Avsnitt
-
The Benefits of Restoring Aquatic Ecosystems
For over a century, native salmon populations in California have been adversely impacted by human activities such as mining, dam building, and overfishing practices, often leading to the loss of critical habitat and decreased genetic diversity. With additional environmental stress from climate change, such as rising surface temperatures and changes in freshwater temperature and flow, salmon populations have been quickly declining. In addition, dams trap salmon into the warmest parts of the watershed, where they are more vulnerable to predators and have decreased breeding area necessary for their survival. Salmon are an incredibly important marine species, often referred to as a keystone species, as they play an essential role in the health and function of an ecosystem. Not only are salmon ecologically beneficial through their ability to disperse nutrients throughout streams and rivers, but they are also culturally significant to Indigenous people. Indigenous culture has historic ties to salmon, including reliance on the species for sustenance and livelihood. As a result, indigenous tribes have a particular attachment to and concern for salmon, and issues such as diminished water quality and the burdens brought about by climate change have a deep resonance. In order to restore salmon populations, Indigenous groups and environmental activists have advocated for increased restoration of watersheds, the reopening and improving of ecologically important areas, and the removal of dams that block natural salmon spawning habitats.
Dam Removal as Solution to Climate Change
As climate change reduces water flows in California and increases temperatures beyond which salmon can tolerate, certain populations of salmon have become endangered species. Drastically reduced population levels have brought about a wave of concern, as their absence can disrupt nutrient cycling, reduce food availability, and negatively impact the livelihoods of people who depend on salmon for sustenance, income and cultural value. The “California Salmon Strategy” outlines actions for state agencies to stabilize and promote recovery of salmon populations. The plan envisions coordination among multiple state agencies, Tribal Nations, and federal agencies for implementation.
In the late 19th century, treaties between Pacific Northwest tribes and federal agencies gave tribes the right to hunt, gather, and fish in “accustomed grounds” in exchange for land. However, by the mid-20th century, these agreements had largely been abandoned by the federal government, with states outlawing traditional methods of subsistence fishing. Coupled with increased development and resultant large-scale habitat loss, salmon populations have been on a steady decline. Tribal governments have long opposed the construction of dams in California, raising concerns of the devastating effects such construction has had on their way of life and the biodiversity of river ecosystems.
Therefore, one solution has been the removal of dams to allow for continual, unobstructed streams of water for salmon to move freely through. Large dams built in the early 1900s block salmon’s access to over 90% of historical spawning and rearing habitat in mountainous streams. The largest river restoration project is currently taking place on the Klamath River, located in Southern Oregon and Northern California, where dam removal is predicted to improve water quality and restore access to more than 420 miles of habitat. The lack of access to these cold waters for spawning was one of the primary reasons for the steady decline of California’s salmon population. Studies project that the removal of the Klamath Dam will reduce the river’s temperature by 2-4 degrees, which salmon prefer as cold water holds more oxygen, allowing for improved metabolism and the preservation of salmon quality, spurring new population growth.
In addition to dam removal, the California Salmon Strategy proposes expanding habitat for spawning and protecting water flow and quality in key rivers. By fostering collaborative efforts, the State of California and Tribal Nations hope to successfully restore salmon spawning habitats and reintroduce salmon through traditional ecological knowledge.
Benefits of Salmon Restoration
Salmon restoration will help restore genetic diversity, improve habitat, and foster resilience. Beyond ecological benefits, restoring salmon habitats will benefit local communities and restore their cultural significance. The removal of dams like that on the Klamath River has already been a huge success in reopening former habitat that historically supported diverse salmon populations, with significant salmon spawning showing signs of a rejuvenation of this endangered species.
Challenges of Restoring Salmon
Unfortunately, salmon will continue to face the threat of climate change, particularly due to the lack of cold, readily available water. Salmon’s migratory lifestyle patterns are also under threat from climate change, as a lack of cold water prevents survival at different stages of the life cycle in order to reach their spawning habitats in time. One major concern of the dam removal process is the short-term increase in turbidity and water quality problems during the removal process. There also could be the potential for disrupted habitats and short-term fish mortality due to the changing water quality dynamics. However, water quality problems usually pass after the initial slug of sediment moves downstream, allowing for long-term benefits to take hold.
About our guest
Regina Chichizola, Executive Director of Save California Salmon is a long-term advocate for tribal water rights, clean water, wild salmon, and environmental justice. Chichizola is an advocate for the restoration of salmon populations through strategies like dam removal and wetland restoration.
ResourcesCalifornia Trout: Klamath Dams RemovalUS Fish and Wildlife Service: Why are dams getting removed and how will this change our rivers?USGS: Simulating Water Temperature of the Klamath River under Dam Removal and Climate Change ScenariosFurther ReadingAmerican Rivers: The Ecology of Dam Removal: A Summary of Benefits and ImpactsCalifornia Salmon Strategy for a Hotter, Drier Future: Restoring Aquatic Ecosystems in the Age of Climate ChangeKatherine Abbott et al: Incorporating climate change into restoration decisions: perspectives from dam removal practitionersNOAA Fisheries: River Temperatures and Survival of Endangered California Winter-Run Chinook Salmon in the 2021 DroughtScientific American: Climate Change Complicates the Whole Dam DebateUSGS: Shifting Practices of Dam Management and Dam Removal in a Changing WorldFor a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/removing-dams-on-rivers-to-ensure-climate-resilience-for-salmon-with-regina-chichizola
-
Reconductoring power grids to boost energy efficiency
The expansion of renewable energy has resulted in a heightened need for greater transmission capacity of the electrical grid. Unfortunately, permitting and cost allocation have been large hurdles to the potential of rapid expansion to meet future demand. As an alternative, large-scale reconductoring of advanced conductor systems has been proposed as a solution. Such an alternative can double transmission capacity cost-effectively, without the need to ensure additional permitting. In order to achieve this transition, old steel power lines would be replaced with carbon fiber, reducing electricity loss and boosting the overall capacity of the power grid.
How does reconductoring work?In order to achieve clean energy goals, it is vital that we increase power grid capacity. To briefly summarize, electrons travel along transmission lines between towers made of conducting elements and a strength member, which allows conductors to hang between towers. The most common type of reinforcement is ACSR, aluminum conductor steel reinforced, used in overhead electrical transmissions. ACSR is susceptible to degradation and breakage, which may lead to more frequent power outages and increased chemical runoff into the environment. As an alternative, ACSS has been proposed by researchers as it carries more current than ACSR and is supported at higher temperatures.
According to recent studies by the Goldman School and GridLab, replacing power lines with advanced conductors would enable 90% clean electricity by 2035. The report revealed that reconductoring transmission lines could add approximately 65 TW-miles of new interzonal transmission capacity in ten years, compared to 16TW-miles from building only new transmission lines. In terms of pricing, implementing advanced conductors costs around 20% more than building new lines. Yet replacing old lines with advanced conductors is typically half the cost than building new lines for the same capacity, partly because you reuse old infrastructure and the new models are much more energy efficient. Further policy and legislation is necessary in order to drive this technology into the future and ensure proper permitting, funding, and planning.
What are some of the benefits?Advanced composite-core conductors such as ACSS can carry double the existing capacity, operate at higher temperatures, and reduce line sag. Further, replacing the steel for a stronger yet smaller composite-based core can avoid the construction of new lines which bring about land acquisition and increasing permitting. There is already a growing movement towards reconductoring, as 90,000 miles of advanced conductors have been deployed globally. More advanced conductors also have the benefit of being cost-effective, with an estimated $180 billion in systems cost savings with more long-term structure. Advanced conductors enable a doubling of line capacity at less than half the cost of new lines. Alongside the benefits, at large, reconductoring can play a pivotal role in low-cost decarbonization of power systems.
What are some of the drawbacks?Amidst the potential advantages are obstacles that may impede the future progress of reconductoring. First, there is a lack of awareness. Conventionally, the only way to expand the grid capacity has been to build new lines. Utilities are not aware of the existing solution and often fail to take reconductoring into account. Alongside this is a lack of experience and misconception that implementing reconductoring lines is difficult and unrealistic. As there is a lack of incentives for utilities to improve their products, cheaper solutions are not enticing for their rate of return regulation. Particularly if reconductoring only occurs in localized areas as opposed to system-wide implementation, the benefits may be limited. Thus, government prioritization of this new solution is critical in order to boost conductor efficiency.
About our guestUmed Paliwal is a senior scientist at the Center for Environmental Public Policy and the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley. Umed conducts research on ways to integrate renewables on the grid and understand its impact on reliability and energy pricing. Umed’s research has revealed that replacing old power lines with newer technology can boost the capacity of the power grid and help to achieve clean energy goals. He holds a Master of Public Policy from UC Berkeley where he focused on energy markets, regulation, power systems modeling and data analytics.
ResourcesGrid rewiring: An answer for Biden’s climate goals?Reconductoring Could Help Solve America’s Looming Grid CrisisReconductoring US power lines could quadruple new transmission capacity by 2035: reportFurther ReadingAccelerating Transmission Expansion by Using Advanced Conductors in Existing Right-of-WayAdvanced Conductors on Existing Transmission Corridors to Accelerate Low Cost DecarbonizationThe 2035 Report: Reconductoring With Advanced Conductors Can Accelerate The Rapid Transmission Expansion Required For A Clean GridFor a transcript of this episode, please visit https://climatebreak.org/increasing-efficiency-through-power-line-reconductoring-with-umed-paliwal/
-
Saknas det avsnitt?
-
What are public utility commissions (PUCs)?
In the transition to clean energy, state public utility commissions (PUCs), which regulate electric, gas, telecommunications, water and wastewater utilities, play an increasingly important role in achieving energy efficiency, enabling renewable energy, and implementing policies for greenhouse gas emissions reduction. PUCs play a pivotal role in determining the energy mix, setting rates, and deciding on investments in infrastructure, such as electric vehicle (EV) charging stations. The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), for example, has to balance safety, reliable utility service, and reasonable rates through the regulation of various large investor-owned electric, natural gas, and water utilities. Utility commissions like CPUC are given a statutory mandate to ensure reasonable, adequate and efficient service to customers at just and reasonable prices. PUCs can issue regulations that impact electricity generation, the adoption of clean energy, and related emissions of pollutants and GHGs. PUCs can play an important role in shaping energy infrastructure, policy, and clean energy development.
