Search for any green Service

Find green products from around the world in one place

Etihad Airways plans to use sustainable fuel made from CO2

Etihad Airways plans to use sustainable fuel made from CO2

UAE-based airline Etihad Airways has partnered with Twelve, a carbon transformation company, to promote sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) produced from CO2 and renewable energy.

Twelve combines renewable energy and water to convert CO2 into vital chemicals and materials derived from fossil fuels. This innovative formula reduces lifecycle emissions by 90% compared to traditional fossil-based fuels and is compatible with current aircrafts.

Etihad’s sustainable mission

The new partnership aligns with Etihad’s sustainability goals of achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 and converting waste into fuel, with a target of diverting 75% of waste from landfills by 2025. The collaboration is driven by the growing demand for SAF among various airlines.

In 2019, the airline introduced the Etihad Greenliner Program, which allocated a Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner to focus on sustainability initiatives. The programme aims to identify and tackle key sustainability challenges through partnerships with Boeing and engine manufacturer GE.

SAF aligns with Etihad’s commitment to driving innovation and transforming the aviation industry towards sustainability, and the new partnership reinforces Etihad’s mission and sustainability efforts.

“Etihad Airways is working hard on its sustainability strategy and deploying a range of initiatives across the spectrum of sustainability to achieve that,” Mohammad Al Bulooki, Chief Operating Officer at Etihad said. “Collaborating with sustainable aviation fuel makers like Twelve to advance products like E-Jet fuel is an important part of that drive.”

A long-term solution for addressing aviation emissions

Twelve has developed a low-carbon jet fuel, E-Jet fuel, produced using carbon transformation technology, which has been tested and verified by the US Air Force.

By joining forces, the two businesses aim to plan international demonstration flights to promote SAF in the global market.

Twelve’s CEO, Nicholas Flanders, describes the partnership as an “honour” while highlighting the company’s progress towards a supply of drop-in jet fuel made from air and not oil.

Flanders continues: “Our E-Jet fuel allows airlines like Etihad to reduce emissions by up to 90% with their existing aircraft fleet, which will be critical to achieving the United Nations’ 2050 net-zero emissions target in aviation.”

 

 


 

 

Source  Sustainability

Green energy – Learn more about green energy sources

Green energy – Learn more about green energy sources

Green energy: What it is and how it works

Green energy is electricity with substantially less carbon dioxide output than fossil fuels. Sources that cause little-to-no impact on the world’s carbon footprint are considered green.

Green electricity sources include:

  • Geothermal energy
  • Solar energy
  • Wind energy
  • Hydro energy
  • Biomass energy

More Americans are looking favorably at green energy companies and green energy plans to help the environment. Plus, with President Biden’s current initiatives of “achieving a carbon pollution-free electricity sector by 2035,” the push toward reducing carbon dioxide, also called greenhouse gas emissions, is at an all-time high.

Most scientists today agree that the world is getting warmer due to carbon dioxide production. The good news is that the U.S. was the second leading country “in installed renewable energy capacity worldwide in 2020,” following China in the top spot, according to Statista.

Within the U.S., Texas, California, and Washington are typically among the top five green-energy producing states. These states have a strong command of renewable energy, excelling at wind and solar generation.

 

Green energy vs. renewable energy vs. conventional power

Green energy and renewable energy often are used interchangeably, but the terms aren’t the same. All green electricity sources of power are renewable, but certain renewable energy sources are not green. For example, burning wood to produce electricity generates carbon dioxide. So, while wood is renewable, many scientists debate whether it is truly green.

Similar arguments can be made about other green energy sources. Solar and wind energy are often considered the best renewable energy; however, both aren’t necessarily green. Solar panel materials and manufacturing produce waste. Wind turbine blades can stay in landfills long after they’ve been used. Hydro energy can damage the environment by destroying habitats.

However, all renewable energy sources, including biomass, can reduce our dependence on the conventional power supply of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas. Here are a few examples of renewable or green energy sources available right now.

 

Geothermal energy

Geothermal energy uses hot water and steam that comes from underground reservoirs. It can reach as far as the magma layer of the earth. Green electricity providers and power plants using this type of energy convert the heat and steam and use it to drive a turbine, which produces electricity.

The U.S. is the world’s largest producer of alternative electricity from geothermal energy. California, Nevada and Utah are some of the top states producing geothermal energy. Texas is also considered an untapped resource when it comes to geothermal. The Energy Information Administration says billions of barrels of water as hot as 200 degrees are produced annually as part of crude oil and natural gas production and could be used in geothermal generation.

Solar energy

Solar energy is a small but growing part of the nation’s energy puzzle, producing 3.3% of the electricity generated in December 2021, the most recent month available from the EIA. Most people have seen solar panels on rooftops or in large solar farms, mostly in rural settings, but few know how they work.

The solar panels act as semiconductors, with positive and negative layers. A conductor attached to both layers creates an electric circuit and turns electrons from sunlight into electricity. Finally, a solar inverter converts direct current into alternating current for residential use.

California, Texas, and Florida generated the most solar electricity in December 2021, at 29.1%, 12.6%, and 8.5%, respectively.

Wind energy

Across the U.S., total wind generation increased almost 25% year over year. Texas, Iowa and Oklahoma lead the nation in wind energy production. However, Texas is responsible for more than 28% of the nation’s electricity generation, which is over three times as much as any other state.

Wind energy, in general, accounts for about 11% of the nation’s energy. Here’s how it happens: Wind causes the huge turbine blades to spin, causing a rotor inside to turn as well. The rotor, in turn, is hooked up to a generator, which turns the motion of the rotor into electricity.

