Search for any green Service

Find green products from around the world in one place

Made in America: A lithium supply chain for EV batteries

Made in America: A lithium supply chain for EV batteries

With the U.S. supplying 1 percent of the world’s lithium, there’s nowhere to go but up.

About 30 miles east of Reno, Nevada — past Tesla’s sprawling Gigafactory battery plant and the arid dusty grasslands of Northern Nevada — a startup is developing a large factory that could help unlock lithium, a key ingredient in electric vehicle batteries, from the earth.

The six-year-old company, Lilac Solutions, makes small white beads that can extract lithium from salty water deposits called brines, found around the world in places such as Argentina and Chile — and also Nevada and California. So-called ion-exchange beads are already used for various industrial applications such as cleaning water, but these are the first used for extracting lithium.

The U.S. is a bit player in the global lithium mining and processing game, dwarfed by other countries. The U.S. produces about 1 percent of the world’s lithium, while Australia, Chile, Argentina and China collectively produce over 90 percent. For decades, the only lithium that trickled out of the U.S. came from a small mine in Nevada run by chemical company Albemarle.

But as global sales of EVs have begun to rise dramatically — expected to grow from just under 10 percent of new passenger vehicle sales in 2021 to 23 percent by 2025 — lithium demand has gone through the roof. The global demand for lithium is expected to rise from 500,000 metric tons of lithium carbonate equivalent in 2021 to 3 to 4 million metric tons by 2030. The problem is clear: Relying on other countries for essentially all the critical minerals that make up EV batteries is not just a liability, it’s a missed opportunity.

That’s why a collective effort is underway to shift the tectonic plates under the world’s lithium supply chain to include the U.S. Mining giants, automakers, tech startups, lithium speculators, state and local governments and the Biden administration have all been trying to kickstart America’s domestic lithium initiatives. New lithium projects, from mining to processing, are proposed across states including California, Nevada, North Carolina, Tennessee and Maine.

American automakers including General Motors, Tesla and Ford will need hundreds of thousands of tons of lithium to meet growing demand for lithium-ion-powered electric vehicles.
Earlier this month, President Joe Biden unveiled a plan to dole out close to $3 billion in grants to 20 companies that are manufacturing, processing or mining key minerals, including lithium, for electric vehicle batteries. Lilac Solutions was chosen to negotiate a $50 million grant to help build its planned factory in Fernley, Nevada, near Reno.

The Biden administration’s Department of Energy funding follows the newly established law, the Inflation Reduction Act, which ties some tax credits for electric vehicles to battery minerals that are extracted, processed or recycled in the U.S. This spring the administration also used the Defense Production Act to increase the American production of battery minerals.

While China, Australia, Chile, Argentina and others are likely to dominate the lithium supply chain for the foreseeable future, domestic U.S. sources for mining, processing and recycling lithium will be important to help bolster the emerging American EV industry.

 

Mine the brine

Lilac, founded in 2016 and based in Oakland, California, has been quietly attracting interest from mining partners such as Australia’s Lake Resources as well as big-name investors. Last year, the company closed on a $150 million round of series B funding from Bill Gates’ Breakthrough Energy Ventures and Chris Sacca’s Lowercarbon Capital. Lilac’s investors also include T. Rowe Price, MIT’s The Engine and Tesla backer Valor Equity Partners.

The startup has drawn a who’s who of funders because of its potential ability to unlock lithium from the world’s brines. Much of the current global lithium supply is dug out of hard rock in mines like in Australia. But there are untapped resources in salty water deposits, where the lithium exists in low concentration and the mixture has high impurities. Lilac says its beads can suck out the lithium from the solution and leave the rest of the brine mixture intact to be returned back to the environment.

The massive brine lithium mines of South America — found in places such as Chile’s Atacama desert — use huge amounts of water and land and take 12 to 18 months to produce lithium through solar evaporation. A technology like Lilac’s could offer a more efficient, more sustainable method across a much smaller footprint.