The Role PUCs play in shaping energy infrastructure
PUCs were first created in the early 20th century to focus on overseeing operations and the utility investment in service while ensuring affordable rates. That role has evolved, and now PUCs often play a transformative role in transitioning towards a greener economy. PUCs have the ability to consider the impacts of GHG emissions, equity, grid reliability, distributed energy resources, and increased consumer choices in their policy decisions.
PUCs oversee planning processes that affect a utility’s resource portfolio and therefore its environmental profile. A new method of planning amongst PUCs has emerged known as Integrated Resource Planning (IRP), which compares the life cycle costs of different resource choices that factor energy efficiency into their analysis. Portfolio standards have also been added to IRP, which requires certain types of resources to be included in the utilities’ mix of power procured, including renewable energy and energy efficiency. PUCs can also incorporate environmental considerations by increasing oversight of utility planning processes, setting prices, determining clean energy targets, and addressing utility incentives related to energy efficiency and distribution. PUCs thus have the ability to promote and shape clean energy adoption and development through their regulatory oversight.
The Case for PUCs
State PUCs have significant authority, often includingI the ability to accelerate decarbonization of the energy sector, mitigate the impacts of climate change, improve public health, and assist in reaching state energy goals. Updated PUC statutory mandates that reflect state energy priorities can contribute to their success in transforming the energy grid to become more energy efficient. Energy efficiency is a cost-effective mechanism to meet future demand for electricity. Energy efficiency reduces the amount of electricity needed to meet demand thereby benefiting the overall reliability of the electric grid. With more efficient systems, utilities and states will not need to build as much new transmission and generation, which can save money and improve environmental quality. Further, modern regulations to achieve such priorities and framing for the public interest can incorporate climate and environmental justice concerns.
The Case Against PUCs
Organizational challenges such as outdated mandates, staff constraints, gaps in technical knowledge, misinformation, and quasi-judicial processes have created barriers to innovation amongst PUCs. Some PUCs still continue to view themselves as purely economic regulators, which does not accurately reflect the current decisions they are being asked to make. Additionally, the authority of PUCs varies widely from state to state. PUCs authority is established by state legislatures, thus their power only extends as far as their statutory authorization. The level of statutory authority delegated to PUCs by legislatures also varies widely. Barriers such as these have made it difficult for some PUCs to develop more innovative mechanisms consistent with new environmental targets and the effort to achieve a zero-carbon US grid.
While transitioning to clean energy promises long-term savings and environmental benefits, the short-term costs can be significant and potentially burdensome for consumers and businesses, posing political and fiscal challenges for PUCs. Stakeholder engagement in this transition will be vital. Labor issues also pose challenges as states transition away from fossil fuels. In addition, challenges exist around regulatory complexities and the evolving federal and state policies.
About Our Guest
Jill Tauber is the Vice President of Litigation for Climate and Energy at EarthJustice. Jill leads the organization in achieving an equitable shift to clean energy through her litigation and legal advocacy work. Prior to serving as VP of Litigation, Jill worked as the Managing Attorney of Earthjustice’s Clean Energy Program, focusing on achieving clean energy solutions across the country.
ResourcesRMI: Purpose: Aligning PUC Mandates with a Clean Energy FutureRMI: The Untapped Potential of Public Utility CommissionsEPA: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency State Climate and Energy Technical Forum Background DocumentFurther ReadingColumbia Law: Public Utility Commissions and Energy EfficiencyFor a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/public-utilities-commissions-with-earthjustices-jill-tauber/
-
How Sustainable Wood Helps Mitigate the Impact of Climate Change
Sustainable wood refers to the use of mass timber, which involves smaller pieces of wood that are dried and glued together in a perpendicular, crosswise pattern to form large slabs. This process can incorporate a closed-loop system that repurposes wood, promoting a circular practice that minimizes wood waste and reduces landfill usage, transportation needs, and carbon emissions. Additionally, the wood retains the carbon absorbed by trees during their growth, storing it in the floors and walls of buildings. As infrastructure demands increase, sustainable wood offers an environmentally friendly solution to meet these needs.
Why the Construction Industry Needs Sustainable Wood
Sustainable wood, particularly through the use of mass timber, is gaining recognition as a critical climate solution in the construction industry. Traditional building materials like concrete and steel are carbon-intensive to produce, responsible for nearly 8% of global carbon emissions. In contrast, mass timber is derived from a renewable resource: trees. Through responsible forest management, trees can be harvested and replanted in a sustainable cycle, allowing forests to continue absorbing carbon dioxide. The wood used in mass timber stores this carbon long after the trees are cut down, effectively sequestering it in the walls, floors, and structures of buildings for decades or even centuries. This makes sustainable wood not only a viable building material but also a carbon sink, helping reduce the overall carbon footprint of new construction.
The production of mass timber involves using smaller, fast-growing trees that are often thinned from forests to maintain ecological health. These pieces of wood are dried and glued in layers, forming large, strong panels that can be used for walls, floors, and even entire building frames. This technique reduces waste by making use of smaller trees or leftover wood that might otherwise be discarded. Additionally, mass timber is much lighter than steel and concrete, reducing the energy needed for transportation and lowering emissions from construction sites. The process can also incorporate repurposed or recycled wood in a closed-loop system, further contributing to the circular economy and minimizing waste.
The climate benefits of sustainable wood go beyond carbon storage. Timber construction has a much lower embodied carbon than steel and concrete, which require energy-intensive processes to extract and manufacture. By substituting these materials with mass timber, builders can reduce carbon emissions by up to 70%. In regions where sustainable forestry practices are employed, this approach also supports local ecosystems by preventing deforestation, protecting biodiversity, and encouraging the regeneration of forests. Importantly, mass timber’s design allows for prefabrication, which reduces construction time and waste, making it not only a greener option but also an economically competitive one.
As cities and communities around the world grapple with the need for affordable housing while also addressing climate change, sustainable wood provides a promising solution. By scaling up the use of mass timber in mid- and high-rise buildings, the construction sector can reduce its reliance on carbon-heavy materials, sequester large amounts of carbon, and promote sustainable forest management practices. This integration of environmental, economic, and social benefits positions sustainable wood as a key player in the transition toward a low-carbon future.
The Future of Sustainable Wood: Making Construction Faster and Greener
Sustainable wood, especially when derived through the use of mass timber, offers a range of environmental, economic, and structural advantages over traditional building materials. From a structural standpoint, mass timber is both strong and lightweight, making it a highly versatile material. It has a high strength-to-weight ratio, allowing it to be used in large, multi-story buildings while reducing the overall load on foundations and minimizing transportation costs. Additionally, mass timber is more fire-resistant than many people realize; when exposed to fire, the outer layer of the wood chars and insulates the inner core, slowing down the spread of fire and maintaining the building’s integrity for longer than some steel structures. This combination of strength, fire resistance, and flexibility gives mass timber a competitive edge in construction.
Economically, sustainable wood offers cost-saving opportunities through faster construction times and less material waste. Mass timber panels can be prefabricated off-site, reducing the time spent on construction and the labor costs associated with traditional methods. This efficiency not only lowers the overall cost of building but also minimizes disruption in urban areas. Furthermore, the use of repurposed or recycled wood supports a circular economy, where resources are reused rather than discarded, reducing the environmental impact and fostering a more sustainable construction industry. As demand for sustainable and affordable housing rises, mass timber presents a compelling, eco-friendly alternative to conventional building practices.
One of the most significant benefits is its ability to sequester carbon. Trees naturally absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere as they grow, and this carbon remains stored in the wood even after it’s used in construction. By utilizing wood in buildings, the carbon is locked away for the lifespan of the structure, helping to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions. In contrast, materials like concrete and steel release large amounts of carbon during their production, contributing to climate change. This makes mass timber a powerful tool in the fight against global warming, especially when paired with sustainable forestry practices.
Sustainable Wood Skepticism
Despite its many advantages, the use of sustainable wood and mass timber as a building material does have some drawbacks and criticisms. One primary concern is the reliance on sustainable forestry practices. If forests are not properly managed, large-scale timber harvesting can lead to deforestation, habitat destruction, and biodiversity loss. The success of mass timber as a climate solution depends on responsible sourcing, including replanting trees to maintain the carbon-absorbing benefits of forests. Unsustainable logging practices or overharvesting could negate the environmental benefits of mass timber by releasing more carbon into the atmosphere and harming ecosystems.
Another challenge is the perception of wood’s durability and fire safety. While mass timber is engineered to be fire-resistant, some critics remain concerned about its performance in large-scale buildings. Public perception and regulatory hurdles can be barriers to adoption, as many building codes and fire safety standards are based on traditional materials like concrete and steel. These regulations may need to be updated to reflect the true performance of mass timber, but in the meantime, they can slow down its widespread use in urban construction.
Additionally, there are economic concerns, particularly regarding initial costs. While mass timber can reduce construction time and labor costs, the price of sustainably sourced wood can be higher than that of conventional materials, especially if demand outstrips supply. The infrastructure for large-scale mass timber production is still developing, and until it reaches full maturity, the material may remain more expensive and less accessible than concrete or steel, limiting its adoption in some markets. Over time, these challenges may be addressed, but they highlight the need for careful planning, regulation, and investment in the mass timber industry.
Who is Our Guest?
Dr. Paul Mayencourt is a researcher and educator at studying low-carbon design solutions in architecture. He does much of his work in the Wood Lab at the University of California, Berkeley between the Department of Architecture and the Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management. Dr. Mayencourt specializes in mass timber, structural design, and structural optimization.
