to global warming in 1988, sent a letter to Scholz urging him to keep the nuclear plants running.

    The German government has acknowledged that, in the short term, the country will have to rely more heavily on polluting coal and natural gas to meet its energy needs, even as it takes steps to massively ramp up electricity production from solar and wind. Germany aims to be carbon neutral by 2045.

    But officials such as Environment Minister Steffi Lemke say the idea of a nuclear renaissance is a myth, citing data showing that atomic energy’s share of global electricity production is shrinking.

    At a recent news conference in Berlin, Lemke noted that new nuclear plants in Europe, such as Hinkley Point C in Britain, have faced significant delays and cost overruns. Funds used to maintain ageing reactors or build new ones would be better spent on installing cheap renewables, she said.

    Energy experts such as Claudia Kemfert of the German Institute for Economic Research in Berlin say the 5% share of Germany’s electricity currently coming from nuclear can be easily replaced without risking blackouts.

    The northwestern town of Lingen, home to the Emsland plant, plans to become a hub for hydrogen production using electricity generated from North Sea wind farms, Mayor Dieter Krone told The Associated Press in an interview this week.

    The power plant’s operator, RWE, made clear that it is committed to the shutdown. The company still runs some of Europe’s dirtiest coal-fired power plants. It recently pushed through the destruction of a village for a mine expansion as part of a plan to increase short-term production before ending coal use by 2030.

    Many of Germany’s nuclear power plants will still be undergoing costly dismantling by then. The question of what to do with highly radioactive material accumulated in the 62 years since the country’s first reactor started operating remains unsolved. Efforts to find a final home for hundreds of containers of toxic waste have faced fierce resistance from local groups and officials, including Soeder, the Bavarian governor.

    “Nuclear power supplied electricity for three generations, but its legacy remains dangerous for 30,000 generations,” said Lemke, who also pointed to previously unconsidered risks such as the targeting of civilian atomic facilities during conflicts.

    Finding a place to safely store spent nuclear fuel is a problem that other nations using the technology face, including the United States. Still, U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm has said that nuclear power will “play a critical role in America’s clean energy future.” This week, she welcomed Japan’s decision to restart many of its reactors.

    With debate raging again in Germany about whether the shutdown is a good idea, the top official in charge of nuclear safety at the Environment Ministry, Gerrit Niehaus, was asked by a reporter to sum up in a single sentence what lessons should be learned from the country’s brief atomic era.

    “You need to think things through to the end,” Niehaus said.

    ___

    Follow AP’s coverage of the climate and environment at https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Mini hydro company raises $18M to generate power in canals

    Mini hydro company raises $18M to generate power in canals

    [ad_1]

    A startup business that places small turbines in irrigation canals to generate electricity has raised $18.4 million to scale up its technology for carbon-free hydropower.

    Emily Morris, CEO and founder of Emrgy, said her inspiration for making electricity in places that some people might find unlikely was seeing water swiftly flowing through the vast network of U.S. irrigation infrastructure. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation alone operates 1,600 miles of main canals.

    In the same way that putting solar on rooftops avoids disturbing the land, making use of existing canals means the hydropower turbines don’t have to disturb the natural environment.

    “Our infrastructure represents a new sector of renewable energy real estate,” Morris said in an interview.

    Irrigation canals in the U.S. are made of concrete or stone and transport water from main sources to fields. Emrgy units look something like a propeller with blades rotating parallel to the ground. Water in the canals turns them and then flows past; there is no dam. The spinning turbines do change how the water moves through the canals, slowing it, so Emrgy works closely with water operators.

    Emrgy’s installations are very small in the commercial sense — between 2 and 10 megawatts. But that’s approximately enough to power a neighborhood or a small campus.

    It “can amount to a pretty significant amount of power,” said John Gulliver, an engineering professor emeritus at the University of Minnesota, given the miles of canals.