Part of Lilac’s Series B funding is being spent on getting the Fernley factory into production, Lilac CEO Dave Snydacker told GreenBiz last month. The $50 million from the DOE will help accelerate production, and the agency said Lilac’s funding will create 150 new jobs.

Snydacker said the plant will come online in phases over the next two years and eventually will be able to make enough beads to support the extraction of 200,000 tons per year of lithium. That’s the equivalent of close to half of the amount of lithium produced globally last year. The funding doesn’t just add to Lilac’s war chest, it also adds validation and the spotlight of the White House.

At the event where Biden unveiled the EV battery minerals grants, 10 executives of companies, many of them startups, appeared behind Biden on a screen and four made remarks about how the funding would be used. Three of the four speakers were leaders of lithium production and processing companies: Albemarle; American Battery Technology Company; and ICL-IP America.

Albemarle plans to use a $150 million grant from the DOE to build a lithium concentrator plant at a mine in Kings Mountain, North Carolina. A concentrator increases the amount of lithium per volume and is one step in the process to get it ready to put into batteries. When it’s up and running, the Kings Mountain lithium supply chain would be able to produce and process enough lithium for 750,000 electric cars per year.

It makes sense for U.S. companies to try to tap into domestic lithium when it’s done sustainably and in a sensitive way for local communities.
Albemarle is also doubling the size of its lithium mine, Silver Peak, in Nevada, about 200 miles southeast from Fernley and Tesla’s Gigafactory. In Nevada alone, there are 17,000 prospecting claims for lithium, the Guardian recently reported.

 

Long road for U.S. lithium

Becoming a player in the global lithium supply chain won’t be easy for U.S. stakeholders. Companies looking to build new mines or reopen older ones face lengthy environmental review processes and are often challenged by local Indigenous communities. And rightly so, mining companies have long histories of polluting lands and neglecting the needs of groups that might use the lands as sacred sites, communal purposes or for hunting and fishing.

Most of the domestic critical mineral deposits needed for EV batteries — lithium, cobalt, nickel, copper — are near Native American reservations. Lithium Americas Corp. has faced resistance from both Native American tribes and environmentalists over its proposed lithium mine, Thacker Pass, in Nevada. By some estimates, Thacker Pass could contain the largest hard rock lithium deposit in the U.S.

American automakers including General Motors, Tesla and Ford will need hundreds of thousands of tons of lithium to meet growing demand for lithium-ion-powered electric vehicles. The industry won’t be able to source all of that domestically and fast enough, and South American lithium mines are likely to play a key role in the growing American EV boom.

But it makes sense for U.S. companies to try to tap into domestic lithium when it’s done sustainably and in a sensitive way for local communities. Investors are eager to put money into U.S. lithium initiatives — it can be cheaper to finance U.S. projects versus international ones — and there are shipping efficiencies if mining, processing and battery production projects can all be on the same continent.

With America supplying just 1 percent of the world’s lithium, there’s nowhere to go but up when it comes to American-made and -processed lithium. And for Lilac Solutions, if the technology works economically at a commercial scale as its supporters hope it does, its Nevada factory could be a key way for an American-made tech to be the one to help unlock the world’s lithium.

 

 


 

 

Source GreenBiz

Cop26: world poised for big leap forward on climate crisis, says John Kerry

Cop26: world poised for big leap forward on climate crisis, says John Kerry

The world is poised to make a big leap forward at the UN Cop26 climate summit, with world leaders “sharpening their pencils” to make fresh commitments that could put the goals of the 2015 Paris agreement within reach, John Kerry has said.

Kerry, special envoy for climate to Joe Biden, gave an upbeat assessment of the prospects for Cop26, which begins in Glasgow at the end of this month, saying he anticipated “surprising announcements” from key countries.

“The measure of success at Glasgow is we will have the largest, most significant increase in ambition [on cutting emissions] by more countries than everyone ever imagined possible. A much larger group of people are stepping up,” he said in an interview with the Guardian. “I know certain countries are working hard right now on what they can achieve.”