ResourcesUC Berkeley: Forest to frame: Paul Mayencourt bridges forest management and sustainable constructionAmerican Wood Council: Mass TimberUC Berkeley: Continuing Berkeley’s legacy in forest productsVox: The hottest new thing in sustainable building is, uh, woodSeattle Business Magazine: Cross-laminated Timber: the Future of Building?Further ReadingUrban Machine: https://urbanmachine.build/Hardware to Save a Planet: Podcast with Co-Founder of Urban MachineWashington Post: Forget the log cabin. Wood buildings are climbing skyward — with pluses for the planet.Swedish Wood: A global solution for a locally active industryDalberg: A Forest Economy for the Future: Generating social and economic dividends from more sustainable, circular sourcesFor a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/sustainable-wood-from-mass-timber-with-dr-paul-mayencourt/
-
How Climate Change Puts the Agriculture Industry at Risk
Since the Industrial Revolution, our soils have lost between twenty and sixty percent of their carbon levels as a result of agricultural practice exacerbated by more common and more extreme droughts and floods resulting from climate change. Farmers have witnessed their crops endure mass devastation as a result of these unprecedented environmental disasters. Hence, the loss of carbon in soil threatens the stability of both the agriculture industry and global food security.
Why Does Soil Need Carbon?
Stable carbon storage in soil is crucial for healthy soil and supports resistance to climate vulnerability. But how? A 1% increase of carbon in soil equates to a two percent increase in its water-holding capacity, in turn creating more drought-resistant soil that can better weather extreme climate variability. By enhancing its water-holding capacity, as well as nutrient retention rates, stable carbon contributes to both the structure and function of soil. Consequently, soil health and productivity are contingent on soil’s carbon content. By recognizing that stable carbon storage within their soil can lead to more nutrient-dense crops and bigger yields, farmers have a clear economic incentive to seek agricultural solutions that can reduce the current rate of carbon loss their crops are experiencing.
The Future of Fungi: Building Resilient Soil Ecosystems
Based in Orange, New South Wales, Australian biotech start-up Loam Bio has developed a new way to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and store it underground. The solution, a microbial fungi-based seed treatment, is far less complex than one might initially think, simply requiring farmers to sprinkle the ground-up dust of fungal spores onto seeds actively used in their planting systems. As crops grow from those seeds, the fungal spores attach themselves to the roots. The tendrils of the fungus then extract the carbon that has been absorbed by the crop it latched onto.
Plants, on their own, sequester carbon from the atmosphere—a process crucial to mitigating fossil fuel emissions. The microbial fungal treatment leverages that sequestration by reducing the plants’ natural emissions of carbon. This particular type of microbial fungi, therefore, provides a level of protection against standard plant respiration, thereby reducing the amount of carbon returned to the atmosphere and instead storing it in soil for a longer period than the natural carbon cycle.
Loam Bio relies on a cross-disciplinary team ranging from geneticists to mycologists to plant physiologists to carbon methodology experts. For example, the fungi and other organisms involved in the treatment are pre-screened through a genetic selection process that evaluates whether they are safe to introduce to the agricultural landscape and can effectively interact with the herbicides and fertilizers that may be used in crop production. The success of the fungi, however, is ultimately dependent on the soil type and the climatic environment of the respective farm to which it is being applied via seed treatment.
Soil Expert Skepticism
While there is hope within the science community for the potential of the uptake of carbon in soil as a climate solution, some experts remain skeptical of whether the use of microbial fungi in field tests will translate to a meaningful impact on the carbon release of crops on operational farms. Further testing and monitoring will be required for a full evaluation of the benefits and impacts.
The agriculture industry relies on intensive farming practices that are increasingly worsening soil erosion and overall decreasing the quality of farming soil, including depleting the soil’s carbon content. Loam’s Bio initiative provides one possible pathway to try and reverse this consequence of industrial farming. So far, Loam Bio has had some encouraging results, achieving soil carbon content levels of 6%—far surpassing the US average of 1-4%. This revolutionary treatment has the potential to transform soil into an invaluable carbon sink, even more than it is now.
Who Is Our Guest?
Tegan Nock is the Co-Founder and Chief Operating Officer of Loam Bio. A sixth-generation farmer from central west New South Wales, Australia, Nock combines her agricultural roots with a Bachelor of Science in Agriculture, Agriculture Operations, and Related Sciences from Charles Stuart University. In addition to her work at Loam Bio, Nock produced Grassroots: A Film About a Fungus, showcasing her passion for soil health and climate resilience. Featured in Netflix’s Down to Earth with Zac Efron (Season 2, Episode 8: Eco-Innovators), Tegan shared insights on the seed treatment and the power of fungi to bolster stable carbon content in soil.
Further Reading:
Loam Bio: Carbon and Soil Health - Loam USSuccessful Farming: Loam Bio brings new carbon opportunities to the U.S.The New York Times: Can Dirt Clean the Climate?Interago: Why biostimulant seed treatments are better for regenerative farming » Interagro (UK) LtdCivil Eats: Fungi Are Helping Farmers Unlock the Secrets of Soil Carbon | Civil EatsFor a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/how-fungi-is-enhancing-soil-carbon-sequestration-underground-with-tegan-nock/
-
What is COF 999?
UC Berkeley chemistry professor Dr. Omar Yaghi recently led a study which has the potential to be revolutionary in reducing the quantity of carbon dioxide present in the atmosphere. “Covalent organic framework number 999,” or COF 999, is a yellow, powder-like material that has billions of tiny holes. Inside of these holes, researchers in Dr. Yaghi’s lab have installed molecular units that can seek out carbon dioxide, enabling the substance to suck in and capture the carbon dioxide. COF 999 has a huge capacity for absorbing emissions; half a pound of the powder can absorb as much carbon dioxide as a tree captures in a year.
The carbon dioxide problem
The quantity of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has reached an all-time high, with a global average in 2023 of 419.3 parts per million. This immense amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere comes from a number of human sources, the most common of which is the burning of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas for energy. Carbon dioxide is the most abundant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, and contributes significantly to global warming and other environmental issues, including ocean acidification.
Applying COF 999
In an interview with Forbes, Dr. Yaghi described the way he sees COF 999 being implemented as a solution. The powder can be made into pellets or a coating, and then integrated into facilities where flue gas –the gas that is released from industrial processes –is released. “This flue gas would pass through the material and because it just plucks out CO2, it cleans CO2 from that flue before it reaches the atmosphere.” According to the San Francisco Standard, Dr. Yaghi says that the powder “requires no energy, shows no signs of degradation even after 100 uses, and is made from inexpensive, commercially available materials.” Another benefit is that the material only needs to be heated to 50 or 60 degrees Celsius, rather than to 120 like many other traditional materials necessary for carbon capture.
In order to see significant change in the atmosphere’s carbon dioxide concentration, we will need to couple preventing carbon dioxide emissions with direct air capture, which COF 999 can also do. According to Zihui Zhou, a UC Berkeley graduate student who worked in Dr. Yaghi’s lab says, “Currently, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is more than 420 ppm, but that will increase to maybe 500 or 550 before we fully develop and employ flue gas capture. So if we want to decrease the concentration and go back to maybe 400 or 300 ppm, we have to use direct air capture.” It will take time, however, for scientists to be able to use COF 999 effectively. This is because the powder has not been tested in real-life scenarios, and therefore the costs and risks from the powder are largely unknown; for example, the powder might restrict air flow through filters when applied, reducing the practicality of the powder.
About our guest
Dr. Omar Yaghi is a professor of chemistry at the University of California Berkeley, and the Founding Director of the Berkeley Global Science Institute, whose mission is to build centers of research in developing countries and provide opportunities for young scholars to discover and learn. He is an elected member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences as well as the German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina.
Resources
Climate.gov: Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon DioxideForbes: This Powder Could Be A Gamechanger For Capturing CO2The San Francisco Standard: The new solution to climate change? A yellow powder you can hold in your fingersUC Berkeley News: Capturing carbon from the air just got easierSmithsonian Magazine: This New, Yellow Powder Quickly Pulls Carbon Dioxide From the Air, and Researchers Say ‘There’s Nothing Like It’For a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/cof-999-carbon-capture-with-dr-omar-yaghi/
-
What is mechanical textile recycling?
Mechanical textile recycling is a process by which used textiles, particularly those made with natural fibers such as cotton, wool, and linen, are broken down into their individual fibers and then spun into yarn or fabric for reuse in the production of new textiles. Textile recycling has the potential to reduce waste and greenhouse gas emissions associated with textile production.
Mechanical textile recycling involves a series of steps: It typically begins with the collection of used textiles, which are sorted according to their fiber type and quality. Next, the textiles are cleaned and processed to remove impurities and contaminants such as buttons, zippers, and other non-textile materials. Once the textiles have been cleaned and prepared, they are typically shredded or ground into small pieces. These pieces are then subjected to a series of mechanical processes—such as carding, combing, and drawing—to separate the fibers from one another. The resulting fibers are then spun into new yarn or woven into new fabric. The new yarn or fabric can be used in a variety of products, such as clothing, linens, and industrial products, such as building insulation.
Mechanical textile recycling could reduce demand for new clothing and other textiles, which could reduce the carbon footprint of the fashion industry. The global fashion industry is a major contributor to global greenhouse gas emissions: In 2018, it produced around 2.1 billion tons of greenhouse gas emissions, equaling between 4% and 10% of the global total—equal to or greater than the annual greenhouse gas emissions of France, Germany, and the United Kingdom combined. About 70% of these emissions came from upstream activities such as textile production, preparation, and processing. The remaining emissions came from downstream activities, including the disposal of textiles in landfills, where they release methane, a potent greenhouse gas, as they decompose.
Mechanical textile recycling is a relatively new technology that faces certain technical and economic challenges, including limited ability to recycle synthetic fibers or fiber blends, and a lack of textile recycling infrastructure. For now, according to CalRecycle, the best way to reduce the environmental impact of textiles is “by reducing the amount of textiles we purchase, use, and dispose.”
What does Material Return do, and who is Bobby Carswell?
Material Return is a textile recycling cooperative based in Morgantown, North Carolina, that works with local manufacturers and national brands to transform textile waste into new products. Material Return recently partnered with Smartwool, an American clothing producer, to collect 400,000 pairs of used socks to recycle them into yarn for use in new socks and other circular clothing products. Bobby Carswell is the research and development director at Material Return.