Hydro energy

Electricity generated by hydroelectric projectsaccounts for about 7% of the country’s electricity.Washington, Oregon, and New York are three of the top-producing hydro energy states. However, hydropower fell by as much as 14% in 2021 due to droughts across California and the Pacific Northwest, according to the EIA.

Dams are the key component for this form of green energy. The dams allow hydroelectric plants to channel water through turbines, again feeding generators that turn the kinetic energy into electricity.

Biomass energy

Biomass is organic material from plants and animals. The material can be burned as is or converted to liquid or gas biofuels. Examples of biomass include wood, other plants, and wastes. Wood and ethanol make up the largest energy sources of biomass, which produces about 5% of the country’s energy, with California, Georgia, and Florida as three of the top-producing states.

 

How to get a green energy plan

Renewable energy is part of every Texas energy plan. The percentage of renewable energy can be found on a plan’s Electricity Facts Label. Most retail electric providers in Texas also offer plans with higher percentages of green electricity, including plans that are 100% green.

Some providers are green energy companies that only sell 100% green energy, such as Gexa Energy, Green Mountain Energy, and Chariot Energy.

Green energy plans and programs

Here’s how green energy providers in Texas operate to give their customers access to renewable energy.

Green energy companies like Gexa Energy purchase renewable energy credits (RECs)from alternative energy generators in the amount to offset your energy usage. These renewable energy sources are a combination of wind, solar, hydro, geothermal, and biomass outputs.
The energy you use at your home isn’t from these sources directly, because the power grid is a blend of electricity from all sources (renewable and conventional power sources). However, your green energy provider is purchasing the equivalent amount of energy you use from renewable sources.
If you want to use renewable energy directly at your home, having a solar panel system at your residence is a popular choice. Otherwise, your electricity will be a blend of sources.

Get a green energy plan

Uncertain of how to proceed? That’s understandable, given that there are different term lengths and options to purchase no-deposit or prepaid plans. Our buying guide offers useful tips on how to decide on a plan. Check out our green electricity rates page for more information on purchasing a green energy plan.

 

 


 

 

Source SaveOnEnergy.com

 

You’re (Probably) Recycling Wrong: Here’s How To Do It Right

You’re (Probably) Recycling Wrong: Here’s How To Do It Right

What Is Recycling?

Recycling is the process of converting waste into reusable materials. There are many examples of recycling that don’t involve putting items into a green bin, like using an old jam jar as a vase for flowers.

 

Why Should You Recycle?

Everyone has their own reasons for recycling, but here are five major reasons why you should make a habit to recycle properly:

  1. Reduce your carbon footprint: Throwing away recyclable materials like aluminum cans or newspapers is a huge waste of energy — equivalent to the annual output of 15 power plants. Recycling cans saves 95% of the energy required to make them from a virgin source.
  2. Preserve our natural resources and wildlife: The process of mining for raw materials is harmful to natural ecosystems and animals.
  3. Reduce landfill waste: Most of us have the luxury of never seeing where our bags of trash end up, but it has to go somewhere. Not only are landfills aesthetically displeasing and have adverse effects on tourism, but they’re also wreaking havoc on our environment.
  4. Prevent pollution: Recycling products to (1) keep them out of landfills and (2) reduce the amount of mining of raw materials prevents air and water pollution.
  5. Create jobs and stimulate the economy: Recycling and reuse activities account for more than 680,000 jobs, $37.8 billion in wages, and $5.5 billion in tax revenues in the U.S. alone.

 

What Can Be Recycled?

Specifics can vary depending on the rules at your local recycling center or curbside recycling program, but the following items can generally be recycled:

Aluminum/Metal

Recycling aluminum cans save 95% of the energy required to make the same amount of aluminum from its virgin source.10 You can recycle the following aluminum materials, but make sure they’re free of residue.

  • Beverage cans
  • Food cans
  • Tin foil
  • Scrap metal

If there’s a hard-to-clean substance stuck to an item, you’re better off throwing it away.

Paper Products/Cardboard

Paper and cardboard have a 68% recycling rate in the U.S., which is pretty high compared to other materials. Again, make sure the material is free of food residue before putting it in the recycling bin. And be sure to check with your curbside recycling program’s policy, as some only accept corrugated cardboard.

  • Cardboard boxes
  • Milk or juice cartons
  • Newspaper
  • Printer paper
  • Frozen food boxes
  • Ream wrappers
  • File folders
  • Poster Board

Plastics

Sadly, only 5–6% of the 46 million tons of plastic generated in the U.S. gets recycled.11 You can help increase that statistic by properly cleaning and recycling the following plastic products:

  • Water bottles
  • Soda bottles
  • Plastic beverage jugs
  • Takeout containers
  • Plastic jugs and tubs labeled No. 1 or 2*

*Typically, those with the numbers 1 or 2 inside the triangle can be recycled curbside, though some may have to be taken to a recycling center. Plastics numbers 3–7 must be taken to a specific recycling facility.

 

What Can’t Be Recycled

To avoid wishful recycling, you should trash (or explore alternative options) for the following waste:

  • Food scraps (look into composting instead).
  • Plastic shopping bags (most retailers offer bag recycling).
  • Food-tainted items (pizza boxes, dirty food takeout containers, used paperware, etc.)
  • Snack bags or candy wrappers
  • Paint buckets
  • Ceramics and kitchenware
  • Glassware (non-bottles or jars)
  • Broken glass
  • Windows or mirrors
  • Plastic wrap
  • Bubble wrap or packing peanuts
  • Styrofoam
  • Photographs
  • Medical waste
  • Wood
  • Yard waste
  • Six-pack rings
  • Frozen food bags

Other Materials and Recycling

There are other materials that can be recycled but must be taken to a special recycling center to do so properly. (In other words, don’t put these items in your recycling bin.)

