Making the Most of Our Carbon
Addressing climate change is a complex and difficult challenge, but we have more figured out than you might think. Most people actually agree on what a good game plan looks like, which is generally in line with this framework which I’ve borrowed from Shayle Kann of Energy Impact Partners:
A. Decarbonize the electric grid (shift from fossil fuels like coal and natural gas to carbon-free sources like wind, solar, hydro, and nuclear, paired with storage and demand-side solutions),
B. Electrify everything you can (switch from internal combustion vehicles to electric vehicles, and from natural gas-based building heating and cooling solutions to electric ones), and
C. Deal with the remaining stuff (with more specific, use-case specific solutions — for emissions-intensive segments that are difficult to electrify, like making concrete, forging steel, or jet fuel for long-distance air travel).
I agree with this framework! It’s a simple heuristic that also keeps in mind that most of our emissions reductions are just going to come from continuing and accelerating transitions which have already begun (more wind and solar, more batteries, more smart connected home devices, more electric vehicles, etc…).
Decades of work, new policies, and billions of dollars of investment will be required for this vision to come to fruition, but we can see where it is headed. At the end of the day, we know (generally) how to decarbonize the majority of our economy. On the other hand, Part C of this framework is a super interesting space where many questions remain. This area is the subject of this post — particularly technologies that make the most of the carbon that we continue to emit.
Making the Most of Pollution
The numerous sources of emissions that are not related to electricity generation, building heating and cooling, or ground transportation tend to be emissions-intensive and not simple to convert to electricity — often either because of the energy density or high temperatures required in these processes. These are tough areas to decarbonize. For some, new policies will drive increased efficiency and the adoption of solutions that are not cost-effective today. However, these are tough nuts to crack. For some applications, instead of eliminating carbon altogether, many emerging solutions are making the most of this carbon and getting multiple uses out of it.
What are we talking about? This could be utilizing the emissions from a steel plant (which is emissions-intensive) to make a substitute for jet fuel (also emissions-intensive), utilizing carbon dioxide (CO2) to make better construction materials, or making petrochemicals (typically derived from oil) from trash (itself a contributor to pollution). Think of it like re-using a bag you get from a convenience store: while the best situation would be not to use the bag in the first place, by re-using the bag, you’re lowering the overall carbon footprint of the activity. These are solutions which rely on fossil fuels, but help us to decarbonize.
Criticism
There is sometimes unease at embracing technologies which rely on fossil fuels and have an emissions profile. After all, will these solutions help us transition quickly enough? And what if they help make fossil fuels more economical in the short term, extending their life and crowding out cleaner solutions?
Carbon capture technologies, in particular, can be very divisive. Some environmental groups, like Greenpeace, don’t support investments in carbon capture and storage because they don’t think it will effectively store it underground.
I am personally not moved by these concerns. Even an extremely aggressive decarbonization plan will take decades to execute, in the meantime, I believe we should pursue all opportunities to make the most of the carbon that we’re already emitting and to continue making investments in technologies which have the potential for large-scale impact (such as carbon capture).
Rational public policy can also mitigate concerns here- ensuring we are only incentivizing approaches that actually result in reduced carbon emissions (like requiring that CO2 pumped underground is monitored to ensure it stays there). Besides, while I love a solar panel as much as the next person, what we should actually care about is an effective approach to decarbonizing our economy, not the specific widgets we utilize to make that happen.
Further, supporting these high-value carbon utilization technologies doesn’t mean we can’t also be planning for complete decarbonization at the same time, it’s just an interim step. Also, many of these technologies will continue to be useful long after we have significantly decarbonized our economy. Making fuel from trash fits the bill here — it will be a very long time before we stop producing garbage. And, some processes may be so hard to completely decarbonize that we decide to continue using an efficient approach which emits CO2, and pair it with a negative-carbon solution, such as investing in an ecological solution that sequesters carbon (such as planting and restoring mangrove forests) or sequestering carbon underground. Indeed, some analysts who are skeptical of drop-in jet fuel replacements feel that way specifically because they think cheap petroleum fuel could be coupled with investments in a negative-carbon solution to offset the emissions from it and still come out ahead on price.
Opportunities
You probably inferred it from the paragraphs above, but you can make petrochemicals from your household garbage, jet fuel from steel refinery pollution, and even operate power plants with CO2. Here are a few examples:
LanzaTech is a pioneer in the production of next-generation fuels and chemicals through the recycling of carbon pollution from steel mills, trash, and more. The Chicago-based company recently raised a $72 million Series E investment round. Among their numerous projects is a partnership with ArcelorMittal, the world’s largest steel company, to take emissions from a blast furnace in Belgium and turn it into transportation fuels. In addition to transportation fuels, this process can also produce more sustainable petrochemicals (which are expected to be the largest portion of petroleum demand globally by 2030).
Fulcrum Bioenergy is diverting municipal solid waste from landfills — the company makes a drop-in replacement for jet fuel out of garbage. Fulcrum is developing a large alternative fuel plant in Gary, Indiana (as well as a half dozen other locations in the US) to supply fuel to United Airlines as part of a partnership agreement (United also has a stake in the business).
NET Power has been called a “game-changer” for carbon capture. The company, backed by a consortium including Exelon, is developing power plants which leverage a unique design which can enable them to capture carbon emissions much more cheaply and effectively than traditional carbon capture systems (by designing it into the system rather than bolting it on). The process utilizes natural gas as a feedstock, but the process design reduces certain types of emissions. The byproducts of the power plant are water and higher-purity carbon dioxide, which can be utilized in a process like Lanzatech’s, or piped underground to be sequestered. In this application, the high level of purity of the CO2 is important — while NET Power is not technically getting multiple uses out of the carbon it uses, it does enable other uses, and can potentially make carbon sequestration much more cost-competitive.
CarbonCure is using CO2 from industrial sources to reduce the level of emissions in making concrete, which today accounts for more than 5% of CO2 emissions globally. In their process, the CO2 injected into the wet mixture reacts with calcium and becomes permanently embedded in the concrete. This approach has a much lower emissions profile and actually makes stronger concrete in the process. Mega climate investor Breakthrough Energy Ventures recently invested in the business.
Carbon Emissions, But Smarter
These are just a few examples of technologies which leverage carbon emissions to create solutions which will help us decarbonize. While electrifying our sources of energy generation, building heating and cooling, and ground transportation will result in the lion’s share of emissions reductions, there are many other important segments which require investments in new technology. And even though we may know the general contours of our decarbonization plan, we still need much more innovation to develop the technological and business solutions to address climate change — it is why Clean Energy Trust exists. Some of these solutions are not completely renewable — but that doesn’t mean they are not incredibly important technology solutions for reducing emissions. Indeed, as long as we have waste streams from garbage and industrial processes, it will be valuable to leverage these technological solutions in order to get the best bang for the buck out of the carbon we use.