Sources:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8588244/https://calrecycle.ca.gov/reducewaste/textiles/https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fmw8Ap7JAI0frmoXiZKR3_qeB1gWxDGp/viewhttps://textileexchange.org/climate+-dashboard/https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/retail/our%20insights/fashion%20on%20climate/fashion-on-climate-full-report.pdfhttps://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-12/fast-fashion-turning-parts-ghana-into-toxic-landfill/100358702https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/30/style/clothing-recycling.htmlhttps://www.thematerialreturn.com/https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffkart/2022/05/12/400000-pairs-of-old-socks-will-be-spun-turned-into-recycled-yarn-by-material-return-smartwool-project/?sh=4ca5c2f95e9dhttps://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/society/20201208STO93327/the-impact-of-textile-production-and-waste-on-the-environment-infographic#:~:text=Textile%20production%20is%20estimated%20to,into%20the%20ocean%20a%20year.For a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/bringing-local-textile-recyling-to-the-us-with-material-returns-bobby-carswell/
-
What is Community Choice Aggregation?
Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) is a system that allows local governments to purchase power directly from an energy supplier other than the existing utility. This means that while the existing utility continues to deliver the power, the CCA buys and generates the power itself, potentially from renewable sources. CCAs continue to pay fees to the existing utility for energy transmission and backup power.
While not required, CCAs can set ambitious climate goals that exceed state-mandated targets and drive decarbonization efforts by investing in emerging clean energy technologies. CCAs can take risks to transform their energy sources and grid in ways that traditional investor-owned utilities may be reluctant to try. When successful, CCAs can reduce electric rates for consumers and drive investment in local energy programs. But CCAs without sufficient capital may face financial and operational challenges.
CCA programs are authorized in various states, including California, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Virginia.
How does it work?In states with enabling legislation, local governments can create a CCA by holding public hearings and passing a law authorizing CCAs. Participation in CCAs is voluntary, with most programs having opt-out provisions. This means customers are automatically enrolled in the program unless they choose to opt out and continue receiving electricity from their current supplier. Some CCAs may have opt-in provisions, requiring customers to actively enroll in the program. Customers under CCAs continue to receive delivery and maintenance services from their existing utility and receive a single utility bill reflecting the change in electricity generation sources and prices.
What are the pros and cons?
Advantages of CCAs include the potential for retail electric rate reductions, the ability to shift to greener power resources quickly, local control over electricity generation aligned with local goals, expanded consumer choices, and the potential to stimulate local job creation and renewable energy development. However, there are also challenges associated with CCAs, including dependence on enabling state legislation, navigating CCA regulations and ordinances, administrative costs, consumer confusion over opt-in and opt-out clauses, and potential resistance from utilities in traditionally regulated electricity states facing new competition from CCAs.
What is Central Coast Community Energy?
Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) is a CCA program that has procured and provided electricity to residents and businesses in Monterey, San Benito, Santa Cruz, and Santa Barbara counties in California since 2018. It is governed by board members who represent each community served by the agency.
3CE recently approved a contract to build the world's largest Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) facility, which will provide 500 megawatts of energy storage. 3CE will reserve 200 megawatts of that capacity to help achieve its goal of serving 100% clean and renewable energy to its customers in Santa Cruz and Santa Barbara counties by 2030. The CAES technology uses underground caverns to store compressed air, which is later released to generate electricity, offering long-duration storage beyond the capabilities of lithium-ion batteries, and supporting grids reliant on intermittent renewable energy.
Further ReadingEPA, Community Choice Aggregation
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Community Choice Aggregation: Challenges, Opportunities, and Impacts on Renewable Energy Markets (2019)
CalCCA, Community Choice Aggregation (CCA): What is it?
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Helping Communities Reach Renewable Energy Goals (Mow 2017)
Local Energy Aggregation Network (LEAN), CCA by State
Metropolitan Area Planning Council (Boston, MA), Start a Community Choice Aggregation Program (2014)
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Status and Trends in the Voluntary Market (2020 data), presentation materials (Heeter 2021)
Central Coast Community Energy (3CE), 3CE to Purchase 200MW of Long Duration Energy Storage from Hydrostor (2023)
For a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/municipal-investment-in-clean-energy-tech-through-community-choice-aggregation-with-rob-shaw/
-
Climate Change and the Law of the Sea
Sea level rise due to climate change will directly impact at least 70 countries, many of them small, low-lying island nations. Though their contribution to climate change is very little, they face some of its worst consequences. This is not a new issue, and tension has been building since the late 1980s. In 1989, the Maldives, an island nation in the Indian Ocean, issued an international declaration, the first of its kind, calling attention to sea level rise due to climate change, and how it impacts its land. Island states often have small land area, but, under international law, have jurisdiction over a larger area of their surrounding seas for economic purposes. What if an island loses territory due to sea level rise? If so, it could lose its economic zone. This is also a national security question; could another nation then legally take over this economic zone? Currently, the international law framework, called the Law of the Sea, does not answer these questions even though the livelihoods of millions are at issue. A 2021 declaration by Pacific Island nations calls for maritime boundaries to stay where they are now regardless of sea level rise. However, this requires the endorsement of other nations. The United Nations, up until now, has paid comparatively little attention to this issue, but, through its study group on sea-level rise, the UN is aiming to engage non-low-lying island nations, and attempt to resolve these and other questions.
Climate Refugees Need Protected Status Under the Law
By 2050, there could be 1.2 billion climate refugees, according to the international think tank International Environmental Partnership. But these refugees often do not fit the legal definition of “refugee”, including individuals displaced in the United States. Becoming a “refugee” under the law confers special status; it protects from deportation, for example. In 2013, a man from Kiribati, a country undergoing severe sea level rise, applied for refugee status as a “climate refugee” in New Zealand. His application was denied, and he was repatriated to Kiribati. The man subsequently filed a complaint with the UN Convent of Civil Liberties, claiming his right to life had been violated. The man lost his case, because his life was not found to be under immediate danger. However, the wording of the UN’s ruling in the case asserts that those fleeing a climate crisis cannot be sent home, thereby creating a non-binding international construct. This case illustrates some of the complexities raised by climate refugees and how they are currently viewed in many of the world’s legal systems. Sea level rise is not only an issue of the future but already an issue of the present.
Who is Dr. Nilufer Oral?
Dr. Nilufer Oral is director at the Center for International Law at the National University of Singapore. She is also a member of the International Law Commission at the United Nations and co-chair of the study group at the UN on sea level rise in relation to international law.
Read More
Sink or swim: Can island states survive the climate crisis? | | UN News
Statement by Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Co-Chairs of the Study Group on Sea level rise -- Interaction with members of the ILC 2020
Nilufer Oral--COP 26
International Law as an Adaptation Measure to Sea-level Rise and Its Impacts on Islands and Offshore Features | Request PDF
For a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/adapting-ocean-governance-for-a-world-of-rising-seas-with-dr-nilufar-oral/
-
Food Waste is a Global Problem with a Big Carbon Footprint
One-third of all food produced is wasted every year – approximately 1.3 billion tons. The UN Environment Program estimates that 3.3 billion tons of CO2 are emitted annually from the resources used to produce wasted food. In the United States alone, 133 billion pounds of edible food, valued at $161 billion, is wasted every year.
Replate’s Solution
Enter Replate: a technology-based nonprofit that works to reduce food insecurity and waste while mitigating food waste´s effects on climate change. The organization provides a solution for businesses to donate surplus food to nearby nonprofits operating throughout the United States and the Middle East. Replate’s services are designed to prevent such food waste through source reduction and donating meals to communities experiencing food insecurity. Its algorithm connects donor organizations to nonprofits, diverting food from landfills while increasing food access.
How Replate Works
Their organization operates through a web app. Donors can schedule pick-up services, then track the environmental and social impact of their donations. Nonprofits can sign up to receive donations using an online form. Replate then works to understand these organizations' capacity and food needs before drop off. Replate works with hundreds of corporations including Netflix, Boston Consulting Group, Whole Foods, Chipotle, Walmart, and more to match businesses with communities in need. Since its founding, Replate has recovered over 3.6 million pounds of food, delivered over three million meals, and served 301 nonprofits. It estimates that to date the program has saved 985 million gallons of water and diverted 3,686 tons of carbon emissions.
Connections to California Composting Goals
As organic material like food and agricultural waste decomposes, it releases methane, a greenhouse gas eighty-four times more potent than carbon dioxide in the atmosphere over a 20-year period. Enacted in January 2022, California’s Short-Lived Pollutant Reduction law SB-1383 targets is trying to address methane emissions due to organic waste. SB-1383 is expected to reduce California’s methane emissions from organic materials in traditional landfills by an estimated twenty percent. As part of the law, large food service providers, distributors, and industries falling under the Tier 1 category—food service providers, food distributors, wholesale food vendors, supermarkets and grocery stores over 10,000 square feet—are required to reduce their organic waste material disposal. Platforms like Replate can help businesses reduce their food waste and comply with SB-1383.
Maen Mahfoud is the founder and CEO of Replate. Witnessing the alarming levels of food insecurity, and enormous amounts of food waste in the Bay Area, his knowledge of the massive effects of food waste on our planet motivated Mahfoud to launch Replate in 2016. Maen is a DRK entrepreneur, a 2023 recipient of the James Irvine Foundation Leadership, and was sponsored by Harvard Business School's Executive Program. Mahfoud holds a Master’s in Public Health from Imperial College London, a degree in Molecular Biology from UC Berkeley, and a Human-Computer Interaction for User Experience Design Certificate from MIT.