These items may include:

  • Textiles/clothing
  • Light bulbs
  • Fluorescent tubes
  • Batteries
  • Computers/electronics

A quick internet search of “how to recycle [item] near me” should direct you toward the proper recycling facility or drop-off center for these items.

 

Do’s and Don’ts of Recycling

We cannot stress this enough: the rules of recycling vary based on your local recycling center or curbside recycling program, so be sure to check what guidelines you need to follow to avoid recycling contamination.

However, the following are common dos and don’ts when it comes to proper recycling.

Recycling Do’s:

  • Check with your local recycling center for guidelines.
  • Empty and clean all containers before recycling, making sure there’s no leftover food or beverage residue.
  • Break down cardboard boxes.
  • Keep the lid of metal cans attached and fold them inwards so the sharp edge isn’t exposed.
  • Separate your materials by type.

Recycling Don’ts:

  • Put any of the materials listed in the above section, “What can’t be recycled,” into a recycling bin.
  • Recycle plastics No. 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 in a curbside recycling bin (these plastics must be taken to a specific recycling facility).
  • Flatten cartons or bottles.
  • Recycle the glass from windows, mirrors, vases, or drinkware.

 

How Are Products Recycled?

You now know what can and cannot be recycled, but have you ever wondered how things are recycled? Let’s take a look at some of the processes for the most common items below.

Aluminum/Metal

Aluminum cans and other metal materials are taken to special treatment plants. After being sorted and cleaned, the metals are remelted to remove colorings, coatings, and shapes.

Once in liquid form, the aluminum is then made into giant blocks called “ingots.” Ingots get shipped out to mills, where they get rolled out into sheets before being fashioned into their new shapes. In all, it takes just a few weeks for aluminum to be recycled.

Cardboard

Cardboard is first sorted by type, either boxboard (i.e., a cereal box) or corrugated (i.e., a standard shipping box). The material is then shredded and poured into big water tanks to be turned into a pulp, with all other materials (metal, tape, etc.) getting filtered out in this process.

After the filtering process, more water and chemicals are added to further pulverize the material before it gets rolled, dried, and pressed into sheets. The sheets are then cut into the proper shapes and sizes.

Paper (Office and Newspaper)

Similar to cardboard, newspapers or magazine paper are brought to a mill, where they are fed into a fiber preparation plant. From there, the paper is mixed in with water and chemicals that dissolve the ink and contaminants and turns into a soggy, mushy pulp.

The pulp is then injected between mesh sheets to form a wet sheet of paper. Once dried, the paper gets polished and rolled into big reels, later to be cut into smaller sizes and sold off.

Plastic

Once sorted by type, plastics are cleaned and then ground up and shredded. Once in bits, the plastic gets melted down and formed into small pellets about the size of a grain of rice.

The plastic pellets are then sold to companies to melt and mold into whatever container or shape they need to create.

 

How to Create a Home Recycling System

Having an organized and functional recycling system is important to promote proper recycling habits while also maintaining a healthier home (and planet). Here are a few steps to help get you started:

Step 1: Find Out the Recycling Pickup Schedule and Guidelines

If your city offers curbside recycling, make sure you’re aware of what items it accepts and what day your recycling pickup is.

Step 2: Figure Out Which Bins to Use and Label Them

Many cities require that curbside recycling be separated into separate bins. If you’re in charge of bringing recyclables to a recycling center, you’re better off buying separate recycling bins and labeling them by type (i.e., plastic, cans, cardboard, paper).

Step 3: Analyze (and Reduce) Your Waste

Do you get a lot of junk mail? Do you buy unnecessary plastic products? Perhaps you have a lot of items shipped to your home? There are ways you can reduce your waste to create fewer recycling headaches.

  • See if you can get a “no junk mail” sticker for your mailbox.
  • Opt out of junk mail by going to the website DMAchoice.org or calling 1-888-5-OPTOUT to stop receiving credit card offers.
  • When you order a product online, see if there are options for reduced shipping materials (Amazon offers this).
  • Sign up for e-notifications or statements for your bank or other service providers.

Reducing your home waste (especially ridding of those cardboard boxes) can help keep your home free of pests as well.

Step 4: Keep It Organized

Stay on top of your recycling by breaking down your materials and sorting them into their respective bins. If you have curbside recycling, set a phone reminder to move your bins to the curb the night before pickup.

 

Teaching Kids How To Recycle

Maintaining a home recycling system is a great chore for children, but the chore doesn’t have to be a bore. Here are some tips to make recycling more exciting for kids.

Make Smaller Recycling Bins Just for Kids

If possible, make smaller recycling bins for your kids’ bedrooms or playroom and teach them how to break down materials and properly sort them. The night before recycling day, they can add their separate stashes to the bigger bins.

Go on a Recycling Scavenger Hunt

A recycling scavenger hunt is a sneaky way to get your kids to help you clean the house. Have them go around your home and find different items that can be recycled, like the opened boxes from online purchases or the soda cans left in the TV room.

You can also hide recycled materials around the house to make it a little more interactive.

Create DIY Projects With Recyclable Materials

There are plenty of ways to upcycle recycled materials, especially those that can’t go into curbside recycling. You could make seed starters out of egg cartons, sew door drafts, or heating pads from old clothing. If you use recycled materials for general arts and crafts, the possibilities are endless.