Kerry cautioned that there was “still a lot of distance to travel in the next four weeks” and that the progress he anticipated was not yet “signed, sealed and delivered”. That view echoes private soundings the Guardian has taken from the UK hosts, the UN and other key figures.

But he said Cop26 could set the scene for further progress to follow swiftly. “There is not a wall that comes down after Glasgow,” said Kerry. “It is the starting line for the rest of the decade.”

But Kerry, one of the pivotal figures at the talks, also acknowledged the outcome would fall short of a fully fledged deal meeting the aims of the Paris accord, which binds nations to hold global heating to “well below” 2C, with an aspirational limit of 1.5C.

 

Kerry delivers a speech at Cop25 in Madrid in 2019. Photograph: Fernando Villar/EPA

 

“Will it be that every country has signed on and locked in? The answer is no, that will not happen,” he said. “But it is possible to reach that if [Cop26 creates] enough momentum.”

He said: “Glasgow has to show strong commitment to keeping 1.5C in reach, but that does not mean every country will get there. We acknowledge that there will be a gap [between the emissions cuts countries offer and those needed for a 1.5C limit]. The question is, will we have created a critical mass? We are close to that. If we have some more countries stepping up in the next weeks, we have something to build on.”

Under the 2015 Paris agreement, 197 parties – every government bar a few failed states – agreed to hold global temperature rises to “well below” 2C above pre-industrial levels, while “pursuing efforts” to stay within 1.5C. But the commitments governments made on cutting emissions at Paris, called nationally determined contributions (NDCs), were too weak, and would lead to more than 3C of heating, so countries also agreed to return every five years to ratchet up their ambitions.

Those commitments should be made at the two-week Glasgow summit, which begins on 31 October, having been postponed for a year because of Covid-19, to be attended by more than 120 world leaders. In the six years since Paris, scientists have presented a clearer warning of the dangers of allowing temperatures to rise beyond the tougher 1.5C limit, so the declared aim of the UK hosts is to “keep 1.5C alive” by gathering enough NDCs, climate finance and pledges to phase out coal and preserve forests, to make that possible.

 

Staying within the 1.5C threshold would require carbon emissions to fall by 45% this decade, but apart from a brief plunge owing to Covid-19 lockdowns, emissions are still rising and are forecast to show their second-strongest leap on record this year. Despite new NDCs from the US, the UK, the EU and others, in total the commitments so far would lead to a 16% rise in emissions.

China, the world’s biggest emitter, will be key to any hopes of a strong outcome at Cop26, but has yet to submit a new NDC. The president, Xi Jinping, who has not left China since the start of the pandemic, has not said whether he will come to Glasgow.

Kerry said Cop26 could still be a success if Xi did not attend. “I am hopeful that President Xi is very much engaged and is personally making decisions, and personally committed,” he said, pointing to a long phone call between Xi and Biden recently in which the climate was discussed. “There was a very clear commitment to work with the US to achieve our goals. We are very hopeful.”

Another positive sign, he said, was that rich nations were close to fulfilling a longstanding pledge that developing countries would receive $100bn (£73bn) a year in financial assistance to help them cut emissions and cope with the effects of extreme weather, which has so far been missed. Biden recently vowed to double the US pledge of climate finance to $11bn a year by 2024, and other countries have stepped up their efforts, leading the climate economist Nicholas Stern to predict that the $100bn target would be met next year.

 

Xi Jinping remotely attends the Leaders Summit on Climate in April. Photograph: Xinhua/Rex/Shutterstock

 

“We need to get $100bn locked in, whether that is this year or next year. I believe we are going to be there with the money President Biden offered,” Kerry said.

He said countries must also agree to reform fossil fuel subsidies, which amount to hundreds of billions a year. “If you want a definition of insanity, it’s subsidising the very problem you are trying to solve,” he said.