For a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/optimizing-food-waste-recovery-through-algorithms-with-maen-mahfoud/
-
Steel Production
Globally, 1.9 billion metric tons of crude steel were produced in 2022. Over the past 15 years, the global demand for steel production has nearly doubled, as this versatile product can be found in nearly all modern infrastructure such as buildings, ships, vehicles, machines, and appliances. Conventionally, steel is made from iron ore (the world’s third most produced commodity by volume), which is a compound derived from iron, oxygen, and other minerals. Through a blast or electric furnace, in which electricity is used to create high-temperature environments to melt the reactants, the final product of steel is generated following a molting refining process. Unfortunately, steel production is extremely energy-intensive and accelerates air pollution through the release of nitrous oxide, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and sulfur dioxide. On average, 1.83 tons of CO2 is emitted for every ton of steel that is produced. Steel production accounts for nearly 7-11% of total global greenhouse gas emissions emitted annually. Steel production not only has harmful environmental impacts, but can negatively impact human health leading to respiratory diseases such as asthma, COPD, and cancer.
What is Green Steel?To mitigate the harmful environmental and health effects of conventional steel production, many researchers are working on green steel as an alternative. Green steel is a form of steel production that is powered by hydrogen or renewable energy, which can reduce carbon dioxide emissions and minimize waste. Green steel can be accomplished through various methods, whether by reducing carbon-based agents, moving from blast to electric furnaces, or decreasing reliance on fossil-fuel based inputs.
In traditional steel production, CO2 emissions generally arise from the use of coal and coke to remove oxygen from iron ore. Green steel utilizes hydrogen rather than coal or coke. When burned, hydrogen emits only water, so this phase of manufacturing is free of carbon dioxide emissions. As a result, water is the only byproduct which can then be used to produce more hydrogen, forming a closed loop system. Throughout production, green steel utilizes either wind, solar or hydro to power the furnaces instead of fossil power. Scrap materials of used steel can also be utilized, reducing the need for extracting additional primary materials.
The Future of Green SteelGreen steel production is on the forefront of innovative design in equipping regions like the Rust Belt with strategies to significantly revitalize their current operations. Last March the Biden-Harris Administration announced a $6 billion funding from the U.S. Department of Energy to accelerate decarbonization projects in energy-intensive industries like steel production. Such investments aim to spearhead the transition to renewable energy sources, focus on investment in new carbon technologies, enable markets to build cleaner products, and benefit local communities. Additionally, a transition to hydrogen-based electric manufacturing could increase jobs in the steel and energy industries by 43 percent. Overall, green steel can conserve resources, promote economic growth, and assist in decarbonization.
Scaling Up the Technology is Proving TroublesomeSteel has posed to be one of the most challenging industries to decarbonize. On a large scale, clean hydrogen production will require billions of dollars in investment to achieve a full transition. Currently, the cost of production of green steel is higher than conventional steel due to the high investment and electricity costs required. Labor, finance, and advanced technology will be essential in scaling up green steel production.
About the GuestAdam Rauwerdink is the Senior Vice President of Business Development for Boston Metal, a Massachusetts based start-up working towards decarbonizing steelmaking and advancing efficient, sustainable metal production. Boston Metal utilizes Molten Oxide Electrolysis, a technology platform powered by electricity. In order to effectively scale up green steel production.
ResourcesBoston Metal websiteDecarbonising the steel industry with new fossil-free production methods (AFRY AB, 2024)Environmental impact of steel production (TheWorldCounts, 2024)Mozaffari et al., Effects of occupational exposures on respiratory health in steel factory workers (Frontiers in Public Health, 2023)Myers, Steel built the Rust Belt. Green steel could help rebuild it. (Grist, 2023)Steel: Definition, Composition, Types, Properties, and Applications (Xometry, 2023)Rossi, The Race to Produce Green Steel (Undark, 2022)For a transcript of this episode, please visit https://climatebreak.org/advancing-sustainable-steel-production-with-adam-rauwerdink/
-
Mobilizing Investors to Build a More Sustainable Global Economy
As the effects of climate change rise in prevalence, all facets of the global economy will be affected. In order to address many of the global environmental crises of today, such as biodiversity loss and extreme drought, entrepreneurs are looking into sustainable investment initiatives as a tool for change. Sustainable investing is a process that directs investment capital to companies and businesses actively working to prevent environmental destruction. Sustainable investments often follow an Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance (ESG) framework, which seeks to promote socially conscious investments. Similar to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), which refers to a company’s commitment to operating ethically, ESG goes one step further in providing an assessable outcome of a company’s overall sustainability performance. Thus, ESG lays a foundation for investors in determining which corporations operate sustainably.
Current Climate of Sustainable InvestmentFrom 2021 to 2026, institutional investment in ESG projects is expected to increase by 84%. The World Economic Forum recently published a report noting that over $200 billion is required annually in order to meet adaptation and resilience investment targets, which is three times the current funding. Such investing in adaptation and resilience could reduce exposure to climate risks and yield financial benefits for stakeholders involved. Although climate financing is slowly on the rise, there remains minimal progress in climate-vulnerable and high-emission countries.
There are various types of sustainable investing, operating through registered investment companies, alternative investment funds and community investments. The US Sustainable Investment Forum identified 645 registered investment companies with $1.2 trillion sustainable investment AUM in 2022. Not only does sustainable investment cover private equity investments, but also cash, fixed income, and alternative investments. Sustainable investments, like conventional investing, receive a return on their investments. Reports from the Morgan Stanley Institute for Sustainable Investing found no financial trade-off between sustainable investing compared to traditional investment initiatives.
Does sustainable investing provide hope for the future?Investing in sustainable industry, infrastructure, and business has the potential to provide a more climate-proof economy for all. For private investors, effective investments in areas vulnerable to climate change could reduce disruptions in the supply chain, thereby boosting labor productivity and lowering operational costs. As such, companies will have the tools in place to be able to respond to vulnerabilities when they arise while still maintaining a profit. Additionally, ESG investing has been proven to provide downside protection during social or economic crises according to the NYU Stern Center for Sustainable Business. Such protection may be pertinent in a world more susceptible to the adverse effects of climate change. Many studies corroborate such findings; a meta-study conducted by Oxford University in 2015 revealed that 88% of companies with robust sustainability practices demonstrate better operational performance, translating into higher cash flows and positive effects on investment performance.
Greenwashing and ESG ConcernsOne concern within the world of sustainable investment is largely centered around the question of whether organizations will be willing to take more or less risk to achieve an impact. Companies that prioritize sustainability may be more volatile than traditional companies, creating fear around the uncertainty of consistent returns. Further, there is often confusion on how to make a good return on investment when choosing to invest in more socially responsible companies.
The rise of sustainable investment has brought about potential concerns related to greenwashing, in which a company’s ESG credentials or potential sustainability initiatives may be over-embellished, leading to falsified information. On the other hand, many investors prioritizing sustainable investment initiatives have received a surge in backlash against their new initiatives, mainly from Republican politicians. A recent study by The Conference Board revealed that 48% of surveyed businesses have experienced backlash to their ESG policies or activities, potentially deterring companies from further pursuing such initiatives. An increase in educational awareness is vital to inform investors of the benefits of sustainable investing and ways to do so responsibly amidst criticism.
Who is our guest?Kirsten Spalding leads the nonprofit Ceres Investor Network, which supports global investor initiatives such as Paris Aligned Asset Owners, Climate Action 100+, and Net Zero Asset Managers. Nonprofit advocacy organizations like Ceres Investor Network are at the forefront of promoting sustainable business practices through mobilizing investors to build a more sustainable economy. Kirsten holds a B.A. from Yale College in music, a J.D. from Hastings College of Law, and an M.Div. from Church Divinity School of the Pacific. For six years, she chaired the Center for Labor Research and Education, UC Berkeley and taught at the School of Law. She is an Episcopal priest, rector of the Church of the Nativity in San Rafael, CA, and an avid backpacker.
ResourcesCeres Investor NetworkAdaptation and resilience investment: How do we get the capital it needsSustainable InvestingSustainable Investing BasicsFurther ReadingCSR or ESG: Where Do Sustainability Frameworks Fit In?ESG and Financial Performance: Uncovering the Relationship by Aggregating Evidence from 1,000 Plus Studies Published between 2015 – 2020 Global Landscape of Climate Finance 2023Financial Performance With Sustainable Investing3 hurdles to sustainable investing — and how to overcome themFor a transcript of this episode, please visit https://climatebreak.org/sustainable-investing-for-a-climate-proof-economy-with-kirsten-spalding/
-
What is carbon mineralization?
As defined by the U.S. Geological Survey, “carbon mineralization is the process by which carbon dioxide becomes a solid mineral, such as a carbonate…The biggest advantage of carbon mineralization is that the carbon cannot escape back to the atmosphere.” This generally occurs by injecting carbon dioxide underground into certain rock formations so the carbon dioxide takes on a solid form: trapped and unable to reach the atmosphere.
How does carbon mineralization work?
Two of the main methods in which carbon mineralization occurs are ex-situ carbon mineralization and in-situ carbon mineralization. With ex-situ carbon mineralization, carbon dioxide solids are transported to a site to react with fluids—like water—and gas. In-situ carbon mineralization is the opposite—fluids containing carbon dioxide are funneled through rock formations in which it solidifies. Both of these methods result in carbon dioxide trapped in a solidified form.
In a third method of carbon mineralization, surificial mineralization, carbon dioxide reacts with alkaline substances—such as mine tailings, smelter slags, or sedimentary formations—which result in the carbon dioxide taking on a solidified form. In the case of in-situ carbon mineralization or surificial mineralization, carbon dioxide can react with surface water rather than an artificial fluid, replicating natural processes of carbon mineralization.
Currently, the biggest drawbacks and barriers preventing carbon mineralization from taking hold as a major climate solution lie in cost and research uncertainties regarding environmental risks. In terms of cost, the price for carbon mineralization is high: 5 million dollars per well to inject carbon dioxide into rock formations. Further, the risks for groundwater and its susceptibility to contamination through this method is unknown, and the potential side effects of contaminating water formations could be devastating for ecological communities which thrive off of these water systems.
Who is our guest?
Dr. Rob Jackson is a professor and senior research fellow at Stanford University, and author of Into the Clear Blue Sky, a novel on climate solutions. His lab focuses on using scientific knowledge to shape climate policies and reduce the environmental footprint of human activities. Currently, he chairs the Global Carbon Project, an effort to measure and control greenhouse gas emissions.