Donate Toys and Clothes

Make a habit of going through the toys and clothes that your children have outgrown and asking them how these items may better serve other children in your community. Whether that be a neighbor or schoolmate or drop off at a donation center or thrift store.

Make a Bird Feeder

You can use plastic jugs or bottles to make homemade bird feeders. All you need is a pair of scissors or X-acto knife, a long stick, a piece of used wire (or string or twine), a nail, and some birdseed.

  1. Cut a hole in the side and the top of the bottle or jug.
  2. Poke a hole through the plastic with the nail.
  3. Put the long stick through both holes (this will act as the t perch for the birds to stand on).
  4. Use the nail again to poke holes in the top of the feeder.
  5. Insert the string through the top hole to make a hanger.
  6. Fill the bottom of the bottle with birdseed.
  7. Hang your bird feeder outside!

Play Zero Waste Games

You can recycle materials to make games for children. Many of these work best in bigger group settings, ideal for the classroom or parties. Here are some ideas:

  • Fill empty bottles with sand for bottle bowling.
  • Create towers with aluminum cans and see who can make theirs the tallest.
  • Do a recycling relay, where you give each kid a pile of mixed recyclables and trash and see who can properly sort their items into the correct bin the fastest.
  • Make three signs (plastic, glass, paper) and put them in different areas of the room. Call out different recycled items (like, “milk carton”) and have the kids run to whichever sign resembles the bin that item would go in.

 

Recycling and Eco Terms Glossary

Below are some helpful recycling and eco terms to know and teach to your kids.

  • Bin: A small container used to hold limited amounts of waste, typically specified by type (compost bin, paper bin, plastics bin, etc.)
  • Biodegradable: When a material can naturally be broken down by microorganisms and turned into water or carbon dioxide.
  • Commingled container: A single waste container that holds a blended collection of recyclable materials (any combination of paper, cardboard, aluminum, steel, glass, and plastic).
  • Compactor: A machine that uses pressure to compress materials into a dense mass.
  • Conserve: Protect something (especially an environmentally or culturally important place or thing) from harm or destruction.
  • Decompose: To rot or break down into essential elements.
  • E-waste: Electronic components that can be disassembled and recycled (including computers, monitors, keyboards, computer mice, TVs, cell phones, etc.)
  • Fossil fuels: Compound mixtures made of fossilized plant and animal remnants (coal, oil, and natural gas) that are extracted from the earth and burned as a fuel source.
  • Hazardous waste: Poisonous or toxic materials that can cause harm to humans, ecosystems, and wildlife if not properly disposed of.
  • Landfill: A place where trash and solid waste are dumped, buried, controlled, and managed. This trash can take decades or even centuries to break down.
  • Renewable energy: Alternative forms of energy from natural resources, like the sun (solar power), wind or water (hydropower).
  • Textiles: A type of cloth or fiber-based that may be composed of woven fabrics, yarns, or threads.

 

 


 

 

Source Today’s Homeowner

Old Growth Trees Sequester More Carbon, Help Prevent Wildfires

Old Growth Trees Sequester More Carbon, Help Prevent Wildfires

As we progress through the 21st century, one of the most important issues of our time is carbon. We create much of it by burning fossil fuels, extracting natural resources, or simply by living our day-to-day lives; we create carbon.

We create much more of it than we should, and the research into climate change backs this up. Many of us have devised innovative ways to counteract and slow down our carbon output, while good solutions are ultimately artificial. As it turns out, nature is our most important ally in fighting the devastating effects of climate change.

According to Frontiers in Forests and Global Change research, old-growth large-diameter trees are the most important carbon sinks we have and are significantly more effective at removing and storing carbon from our atmosphere than any other technology we have available in the present day.

Oregon, USA, and the Blue Mountains Complex region, in particular, has been world-renowned for its natural beauty and resources for hundreds of years. The timber industry makes up much of the natural resource extraction sector. However, despite this fact, this area significantly lacks protections guaranteeing the safety of its natural beauty from those who would profit from taking what is there until there is nothing left.

One of the central issues for those living in Oregon is wildfires, which destroy land and towns and devastate those living there. Thus, “chainsaw medicine,” as it’s called in the region, is implemented to reduce the number of trees that can be burned to safeguard their communities from destruction and to turn a profit at the same time. However, recent developments in research in forestry have concluded that this might actually be accelerating the problem and making it worse, not better.

Large-diameter trees comprise only 7% of the total number of trees in the Blue Mountains Complex, yet they sequester 50% of the carbon emitted in the region into their bodies. These trees are incredibly carbon-dense and eat up the carbon in the atmosphere cleaning the air and providing important stability to the soil that prevents landslides.

On top of that, trees that are standing or dead actually prevent wildfires due to wind and humidity. The two main contributors to massive wildfires that spiral out of control are dry, windy conditions that lead sparks that would otherwise be contained and extinguished to engulf an entire forest. The forestry industry cuts down large swaths of the forest leading to large open areas with no shade to regulate the temperature and no obstructions to the wind that blows through freely.

And while global climate change does make historic wildfires much worse than they otherwise would be, indigenous peoples for hundreds of years used controlled burns in order to modify their landscape and regenerate the soil that benefits from ash in the dirt.

This new research has the capability to seriously challenge the conventional view on wildfires, as legislation is currently being introduced that can protect the pristine forests of Oregon from the industry that seeks to extract the trees and release all that carbon that otherwise would be contained in the bark.