    An installation is made up of modules that each generate 5-25 kilowatts, but Morris said the company would never deploy a single turbine, just as a solar company would not install a single solar panel on a roof.

    “We need everything we can get from all of the renewable energy sources,” said Dan Reicher, senior scholar at the Stanford University School of Sustainability. “So I do think this energy generation is meaningful.” It’s also environmentally low impact, he said.

    Daniel Kirschen, an engineering professor at the University of Washington made the same point. “If we can generate a reasonable amount of power from them, it’s very useful,” he said.

    Traditional large-scale hydropower projects have faced scrutiny for their environmental impact, including submerging communities, slowing rivers, and blocking fish migration. Some are being demolished. On the other hand, they generate enormous amount of energy, as long as it rains and snows.

    The Emrgy systems connect to the grid the same way any distributed wind or solar does. Sometimes electric distribution lines run right along canals. The turbines can be installed quickly without lengthy permitting.

    “I’ve watched how solar has risen to dominate the renewable energy mix over recent years,” said Morris. “We know the faster we can generate new power means we will be more impactful and can grow.”

    Emrgy’s systems are currently in use at Denver Water, Oakdale Irrigation District in California, a district in Salt Lake City and one in New Zealand. The company has a pilot in South Africa and is expanding.

    The $18.4 million will go to hire more people, develop projects, and open a first assembly facility in Aurora, Colorado.

    The Inflation Reduction Act signed last fall is helping. It offers incentives for U.S.-based clean energy manufacturing. Emrgy gets a 10% tax credit for sourcing its machinery and components in the U.S. and a 30% federal investment tax credit for renewable energy development.

    “This is definitely a renewable resource that needs to be tapped and it’s fantastic they have an economic solution,” said Kirschen.

    ___

    Associated Press climate and environmental coverage receives support from several private foundations. See more about AP’s climate initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Japan, US agree to cooperate on geothermal energy

    Japan, US agree to cooperate on geothermal energy

    [ad_1]

    Japan and the United States have agreed to cooperate on developing geothermal energy, one of the most plentiful resources on this volcanic island chain

    ByELAINE KURTENBACH AP Business Writer

    SAPPORO, Japan — Japan and the United States agreed Saturday to cooperate on developing geothermal energy, one of the most plentiful resources on this volcanic island chain.

    The memorandum of commitment was signed Saturday on the sidelines of a meeting of the Group of Seven energy and environment ministers in the northern city of Hokkaido.

    Japan’s famed hot springs reflect its abundant geothermal activity, but the spas and resorts clustered around them have slowed efforts to use that resource to generate power.

    The pact signed by Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm and Japan‘s minister of economy, trade and industry, Yasutoshi Nishimura, says that geothermal energy is recognized as a “renewable energy technology that the United States and Japan can work together to advance.”

    It calls for collaborating in research and development and exchange of information and in pursuing geothermal projects in the U.S., Japan and other countries. It’s one of an array of areas where the two countries intend to collaborate in reducing reliance on fossil fuels and cutting carbon emissions that contribute to climate change.

    “The prospects of offshore wind are enormous. The prospects of geothermal. We’re very excited about partnering with Japan on these kinds of issues,” Granholm said in an interview with The Associated Press on Friday ahead of the G-7 meetings.

    Adding more geothermal power could make it possible for Japan to provide 90% of its power generation from renewable sources, according to an estimate by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. That would amount to a 92% reduction in the country’s greenhouse gas emissions, it said in a recent study.

    So far, Japan’s geothermal capacity has been underutilized: it has dozens of small power plants run on the steaming hot springs dotted across the country, but together they account for less than 1% of its total power generating capacity.

    Both Japan and the U.S. are looking to export geothermal technology.

    Japanese companies are participating in a joint project to build what is expected to be the world’s largest geothermal power station, in Indonesia’s Sumatra, with 320 gigawatts of electricity.

    Biomass and geothermal power also contribute less than 1% of U.S. generating capacity, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

    [ad_2]

    Source link