Resources
USGS: U.S. Geological SurveyScienceDirect: A holistic overview of the in-situ and ex-situ carbon mineralization: Methods, mechanisms, and technical challengesNational Center for Biotechnology Information: Negative Emissions Technologies and Reliable Sequestration: A Research Agenda.Frontiers: An Overview of the Status and Challenges of CO2 Storage in Minerals and Geological FormationsFurther ReadingThe New York Times: How Oman’s Rocks Could Help Save the PlanetClimate Break: Rerun: Using Concrete for Carbon Removal with Dr. Erica DoddsFor a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/carbon-capture-mineralization-with-dr-rob-jackson/
-
Methane in the Atmosphere: A Serious Risk
Many of the solutions we often hear about when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions revolve around reducing carbon emissions, as carbon dioxide (CO2) is the primary greenhouse gas emitted by human activities. Methane, however, is the second most common greenhouse gas, emitted through agricultural practices, landfill waste, coal mining, and oil and gas operations. While methane generally receives less attention than carbon dioxide when it comes to climate solutions, recent studies have shown that it is a more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. According to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, methane has a global warming potential 28-34 times higher than CO2 upon emission, which increases to 84-86 times over a 20-year period.
How does methane enter our skies?
The concentration of methane in the atmosphere has more than doubled over the past century. Both everyday infrastructure in older cities and major leaks at oil and gas fields add to the quantity of methane into the atmosphere. As for the source of these leaks, they are largely caused by equipment failures or faulty pipes and vessels. 2,595 gas incidents have been reported in the US from 2010 to 2021, adding up to 26.6 billion cubic feet of methane gas emitted. Methane impacts both the climate system and public health; breathing methane can cause damaged airways, lung diseases, asthma attacks, increased rates of preterm birth, cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and heightened stroke risk.
What can we do?
Mining operations can be improved to reduce methane leaks and oil and gas operations can greatly reduce emissions throughout the system. As our tools of measurement and technology improve, the world has realized the greater need to attack methane emissions, which led to the Global Methane Pledge in 2021. In this pledge, 158 countries and the EU pledged to make a distinct effort to reduce global methane emissions by at least 30 percent from 2020 levels by 2030.
Part of reducing methane emissions involves switching from fossil fuels to electricity generated from renewable sources. According to Environmental specialist and Stanford professor Dr. Rob Jackson, our skies will become cleaner once we switch to cleaner, electrical energy sources, including electric heat pumps to cool and heat our homes, electric water heaters, and especially electric stoves. According to the Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, methane emissions from gas stoves in America—when scaled to the 20-year global warming potential of the gas—were “comparable to the carbon dioxide emissions of approximately 500,000 gas-powered cars.” Health-wise, a study conducted by Stanford’s Doerr School of Sustainability and PSE Healthy Energy found that “children who live in homes with gas stoves had a 24% higher risk of lifetime asthma and a 42% increased risk of having asthma currently.” Dr. Jackson says that making the switch to induction stoves is not only energetically cleaner and prevents the likelihood of gas leaks, but it also prevents us from being exposed to toxic pollutants such as nitrogen oxides and benzene gasses that come from gas stoves.
Some potential drawbacks: the cost of electricity
While induction stoves and a cleaner, electrical society sounds optimal, there are some challenges and barriers to making this a reality. First of all, not every person can afford to implement an induction stove and replace their functioning gas stove, as home renovations, rewirings, and big purchases such as a new stove cost a great deal of money. In this way, income inequality plays a major role in the way climate change impacts different people in society. Dr. Jackson uses the example of a person living in a lower-income community; surrounded by older, poorly-maintained appliances, people in these types of homes often breathe dirtier air indoors than outdoors. This is why Dr. Jackson proposes that the shift to clean energy be gradual; fueled by regulations and government support. Without social support, equal access to cleaner energy cannot be achieved.
In terms of major gas leaks, change is hard to make as an individual. According to the Environmental Defense Fund, the best thing we can do is to fight for national policy to repair and prevent leaks wherever they occur: whether at mining facilities or under our sidewalks. This is a difficult task, as all individuals can do is push for political action, however agreements such as the Global Methane Pledge seem to be steps in the right direction.
Who is our guest?
Dr. Rob Jackson is a professor and senior research fellow at Stanford University, and author of Into the Clear Blue Sky, a novel on climate solutions. His lab focuses on using scientific knowledge to shape climate policies and reduce the environmental footprint of human activities. Currently, he chairs the Global Carbon Project, an effort to measure and control greenhouse gas emissions.
ResourcesUS Environmental Protection Agency: Overview of Greenhouse GasesUNECE: The ChallengeMIT Technology Review: Methane leaks in the US are worse than we thoughtPIRG: Methane Gas LeaksEnvironmental Defense Fund: How Methane Impacts HealthGlobal Methane Pledge: About the Global Methane PledgeJournal of Environmental Science and Technology: Methane and NOx Emissions from Natural Gas Stoves, Cooktops, and Ovens in Residential HomesAmerican Chemical Society Publications: Gas and Propane Combustion from Stoves Emits Benzene and Increases Indoor Air PollutionEnvironmental Defense Fund: How to stop natural gas leaksFurther ReadingThe New York Times: Did I Turn Off the Stove? Yes, but Maybe Not the GasFor a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/identifying-and-fixing-natural-gas-leaks-in-cities-with-dr-rob-jackson/
-
Impacts of Heat Waves on Human Health
Across the United States, climate change is increasing the frequency and intensity of heat waves. A heat wave is defined as a persistent period of high temperature days. Although unusually hot days are a natural part of day-to-day variations in weather, heat waves are becoming more common alongside the rapidly accelerating climate crisis. In major cities across the country, the number of heat waves has increased steadily, from two heat waves per year in the 1960s to six per year into the 2010s and 2020s. In the 1960s, the average heat wave was 2.0 degrees above the local 85th percentile threshold, while the average heat wave during the 2020s has been 2.5 degrees above the local threshold. Approximately 210 million Americans, or two thirds of the population, live in counties vulnerable to health threats from high temperatures. As temperatures increase, the number of heat-related illnesses, emergency room visits, and deaths simultaneously increase. As we head further into the 21st century, adaptive measures to protect human health from the effects of extreme heat waves will be necessary in the face of rising climate risk.
Protecting yourself during extreme heatOver the past three decades, heat waves have been the leading cause of weather-related fatalities across the nation. In addition to rising heat-related illnesses and deaths, extreme heat can also worsen health outcomes from chronic conditions such as cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, and acute kidney injury. Extreme temperatures compromise the body’s ability to regulate its internal temperature, resulting in illness, heat cramps, heat exhaustion, heatstroke, and hyperthermia. Individuals living in densely populated cities are extremely vulnerable to the urban heat island effect, which exacerbates high heat temperatures as man made surfaces absorb sunlight during the day and radiate the stored energy at night as heat. Children, the elderly, people experiencing homelessness, low-income communities and individuals with pre-existing health conditions are at the greatest risk to the adverse effects of extreme heat. As temperatures continue to rise, it is necessary that individuals take on adaptive measures to protect themselves from the health risks posed by extreme heat.
Action can be taken on both a policy and an individual level. Local governments can take steps to help residents reduce their vulnerability to heat through heat management plans and vulnerability assessments. For example, officials can create early warning systems and urban cooling centers for individuals to find refuge. On an individual scale, when you need to go outside, taking preventive measures such as sun protection, hats, and umbrellas is vital to stay cool. Trying to stay inside as much as possible and finding refuge from the heat will help one avoid the risks of heatstroke. More educational initiatives will be vital in informing individuals on risk factors, symptoms, and treatment steps to keep people safe and informed.
Benefits of protecting oneself during extreme heatDuring periods of extreme heat, it is important to take proper care of yourself in order to mitigate the health effects that result from high temperatures such as dehydration, heat stroke, exhaustion, and slowed cognitive function. Taking extreme heat seriously is vital, as the effects of extreme temperatures can be as serious as sudden events like heart attack or stroke. Prolonged periods of heat and humidity make your body work extra hard to maintain a normal temperature, so taking such precautions is necessary to protect yourself and your loved ones. As extreme heat-related weather events become more common, becoming accustomed to the ways you can keep yourself safe is imperative in a warming world.
More progress can be madeIf we fail to take adaptation measures on both an individual and policy level, we will be unprepared to respond to the impacts of extreme heat. As extreme heat rises in prevalence, more awareness on the ways to respond to increasingly high temperatures can help individuals adapt to such events. Currently, heat is already the weather phenomenon that kills the most people in the United States, so taking care of yourself, family, and neighbors during heat waves is essential to saving lives. For residents who do not have the resources or cooling systems in place to seek protection during a heat wave, the use of cooling centers in cities can provide short-term relief. Important to note, however, is that the increased use of cooling systems will heighten electricity costs due to increasing demand, thereby generating more greenhouse gas emissions from rising power generation. If leaks are to occur, concerns can also arise around the potential release of potent refrigerant gasses, which worsen climate change and damage the ozone layer. This creates a self-perpetuating cycle in that air conditioning is used to treat extreme temperatures, but effectively worsens the climate crisis in doing so. More innovative solutions will be necessary to curtail emissions while keeping individuals safe. Beyond individual actions during times of crisis, cities also need to help their residents respond to rising temperatures in the long-term by redesigning public spaces, planting trees to provide cooling, painting rooftops white to repel sunlight, and incorporating new cooling technologies in buildings and homes.
About our guestDr. David Sklar is an Assistant Dean at the Arizona State University School of Medicine and Advanced Medical Engineering, is a Professor at the ASU College of Health Solutions and works as an emergency physician. Former Editor in Chief of Academic Medicine, Dr. Sklar now works as a senior advisor in health policy and health professions education at ASU Health. Dr. Sklar works to increase awareness on mitigative steps individuals can take to decrease their health risks from extreme heat events.