As the world changes and new technologies are being developed and implemented in order to address our climate crisis, mother nature once again proves to us that often the right choice is to use what we already have. We like to believe that we are the most ingenious and intelligent life on the planet, but ultimately we come from the dirt and will return to it.

It only makes sense that we should begin respecting the solutions that come from the ground and dig our roots deeper to protect what is already here. New legislation that can bring about what is good for the environment has to be of top priority because, at the end of the day, we are not defending nature; we are nature defending itself.

 

 


 

 

Source Happy Eco News

Switching to renewable energy could save trillions – study

Switching to renewable energy could save trillions – study

Switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy could save the world as much as $12tn (£10.2tn) by 2050, an Oxford University study says.

The report said it was wrong and pessimistic to claim that moving quickly towards cleaner energy sources was expensive.

Gas prices have soared on mounting concerns over energy supplies.

But the researchers say that going green now makes economic sense because of the falling cost of renewables.

 

The cost of green energy like wind and solar has been falling for decades

 

“Even if you’re a climate denier, you should be on board with what we’re advocating,” Prof Doyne Farmer from the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School told BBC News.

“Our central conclusion is that we should go full speed ahead with the green energy transition because it’s going to save us money,” he said.

Will new government stick to climate targets?
PM will explore energy market reform to cut bills
What is climate change? A really simple guide
The report’s findings are based on looking at historic price data for renewables and fossil fuels and then modelling how they’re likely to change in the future.

The data for fossil fuels goes from 2020 back more than 100 years and shows that after accounting for inflation, and market volatility, the price hasn’t changed much.

Renewables have only been around for a few decades, so there’s less data. But in that time continual improvements in technology have meant the cost of solar and wind power have fallen rapidly, at a rate approaching 10% a year.

The report’s expectation that the price of renewables will continue to fall is based on “probabilistic” modelling, using data on how massive investment and economies of scale have made other similar technologies cheaper.

“Our latest research shows scaling-up key green technologies will continue to drive their costs down, and the faster we go, the more we will save,” says Dr Rupert Way, the report’s lead author from the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment.

Wind and solar are already the cheapest option for new power projects, but questions remain over how to best store power and balance the grid when the changes in the weather leads to fall in renewable output.

 

Cost of net zero
Back in 2019 Philip Hammond, then Chancellor of the Exchequer wrote to the prime minister to say that the cost of reaching net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 in the UK would be more than £1tn. This report says the likely costs have been over-estimated and have deterred investment.

It also says predictions by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that the cost of keeping global temperatures rises under 2 degrees would correspond to a loss of GDP by 2050 were too pessimistic. The transition to renewables was, it says, likely to turn out to be a “net economic benefit”.

The research has been published in the journal Joule and is a collaboration between the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, the Oxford Martin Programme on the Post-Carbon Transition, the Smith School of Enterprise & Environment at the University of Oxford, and SoDa Labs at Monash University.

 


 

Source BBC

Maersk eyes ‘leapfrog’ to carbon neutral fuels in shipping

Maersk eyes ‘leapfrog’ to carbon neutral fuels in shipping

The Danish shipping giant is looking at ways of cutting emissions this decade, saying the industry needs to act with a “crisis mindset” in order to respond to the climate emergency.

For Maersk, this means ditching transition fuels such as liquified natural gas (LNG), which are cleaner than the heavy oil traditionally used in large vessels but are still harmful to the environment because they are made from fossil gas.

“From our perspective as a company, we believe we have to leapfrog to carbon neutral fuels for our vessels and for transportation in general,” said Morten Bo Christiansen, head of decarbonisation at Maersk.

“Any talk about so-called transition fossil fuels is simply not relevant from our perspective, it’s simply not solving the problem,” he told an online press briefing last month. “The last thing we need is another cycle of fossil fuel assets,” he added, pointing out that ships built today have an average lifetime of about 20 to 30 years and will therefore still be around in 2050.

International shipping accounts for 2.2% of global carbon dioxide emissions, according to the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), more than aviation’s 2% share. The IMO, a United Nations agency, has said it aims to halve greenhouse gas emissions from 2008 levels by 2050.

 

Methanol: ‘The here and now’

Because of the urgency to cut emissions already this decade, Christiansen said the first solution Maersk can turn to is methanol, which he described as a mature technology. “And we see later also ammonia,” he added.

The problem is that methanol today is mostly made from coal or natural gas, which are both polluting, Christiansen continued. This is why Maersk is looking at green methanol made from biomass gasification, or so-called “Power-to-X” where biogenic CO2 is added to hydrogen. “And same with ammonia, made from hydrogen and then just adding nitrogen.”

The hope is that these alternative shipping fuels will gradually become greener as biomass, ammonia and hydrogen are produced in growing quantities using sustainable production methods.

“But again, the ‘here and now’ perspective is that there is actually only one solution and that’s methanol,” Christiansen said, adding there are safety aspects to ammonia that need to be solved before it can be used on a commercial scale.

Maersk is seen as a trailblazer in the shipping industry when it comes to decarbonisation. On 2 June, the Danish firm called for a carbon tax on ship fuel to encourage the transition to cleaner alternatives. The Danish firm proposed a tax of at least $450 per tonne of fuel, which works out to $150 per tonne of carbon.

Maersk CEO Soren Skou called the tax proposal “a levy to bridge the gap between the fossil fuels consumed by vessels today and greener alternatives that are currently more expensive.”

 

Bottleneck

The main obstacle to green shipping fuels is scale. Production is still tiny and a massive increase in volume would be needed to decarbonise the shipping industry.