Kerry, a longstanding US senator who challenged George W Bush for the presidency and served as US secretary of state under Barack Obama when the Paris agreement was signed, is embarking on a final hectic round of diplomacy in the next few weeks, with meetings planned with Russia, China, Mexico and Saudi Arabia. World leaders will also meet for the G20 summit in the days before they arrive in Glasgow.

In those meetings, Kerry will point to the commitments Biden has made domestically, including phasing out fossil fuels from electricity generation and reducing emissions from cars. “The US is heading to a post-2035 future where our power sector will be carbon-free. That is not a small step. I hope that can encourage other countries too, with regard to what they might be trying to achieve.”

He will also emphasise the technological advances that could help countries to move faster. “There is a massive amount of money and energy going to bringing these [clean technologies] up to scale,” he said.

Kerry was also confident the US’s post-pandemic infrastructure bill, which Biden hopes to be the engine of a “green recovery”, but which may be scaled back from the $3.5tn envisaged amid opposition and delays, would be passed.

Asked if he was worried about there being any upsets at the Cop26 conference, Kerry said: “I’m not succumbing to any fear at this point. Keep going, straight ahead.”

Alok Sharma, the UK cabinet minister and president-designate of Cop26, travelled to the French capital on Tuesday to call for world leaders to reprise the spirit of the Paris agreement, and come forward urgently with fresh commitments. He said: “Cop26 is not a photo op or a talking shop. It must be the forum where we put the world on track to deliver on climate. And that is down to leaders … Responsibility rests with each and every country, and we must all play our part. Because on climate, the world will succeed or fail as one.”

 


 

Source The Guardian

Imagining the climate-proof home in the US: using the least energy possible from the cleanest sources

Imagining the climate-proof home in the US: using the least energy possible from the cleanest sources

Dealing with the climate crisis involves the overhauling of many facets of life, but few of these changes will feel as tangible and personal as the transformation required within the home.

The 128m households that dot America gobble up energy for heating, cooling and lighting, generating around 20% of all the planet-heating emissions produced in the US. Americans typically live in larger, more energy hungry dwellings than people in other countries, using more than double the energy of the average Briton and 10 times that of the average Chinese person.

This sizable contribution is now coming under the scrutiny of Joe Biden’s administration, which recently put forward a raft of measures to build and upgrade 2m low-emissions homes. “Decarbonizing buildings is a big task but it’s an essential task,” said Michael Regan, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.

Rapid change will be needed to avoid disastrous climate change. To get to zero emissions by the middle of the century, the sale of fossil fuel boilers will have to end within five years, all new buildings will have to run on clean electricity by 2030 and half of all existing buildings will have to be fully retrofitted by 2040, a recent landmark International Energy Agency report warned.

“The appliances we use at home have tended to be overlooked but they are contributing a significant amount to climate change and we need to address that,” said Mike Henchen, an expert in carbon-free buildings at RMI. “That will touch people’s lives – our homes are our refuges, the places we know best. But hopefully the change will also make people’s homes more comfortable, safer and healthier, as well as reduce the climate impact.”

So what will the climate-adapted homes of the future look like?

 

Designing the home to use less – and cleaner – energy

Changes on both the outside and inside of our structures will shape the future of climate-proof homes. According to Alejandra Mejia Cunningham, building decarbonization advocate at the Natural Resources Defense Council, homes will have to follow three interlocking mantras: “using the least energy possible from the cleanest sources at the right time”.

 

Source: The Guardian

 

Solar panels on roofs will become more common while, in rented or apartment accommodation, community solar schemes could provide an alternative. Solar panels can also be married with home batteries to help store excess energy which, along with proper insulation, will help keep a house functioning even during the sort of lengthy power blackouts Texas experienced earlier this year.

Such a scenario opens up the possibility of utility companies operating an automated network of homes, as is the case in parts of Vermont, to manage demand and supply, rather than rely on hulking centralized infrastructure. “Having solar panels, batteries and water heaters all orchestrated and distributed makes the home a part of the energy system and can provide a lot of savings,” said Henchen.