ResourcesIndiana University: Adaptation strategies for extreme heat and public healthNRDC: Climate Change and Health: Extreme HeatEPA: Climate Change Indicators: Heat WavesWHO: Heat and HealthNIH: Temperature-related Death and IllnessFurther ReadingPenn State: Climate-driven extreme heat may make parts of Earth too hot for humansArch Daily:How to Adapt Cities to Extreme HeatWhite House: Planning Tools for Combatting Extreme HeatFor a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/staying-safe-in-extreme-heat-with-dr-david-sklar/
-
The Current State of US Energy Consumption
The United States consumes vast amounts of energy and spends enormous amounts of money every year to fuel our economy, business, and lifestyle. The US accounts for 4% of the world’s population, yet uses 16% of the world’s total energy. The production and consumption of energy are major drivers of global climate change, hazardous air pollution, habitat destruction, and acid rain. In 2022, US consumers spent $1.7 trillion on energy, amounting to around 6.7% of GDP. Annual energy costs were $5,159 per person in 2022, a 30% increase from 2021. In order to mitigate the large-scale impacts of excessive energy consumption, policymakers are calling for an urgent restructuring of the energy system through increasing efficiency. Energy efficiency is the use of less energy to perform the same task or result, often being achieved through more efficient heating and cooling systems, manufacturing facilities, and appliances and electronics. Simply, energy efficiency reduces the amount of energy required to provide products and services. Many lower-income households are burdened by rising electricity costs and increasing risks from extreme weather events but do not have the resources to fund energy-efficient systems in their homes. To address this disparity, new energy efficiency standards for affordable housing are being developed in order to lower costs and improve climate resilience for households unable to afford high energy prices.
Current Initiatives in the USThe Biden Administration has taken a lead in issuing new minimum energy standards for homes built with federal dollars in an attempt to save costs for renters and homeowners. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the USDA announced the adoption of the Minimum Energy Standards for new single and multi-family homes. The standards are expected to decrease cost expenditures for residents, reduce energy use and pollution, improve resident health, and increase resilience in extreme weather events. The adoption of such energy standards will incorporate cost-saving insulation, air sealing, and efficient windows, lighting, heating and cooling systems in HUD and USDA supported properties to decrease energy bills for families. It is projected that energy efficiency improvements of 37% will decrease energy costs by more than $950 a year for homeowners. Overall, minimum energy standards are projected to expand housing affordability, minimize health risks, and improve resilience of homes during extreme weather.
Advantages of energy efficiency standardsEnergy efficiency can increase affordability and reliability for homeowners by reducing total energy demand and peak electricity demand. Peak electricity demand is the highest demand for electricity at any one point in time, which utilities are required to have the capacity to meet. Peak demand is driven by patterns of energy use in the market, with most production occurring in the afternoons. Energy efficiency programs utilize a demand-side management (DSM) strategy to reduce energy demand specifically during these high-volume, peak hours. For homeowners, energy efficiency improvements are cost-effective as they can lower utility bills by reducing the amount of power needed. Further, energy efficiency can decrease our reliance on fossil fuels and enable the growth of renewable energy, thereby decreasing GHG emissions. Updated minimum energy standards are expected to reduce 6.35 million metric tons in carbon emissions over the next three decades, generating an annual cost savings of $13.9 million. Energy efficiency also spurs the creation of new jobs in research, production, installation, and sales. In 2022, more than 2.1 million Americans worked in energy efficiency, with this only growing as we transition to a greener economy. There are many social, economic, and environmental advantages that come alongside transitioning towards an energy-efficient economy,
Drawbacks in achieving energy efficiencyAlthough there are many advantages to achieving energy efficiency, there exists roadblocks in achieving the current goals being set. First, innovative technologies rely upon very specialized knowledge, requiring expert research in the field. As well, a large concern in the development of these technologies are the significant upfront costs, through initially high levels of investment in research and development. For projects that are just starting up, it can be difficult to secure funding, potentially leading businesses to solely focus on short-term goals. On the consumer side, there may be a lack of acceptance or awareness of these new technologies prohibiting their take up in the market. To achieve universal acceptance, technologies must attain the energy savings and functionality that consumers expect. Scaling up these technologies can be time-consuming and labor-intensive, requiring complex supply chain logistics, techniques, and manufacturing. Government policies, such as the new energy efficiency standards for lower-income households, will be vital in encouraging innovation and investment to accelerate this transition.
Who is our guest?Mark Kresowik, Senior Policy Director at the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, is a strong advocate for centering marginalized communities in policies that work to improve energy efficiency. Mark works to shape local, state, utility, and federal-level policies across the country.
ResourcesUSAID: From the American People, Energy Efficiency BasicsOffice of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy: Energy Efficiency: Buildings and IndustryCase Western Reserve University: Energy-Efficient Building Technologies: Challenges and OpportunitiesNatural Resources Defense Council (NRDC): Lora Shinn, Energy Efficiency: The Clean FactsU.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: New Update: HUD and USDA Announce Adoption of Minimum Energy Standards that will Lower Monthly Costs for Homeowners and RentersCenter for Sustainable Systems: U.S. Energy System Factsheet (University of Michigan)Further ReadingU.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: Minimum Energy StandardsU.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: Minimum Energy Standards FAQsUS Housing Consultants: HUD and USDA Announce Adoption Cost-Lowering Minimum Energy StandardsFor a transcript of this episode, please visit https://climatebreak.org/standardizing-energy-efficiency-with-mark-kresowik/.
-
Staying Educated About Climate Change
As climate change intensifies, the heightened frequency of natural disaster weather-related events is quickly becoming the new reality. Whether it be prolonged wildfire seasons in Northern California or destructive hurricanes off the Florida coast, citizens across the country are beginning to bear the burden of a changing climate. For those of us yet to experience the full force of such events, our primary means of gathering information on natural disasters is through the media. Without the media’s coverage of extreme climatic events, it is difficult for people not directly impacted to be fully aware of the dangers of a changing climate. While climate change impacts more people every year, severe impacts still feel like an abstract, distant concern that may never affect them personally. In order to reframe this perception, climate storytelling, which includes steps for action and recovery, is becoming foundational towards building empathy in the wake of the climate crisis.
What is Climate Journalism?Climate journalism, the process of collecting and distributing accurate information on extreme weather events and climate change-related impacts, has been an essential element for informing the public about the effects of a changing climate. Following Al Gore’s 2006 documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, climate journalism increased by 1,000 percent in the media from the year 2000. This increase in viewership is most likely attributed to the rise of ethical concerns relating to the climate crisis as more people began to suffer the effects of natural disasters. The majority of Americans, approximately 54%, now identify climate change as a major threat to the country’s well-being. Media Matters found that news and morning shows such as ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox spent a total of around 23 hours discussing climate change in their annual 2022 reporting. Unfortunately, climate coverage still only accounts for around 1% of corporate broadcasting, even though the climate crisis is rapidly worsening.
Keeping the Public Aware and PreparedClimate journalism not only raises awareness for the public, but can provide steps for change in combating one of the most pressing issues of our time. People need accurate information in order to make informed decisions. Strong, reliable reporting can provide citizens and policymakers the information needed to prepare for and adapt to the potential impacts climate change brings. Climate journalism can offer hope to the public, providing people with the voice and power to make a difference. By including climate change in the media, people can begin to see the incoming reality of this crisis, inspiring citizens to take action.
The Struggles of Climate CoverageUnfortunately, there remain many obstacles that hold back media organizations from prioritizing climate coverage. Climate-related disasters can be hard to access, difficult to watch, and politically polarizing. Media outlets may struggle to gain large viewership, deterring them from covering climate events. Further, the various approaches to climate journalism can create discrepancies in the type of media coverage disseminated. For example, should climate topics be covered locally or nationally? What solutions should climate journalism focus on? Such a broad scope may distract from the realities currently being faced. Unfortunately, media coverage of environmental issues still only occupies a very small proportion of total media. There remains a need for increased resources, strategies, and investment in climate and environmental journalism. Further, many major news outlets publish misleading promotional content for fossil fuel corporations, greatly impacting the opinions of viewers on such controversial issues. There are, of course, many examples of excellent climate change coverage. Our modest effort at Climate Break, as a small example, focusing on climate solutions and the wide variety of actions and initiatives being developed around the world, is designed to provide quick insights into climate solutions.
Who is Jonathan Vigliotti?Jonathan Vigliotti, CBS News correspondent, is just one example of the many climate journalists directly involved in the movement to inform the public on the effects of climate change. Vigliotti’s work as an environmental journalist has taken him to over forty countries and territories across six continents. Author of Before It’s Gone: Stories from the Front Lines of Climate Change in Small-Town America, provides personal insights into the everyday lives of Americans affected by climate change, presenting a compelling argument for the urgency of taking action now. Vigliotti believes that climate journalism has the power to spark change through the use of accurate, inspiring, and thought-provoking reporting.
Further ReadingShäfer & Painter, Climate journalism in a changing media ecosystem: Assessing the production of climate change-related news around the world (WIREs Climate Change 2020)MacDonald, How broadcast TV networks covered climate change in 2022 (Media Matters)Tyson et al., What the data says about Americans’ views of climate change (Pew Research Center, 2023)BBC, Why climate change should be at the heart of modern journalism (2023)For a transcript of this episode, please visit https://climatebreak.org/using-climate-journalism-to-connect-weather-events-and-climate-with-jonathan-vigliotti/
-
What are “Resilience Hotspots”?
Technology and high-tech solutions are not the only responses to climate change. Nature can also be a powerful form of climate resilience. Resilience hotspots are small pockets of nature that, when restored and maintained, act as barriers to climate impacts. For instance, wetlands can insulate shores from storm surges and trees can provide shade in urban heat islands. In this way, climate adaptation can go hand-in-hand with integrating nature into our cities.
The Science of Nature-Based SolutionsWhile many natural areas can have climate benefits, wetlands and urban green spaces are particularly significant ecosystems in terms of climate adaptation. How do these natural protections from climate change work in the first place?