That requires quickly ramping up production of renewable electricity to produce green hydrogen “because that will very soon become the bottleneck here,” said Ulrik Stridbæk, head of regulatory affairs at Ørsted, the Danish energy firm.

“So we’re trying to match this with the electrons that will hopefully start to flow from the Baltic Sea,” said Stridbæk, who cited Danish government plans to build an “energy island” off Bornholm in the Baltic Sea to harness production of offshore wind to serve the Danish and German markets.

“This is the vision,” Stridbæk said. “Producing very large scale renewable electricity, and converting it” into green hydrogen and eFuels that can be used in the maritime and aviation sector.

Last year, Danish companies – including Ørsted, Scandinavian Airlines, and Maersk – launched the Green Fuels for Denmark initiative, with the aim of ramping up the production of renewable hydrogen in the country.

The first phase, targeted for 2023, would see the construction of a 10MW electrolyser to produce renewable hydrogen to be used as fuel for buses and trucks. By 2030, the capacity would reach 1.3GW, enough to supply the creation of more than 250,000 tonnes of sustainable fuel.

 

Access to renewable electricity

“Clearly the constraining factor here will be the production of these fuels and the access to the renewable energy that is needed,” said Maersk’s Christiansen.

However, the cost of producing green fuels – whether methanol, ammonia, or hydrogen – is prohibitively expensive at the moment. And while demand is expected to boom in the coming years, eFuels are expected to remain more expensive than oil until the end of this decade, Christiansen said.

“A market based system, some kind of carbon price would surely level the playing field and incentivise investments into this. That is clearly something that would help and would be needed in the long term,” he said.

At EU level, the European Commission is preparing proposals to mandate a gradual incorporation of green jet fuel in aviation, with percentages increasing over the years. A certification scheme for renewable and low-carbon fuels is also under consideration as part of the revision of the EU’s renewable energy directive.

The  proposal “will come with an updated set of incentives to promote the use of these fuels in various sectors,” the EU’s Energy Commissioner Kadri Simson announced in February.

The EU executive is also preparing a green fuel law for shipping – FuelEU Maritime – which is due to be published on 14 July.

A draft of that law, seen by The Guardian, has opted for a goal-based approach that would set increasingly stringent “greenhouse gas intensity targets” to be met for the energy used on board.

The result is that LNG would be eligible to power EU ships until around 2040, a prospect environmental groups described as “a disaster.”

 


 

Source EURACTIV

New Zealand government launches $70m fund to reduce carbon emissions from coal and gas

New Zealand government launches $70m fund to reduce carbon emissions from coal and gas

The Government has launched a $70m fund to help businesses switch from fossil fuels, such as coal and gas, to clean energy for process heat.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and energy minister Megan Woods announced the fund in New Plymouth on Wednesday, and said it would allow business and industries to access financial support to switch away from boilers run on coal and gas, to cleaner electricity and biomass options.

Process heat is the steam, hot water or hot gases used in industrial processing, manufacturing and space heating.

 

Jacinda Ardern is mobbed by students at Witt in New Plymouth. ANDY JACKSON/STUFF

 

Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from process heat is win-win for our climate and our recovery,” Ardern said in a statement. “It provides much-needed financial support to business to assist with the often costly transition of plant and equipment to clean energy sources.”

 

Ardern said the $70m fund would create jobs and stimulate the economy, while demonstrating the Government’s commitment to future-proofing New Zealand’s Covid-19 recovery.

“I have set out that the economic recovery from Covid and addressing climate change are priorities for the new Government,” she said. “This fund creates jobs while lowering emissions and is the exact sort of initiative that will help us to build back better from Covid.”

 

Ardern poses for a selfie while at New Plymouth’s polytech. ANDY JACKSON/STUFF

 

According to the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA), 79 per cent of the process heat in New Zealand is used in the industrial sector, in sawmills, pulp and paper mills, and food processing plants (including dairy).

The final 21 per cent is used in the commercial sector, in shops and office buildings, the public sector, in schools, hospitals, prisons and public administration buildings, and in the agricultural sector, mainly for glasshouses.

 

Ardern meets with Colleen Tuuta during her visit to Witt on Wednesday. ANDY JACKSON/STUFF

 

About half of the country’s process heat demand comes from burning coal or natural gas.

It counts for about 9 per cent of our total emissions, and 27 per cent of our energy-related emissions.

Woods said this fund would be key to reducing those emissions in the coming year.

“The new fund will target New Zealand’s largest energy users to accelerate their uptake of electrification and other technologies that will dramatically lower emissions from this sector, and create clean energy jobs.”

 

Jacinda Ardern caught up with her aunt, Marie Ardern, and New Plymouth MP Glen Bennett during her visit. ANDY JACKSON/STUFF

 

Woods said a minimum of $15m was available in the first round, which opened on Wednesday.

“Successful applicants will likely already have a plan in place to decarbonise their process heat, and will be able to demonstrate value for money as well as their contribution to the economic recovery by boosting economic activity and providing local employment.”

 


 

By Jane Matthews

Source: Stuff

Super-charged: How Australia’s biggest renewables project will change the energy game

Super-charged: How Australia’s biggest renewables project will change the energy game

Australia doesn’t yet export renewable energy. But the writing is on the wall: demand for Australia’s fossil fuel exports is likely to dwindle soon, and we must replace it at massive scale.

The proposed Asian Renewable Energy Hub (AREH) will be a huge step forward. It would eventually comprise 26,000 megawatts (MW) of wind and solar energy, generated in Western Australia’s Pilbara region. Once complete, it would be Australia’s biggest renewable energy development, and potentially the largest of its type in the world.