Wetlands are areas where the soil is saturated with water either seasonally or year-round. They often provide crucial protection from the heavy rainfall and storms, which are becoming more frequent and severe due to climate change. Acting as a sort of sponge, wetlands have the ability to absorb and temporarily store the excess water from these events. When a storm hits, wetlands are a “speed bump” to floodwaters, slowing and holding back storm surge and flooding that otherwise causes damage to nearby cities and towns. According to NOAA, such protection by wetlands saves US coastal communities a whopping $23 billion a year. In many areas of the US, wetlands have been degraded by nearby urbanization or drained for development, leaving these areas more vulnerable to storm surge and flooding. As a result, restoring wetlands has become a priority as a strategy to increase climate resilience in these areas.
Urban green spaces protect against a different climate impact: extreme heat. Because urban surfaces tend to be densely covered in heat-absorbing materials like asphalt or concrete, cities absorb a greater proportion of heat from the sun’s rays. This, combined with greater concentrations of greenhouse gasses in cities, leads to a situation where cities can be up to 20 degrees Fahrenheit hotter than nearby green spaces, a phenomenon known as the urban heat island effect. With the temperature increases associated with climate change, the heat island effect poses great risks for heat-related illness and death. Urban green spaces break up the dense cover of manmade material with parks, green roofs, and shade-providing trees, creating natural areas that reflect sunlight, take up greenhouse gas emissions and provide aesthetic and mental health benefits.
How to Build Resilience HotspotsSo how can we implement these nature-based climate solutions into our cities? The resilience hotspots approach uses a patchwork of crucial sites integrated into towns and communities. By focusing on places with great potential to mitigate climate damage, this approach promotes the benefits of nature-based solutions while working with the existing urban infrastructure.
In the San Francisco Bay Area of California, for example, existing wetlands have the potential to store water and reduce storm surge during storm events if they are enhanced, thereby protecting a great number of low-lying urban places. Greenbelt Alliance has identified eighteen key areas across the Bay Area that have great natural potential to mitigate climate damages and are located in or near communities that will bear greater impacts from climate change. Working with community partners, they plan and implement restoration projects that enhance the ecosystem and increase resilience.
Equity also plays an important role in designing resilience hotspots. A process that involves community organizations in the restoration of their environment integrates local expertise and insights and can promote equitable outcomes. By combining science and equity, restoration, equity and resilience can operate collectively. Resilience hotspots can be a natural tool for mitigating climate damages and for advancing climate justice.
About our GuestSadie Wilson is the Director of Planning and Research at Greenbelt Alliance, where she manages resilience hotspots work and advocates for climate smart planning and policy. During her Masters in City and Regional Planning at UC Berkeley, she contributed to research at many Bay-Area focused institutions including the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, The Center for Cities and Schools, and The Terner Center.
Further Reading
Greenbelt Alliance, About the Resilience HotspotsNOAA, Coastal Wetland BenefitsCBS News, Quick Explainer on Urban Heat IslandsEPA, How Inequity affects Heat IslandsQuaranta, Dorati & Pistocchi, Economic Benefits of Urban Greening (Scientific Reports, 2021)Greenbelt Alliance, Read some of Sadie’s workFor a full transcript of this episode, please visit https://climatebreak.org/resilience-hotspots-natures-role-in-urban-climate-adaptation/
-
Induction-Range Stoves:
Gas stoves have recently been in the news as a source of harmful pollutants in the home and generators of greenhouse gas. The adoption of energy-efficient induction-range stovetops could offer a solution. Induction cooktops use electromagnetism to generate heat from directly within cookware, preventing the levels of energy loss seen in conventional gas or electric cooktops. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission is not coming for anybody’s gas stove, despite a recent frenzy over concerns of bans on gas stovetops, so cooks around the country can pick the stove tops of their choosing. But as a handful of journalists have pointed out, the notion that gas stove tops are better for cooking than electric, really a matter of opinion, could have something to do with advertising investments by the American Gas Association. In fact, many chefs actually prefer induction cooktops to gas, and their environmental benefits are substantial.
Induction stoves contain an electromagnetic coil that generates a magnetic field when turned on. That magnetic field creates metallic resistance from compatible cookware, generating heat from within itself. Conversely, conventional gas and electric stoves transfer heat to pots and pans through a flame or electric coil. In that heat transfer, energy is lost. Induction has an energy efficiency of 85%. Electric stoves and gas stoves are 75-80% and 32% energy efficient, respectively, making gas the least energy efficient stove type. Across the United States, only about 32% of households use gas ranges, but in some states, like California, the number is closer to 70%. Energy Star estimates that a widespread shift to induction ranges would collectively save the United States over $125 million in energy costs and over 1000 GWh of energy.
Plug-in Induction-Range Stoves:
While Induction stoves are highly energy efficient, and can save consumers money on their energy bills, the upfront cost can be significant. According to Consumer Reports, a typical induction stove can range from roughly $1000 to $4000. Their installation can sometimes require upgrades to the home’s electrical wiring, which can add additional cost and complicates the process. Battery-powered induction-ranges like those in production by Channing Street Copper Company can be plugged in directly to standard electrical outlets. Plug-ins remove the complication of updating electrical panels or installing special high-voltage outlets, but they can be more expensive, costing consumers roughly $6000. However, a purchase of a standard induction or plug-in induction range may qualify consumers for rebates at federal and local levels.
Sam Calisch is an engineer and scientist working on decarbonization and electrification. He is the co-founder of Channing Street Copper, where he leads technology development.
For a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/an-induction-range-no-rewiring-required/
-
Climate Change and Anxiety: Some Data
Climate or “eco” anxiety refers to people feeling distressed about climate change and its impacts on our ecosystems, the environment, and human health and well-being. It is rooted in a deep existential dread concerning the future of the planet. Symptoms include feelings of grief, loss, anger, sadness, and guilt, which in turn can cause jitteriness, nervousness, increased heart rate, shallow breathing, difficulty concentrating, changes in appetite, or insomnia due to worry or concern about the effects of climate change.
According to Grist, Google searches for “climate anxiety” soared by 565 percent in 2021. And according to the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, an all-time high of 70 percent of Americans express worry about climate change. In September 2021, the largest study of its kind found that the climate crisis was causing widespread psychological distress for young people between the ages of 16 and 25 across 42 countries from both the global North and South. Over 45 percent of teens and young adults said that climate anxiety was affecting their daily lives and ability to function; 56 percent said they thought that "humanity is doomed" and nearly 4 in 10 said that they were hesitant to have children because of climate change.
From Solastalgia to Soliphilia: how Native American Ecology can lead the wayThe steps people must take to address their climate anxiety depends on each individual, as people are affected by climate change in different ways. For example, some people have lost homes or even loved ones, while many others have witnessed these catastrophic events unfold on their phone screens.
Dr. Melinda Adams describes this trauma as “solastalgia,” originally coined by Australian philosopher Glen Albrecht to describe the distress caused by the destruction or loss of one’s home environment. This concept helps people to understand and express the “psychoterratic,” or the relationship between human mental health and the earth’s own well-being. Many have taken legal and political action to deal with their solastalgia. For example, last year Montana youths sued the state for its failure to recognize that approving fossil fuel projects was unconstitutional without further review of the impacts to the climate. Others have drastically altered their lifestyles, opting instead to practice underconsumption to limit their personal contributions to the changing climate.
Dr. Adams has another solution, reminding those who suffer that the definition of solastalgia also includes hope. Hope can lead us either into action or ecoparalysis. It is within this framework that Dr. Adams introduces Native American cultural burnings as a way to achieve soliphilia, “the political affiliation or solidarity needed between us all to be responsible for a place, bioregion, planet, and the unity of interrelated interests within it.’’
Cultural fires or “good fires,” which involve lighting low-intensity fires to heal the surrounding ecosystem, can exemplify this step. Not only do these fires restore degraded soils, decrease vegetation or fuel overgrowth, encourage re-vegetation and biodiversity, but they also deepen the spiritual ties people have to the land they inhabit. Fire therefore has a regenerative power, both spiritually and ecologically, as participants share stories and strengthen communal and spiritual bonds with one another during these ceremonial burnings. As a member of the N’dee San Carlos Apache Tribe, Dr. Adams takes Glen Albrecht’s theory of the “psychoterratic” and frames it as a relationship between siblings. Subsequently, as siblings, humans and the land must help each other survive. By treating the earth as a more-than-human sibling, and by practicing cultural burns, participants can begin to heal from their solastalgia.
Directly engaging with a regenerative process such as “good fires,” “grounds people’s intentions and allows for deeper connections—to place and among one another.” “[C]eremonial fires create opportunities for social, environmental, and cultural healing among young persons (Native and allied)” (Tom, Adams, & Goode at 3). Essentially, the strengthening of community through spiritually uplifting activities alleviates climate anxiety by showing young people that there are people out there who share their concern for the climate and are motivated to do something about it.
Who is our guest?Dr. Melinda Adams is a member of the N’dee San Carlos Apache Tribe and an Assistant Professor in the Department of Geography and Atmospheric Science at the University of Kansas. A cultural fire practitioner and scholar, her research focuses on the revitalization of cultural fire with Tribes in California and more recently with Tribes in the Midwest. Her work with Indigenous communities combines environmental science, environmental policy, and Indigenous studies methodologies. Read more about Dr. Melinda Adams here.
ResourcesCornell University: Climate Change & Eco-AnxietyIt’s Not Just You: Everyone is Googling Climate Anxiety (Salon)Leiserowitz et al., Dramatic Increases in Public Beliefs and Worries About Climate Change (Yale Program on Climate Change Communication)Hickman et al., Climate anxiety in children and young people and their beliefs about government responses to climate change: a global survey (The Lancet Planetary Health)Tom, Adams, and Goode, From Solastalgia to Soliphilia: Cultural Fire, Climate Change and Indigenous Healing (Ecopsychology)Further reading UC Davis: Melinda Adams: Flame KeeperClimate Designers: Podcast: Deep Dive with Dr Melinda Adams: Solastalgia & Soliphilia Yale: Yale Experts Explain Climate AnxietyFor a transcript of this episode, please visit https://climatebreak.org/how-native-american-ecology-can-tackle-climate-anxiety-with-dr-melinda-adams/.
- Visa fler