Late last week, the federal government granted AREH “major project” status, meaning it will be fast-tracked through the approvals process. And in another significant step, the WA government this month gave environmental approval for the project’s first stage.

The mega-venture still faces sizeable challenges. But it promises to be a game-changer for Australia’s lucrative energy export business and will reshape the local renewables sector.

 

The projects promise enormous clean development opportunities for Australia’s north and will create thousands of jobs in Australia – especially in high-tech manufacturing.

 

Writing on the wall

Australia’s coal and gas exports have been growing for decades, and in 2019-20 reached almost A$110 billion. Much of this energy has fuelled Asia’s rapid growth. However, in recent weeks, two of Australia’s largest Asian energy markets announced big moves away from fossil fuels.

China adopted a target of net-zero greenhouse emissions by 2060. Japan will retire its fleet of old coal-fired generation by 2030, and will introduce legally binding targets to reach net-zero emissions by 2050.

There are signs other Asian nations are also moving. Singapore has weak climate targets, but on Monday inked a deal with Australia to cooperate on low-emissions technologies.

 

Export evolution

The Asian Renewable Energy Hub (AREH) would be built across 6,500 square kilometres in the East Pilbara. The first stage involves a 10,000MW wind farm plus 5,000MW of solar generation – which the federal government says would make it the world’s largest wind and solar electricity plant.

The first stage would be capable of generating 100 terawatt-hours of renewable electricity each year. That equates to about 40 per cent of Australia’s total electricity generation in 2019. AREH recently expanded its longer term plans to 26,000MW.

The project is backed by a consortium of global renewables developers. Most energy from AREH will be used to produce green hydrogen and ammonia to be used both domestically, and for shipping to export markets. Some energy from AREH will also be exported as electricity, carried by an undersea electrical cable.

Another Australian project is also seeking to export renewable power to Asia. The 10-gigawatt Sun Cable project, backed by tech entrepreneur Mike Cannon-Brookes, involves a solar farm across 15,000 hectares near Tennant Creek, in the Northern Territory. Power generated will supply Darwin and be exported to Singapore via a 3,800km electrical cable along the sea floor.

The export markets for both AREH and Sun Cable are there. For example, both South Korea and Japan have indicated strong interest in Australia’s green hydrogen to decarbonise their economies and secure energy supplies.

But we should not underestimate the obstacles standing in the way of the projects. Both will require massive investment. Sun Cable, for example, will cost an estimated A$20 billion to build. The Asian Renewable Energy Hub will reportedly require as much as A$50 billion.

The projects are also at the cutting edge of technology, in terms of the assembly of the solar array, the wind turbines and batteries. Transport of hydrogen by ship is still at the pilot stage, and commercially unproven. And the projects must navigate complex approvals and regulatory processes, in both Australia and Asia.

But the projects have good strategic leadership, and a clear mission to put Australian green energy exports on the map.

 

Shifting winds

Together, the AREH and Sun Cable projects do not yet make a trend. But they clearly indicate a shift in mindset on the part of investors.

The projects promise enormous clean development opportunities for Australia’s north, and will create thousands of jobs in Australia – especially in high-tech manufacturing. As we look to rebuild the economy after the Covid-19 pandemic, such stimulus will be key. All up, AREH is expected to support more than 20,000 jobs during a decade of construction, and 3,000 jobs when fully operating.

To make smart policies and investments, the federal government must have a clear view of the future global economy. Patterns of energy consumption in Asia are shifting away from fossil fuels, and Australia’s exports must move with them.

John A. Mathews is Professor Emeritus in the Macquarie Business School at Macquarie University. Elizabeth Thurbon is Scientia Associate Professor in the School of Social Sciences at UNSW Sydney. Hao Tan is Associate Professor with the Newcastle Business School, University of Newcastle. Sung-Young Kim (김성용) is Senior Lecturer in the Macquarie School of Social Sciences at Macquarie University. This article was originally published on The Conversation.

 


 

By John Mathews and Elizabeth Thurbon and Hao Tan, Sung-Young Kim

Source: Eco Business

Wood, metal, paper and fabric can help cut climate-harming plastics

Wood, metal, paper and fabric can help cut climate-harming plastics

Replacing plastics used in buildings with metal, wood, ceramics and glass, turning to paper and fabric for packaging, and boosting recycling rates could slash planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, researchers said on Monday.

A mixture of substitution, changes in business models and consumer behaviour, and producing more plastics without using fossil fuels could halve global plastic consumption and cut emissions from plastics by more than half, they said.

Otherwise, emissions from plastics are expected to increase threefold by 2050, jeopardising a goal of keeping global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, said a new report from the London-based Overseas Development Institute.

“Although plastics permeate our lives and every corner of our planet, it is technically possible to largely phase them out,” the report said.

 

When somebody buys a plastic product, they don’t actually generate emissions when they’re using it. But there’s emissions embodied in the product from the previous stages. – Andrew Scott, research fellow, Overseas Development Institute

 

Lead researcher Andrew Scott told the Thomson Reuters Foundation that all but 1-2 per cent of plastics are made from fossil fuels, principally oil and gas, with the emissions produced at different stages of the value chain.

“When somebody buys a plastic product, they don’t actually generate emissions when they’re using it. But there’s emissions embodied in the product from the previous stages,” he said, adding emissions could also come from discarded plastics.

The largest use of plastic is for packaging, accounting for 36 per cent of total output in 2015, followed by construction at 16 per cent, the report said.

However, switching to non-plastic alternatives that are currently available, such as wood and metal, could reduce the use of plastics in the construction industry by 95 per cent, it said.

A combination of regulation on single-use plastics and changes in consumer behaviour could cut plastic consumption by 78 per cent in the packaging sector, it added.

There is also much room for improvement with recycling as only about 20 per cent of plastic waste is recycled today, the report noted.

It also looked at the automotive and electrical and electronic equipment sectors, which together with construction and packaging make up more than 60 per cent of plastic use, said Scott.

North America, Europe and East Asia consume almost two-thirds of the world’s plastics, the report said.

Globally, per-capita consumption of plastics is 47 kg (103.6 lb) per year, but in Africa and South Asia, it is less than 10 kg per year.

A report last week from the Changing Markets Foundation criticised consumer giants such as Colgate-Palmolive, Danone, Nestlé and Unilever for failing to meet their pledges to use less plastic in their products.

It also said they had lobbied against and undermined efforts to tackle plastic pollution, a charge the companies denied.

This story was published with permission from Thomson Reuters Foundation, the charitable arm of Thomson Reuters, that covers humanitarian news, climate change, resilience, women’s rights, trafficking and property rights. Visit http://news.trust.org/climate.

 


 

By 

Source: Eco-Business

Fossil fuel funding by world’s biggest banks has grown every year since the Paris Agreement, report finds

Fossil fuel funding by world’s biggest banks has grown every year since the Paris Agreement, report finds

America’s JP Morgan Chase has pumped more than the GDP of Finland into fossil fuels expansion since the Paris climate accord of 2015, while Japan’s and China’s mega banks have also been ‘failing miserably’ in their response to climate change over the last four years, a report from a coalition of NGOs has shown.

 

It’s as if the penny hasn’t dropped for the financial services industry that climate change is not only an increasingly disruptive environmental phenomenon, but a grave risk to the stability of the global economy.

Financial support for the fossil fuel industry has increased every year since the Paris Agreement came into being in 2015, according to a new report, Banking on Climate Change 2020, from a collective of environmental groups including Rainforest Action Network, BankTrack and Indigenous Environmental Network.

The Paris Agreement recommended that global warming be capped at 2°C above pre-industrial levels to avoid the most devastating effects of climate change. To do so, scientists say greenhouse gas emissions, the bulk of which come from the burning of fossil fuels, must be slashed.

However, the report found that 35 global banks have not only been maintaining but expanding the fossil fuels sector, with more than US$2.7 trillion in investments made since 2015.

 

It is unconscionable for banks to be approving new loans and raising capital for the companies that are pushing hardest to increase carbon emissions.

Alison Kirsch, climate and energy leader researcher, Rainforest Action Network

 

United States-headquartered banks JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citi and Bank of America have accounted for 30 per cent of all fossil fuel financing from the major global banks since the Paris accord.

JPMorgan Chase, which recently announced it will close one-fifth of its branches in the US in response to the Covid-19 coronavirus pandemic, pumped US$269 billion—more than the gross domestic product of Finland—into the fossil fuels sector over the last four years, notably in fossil fuel expansion, Arctic oil and gas, offshore oil and gas, and fracking.

In Asia, Tokyo-headquartered Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group (MUFG) was the region’s biggest fossil fuel financer and the world’s sixth-biggest financier, investing US$119 billion since 2015.

 

The investments in fossil fuels made by the world’s biggest 35 banking institutions between 2016 and 2019. Source: Banking on climate change report.

 

Counting out coal

China’s mega banks were found to be world’s biggest financiers of coal—the single biggest driver of greenhouse gas emissions—since the Paris Agreement. China Construction Bank and Bank of China are the biggest bankers of coal mining, pumping US$25 billion into the sector between them. The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China and Bank of China were the heaviest funders of coal power globally, investing US$42 billion combined, according to the report.

However, financial support for the carbon-intensive fuel is dwindling globally, the report noted. Finance to the top 30 coal mining companies fell by 6 per cent between 2016 and 2019, while finance to the top 30 coal power companies shrank by 13 per cent.

Though China’s banks are a noteable exception, the report found that 26 of the 35 banks in the report now have policies restricting coal finance, which has helped to push the finance sector away from coal. China’s big four banks do not have any climate policies in place.

A growing minority of the world’s biggest banks—now 16—now also restrict finance to some oil and gas sectors. The report said European banks have the toughest fossil fuel lending restrictions. France’s Crédit Agricole, the Royal Bank of Scotland and Italy’s Unicredit are said to have the most progressive climate policies.

 

Banking on Paris

The majority of the world’s top banks are signatories of frameworks such as the United Nations’ Principles for Responsible Banking and the Equator Principles, which commit banks to align their business strategies with the Paris Agreement.

But because potential emissions from the coal, oil and natural gas already in production exhaust the carbon budget for the 2°C warming limit of the Paris Agreement, any bank that supports the further expansion of the fossil fuel sector is Paris-incompatible, the report noted.

Alison Kirsch, climate and energy leader researcher, Rainforest Action Network, said that it is “crystal clear” that banks are “failing miserably” in their response to climate change and the decarbonisation of the global economy.

“As the toll of death and destruction from unprecedented floods, droughts, fires and storms grows, it is unconscionable and outrageous for banks to be approving new loans and raising capital for the companies that are pushing hardest to increase carbon emissions,” she said.

The report emerges at a time when the ongoing Covid-19 coronavirus is threatening to derail investment in renewable energy, according to the International Energy Agency.

 


Source: https://www.eco-business.com/