Power use will become smarter and more automated, with technology helping spread energy use throughout the day to work in tandem with a grid powered by variable wind and solar, rather than cause big surges in demand that require the burning of gas or coal.

 

New tools for heating and cooling the home

Another energy efficient move will be to properly insulate homes. In fact new homes could be pre-fabricated in factories and fitted on site to reduce gaps where heat can escape.

 

Source: The Guardian

 

Deep reductions in emissions will involve revamping the major appliances in the home, such as the water heater, furnace and air conditioning unit. As these items become older, they become wasteful and they will need to be replaced by more efficient appliances that run off clean electricity.

Some of these replacements will be relatively innocuous, such as the installation of heat pumps, which will be in the basement or on the side of the house. Heat pumps work on principles similar to a refrigerator, shifting heat from outdoors indoors and vice versa. They can heat and cool your home and can also heat your water with an efficiency rate four times greater than a gas-powered version.

 

The changes you’ll notice in everyday life

Other changes will be more obvious in day-to-day life, such as replacing incandescent lightbulbs with LEDs, installing low-flow shower heads and phasing out gas stoves in favor of electric induction stovetops.

 

Source: The Guardian

 

Such a change may be unnerving to dedicated home cooks but proponents point to the swifter heat-up time, reduced indoor air pollution and negated risk of injuries to the hands of curious children.

“People will get used to technology like induction cooktops. There are already top chefs out there giving out the message that they don’t have a worse performance than gas,” said Rohini Srivastava, a buildings expert at the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.

The phase-out of gas will also remove the need for a carbon monoxide detector in the home, although in the western US, air purifiers may become a standard feature in an age of growing wildfire smoke.

 

At what cost?

All of this will cost money – about $70,000 for the average American household to decarbonize, according to Rewiring America. And broader, systemic changes will need to take place to make housing denser and centered around transit lines and walkable communities to reduce car use, as well as a concerted effort to make homes resilient to the storms and fires spurred by the climate crisis.

Climate advocates are calling for a slate of government support to aid this transition – San Francisco is currently working out how to make the $5.9bn switch to electrify all its homes currently powered by gas – but stress that the public will need to view the changes as painless.

“The only way we will be able to do this is if the home feels just as comfortable and user-friendly as it has always been” said Cunningham. “You need to be able to take hot showers, be cool in summer and warm in winter and not know the difference in terms of how that is all powered.”

 


 

Source The Guardian

Biden’s clean energy plan would cut emissions and save 317,000 lives

Biden’s clean energy plan would cut emissions and save 317,000 lives

Biden administration plan to force the rapid uptake of renewable energy would swiftly cut planet-heating emissions and save hundreds of thousands of lives from deadly air pollution, a new report has found amid growing pressure on the White House to deliver a major blow against the climate crisis.

Of various climate policy options available to the new administration, a clean energy standard would provide the largest net benefits to the US, according to the report, in terms of costs as well as lives saved.

A clean energy standard would require utilities to ratchet up the amount of clean energy, such as solar and wind, they use, through a system of incentives and penalties. The Biden administration hoped to include the measure in its major infrastructure bill but it was dropped after compromise negotiations with Republicans.

But the new report, conducted by a consortium of researchers from Harvard University, Georgia Institute of Technology and Syracuse University, suggests it would be the most effective tool in reaching a White House goal of 80% renewable energy use by 2030. Joe Biden has said he wants all electricity to be renewable by 2035.

A clean energy standard to reach the 80% goal by the end of the decade would save an estimated 317,500 lives in the US over the next 30 years, due to a sharp reduction in air pollution from the burning of coal, oil and gas. In 2030 alone, 9,200 premature deaths would be avoided once the emissions cut is achieved. The number of lives saved would be “immediate, widespread and substantial”, the report states.

A total of $1.13tn in health savings due to cleaner air would be achieved between now and 2050, with air quality improvements most acutely felt by black people who currently face disproportionate harm from living near highways and power plants.

Every state in the US would gain better air quality, the report found, although the greatest benefits would go to Ohio, Texas, Pennsylvania and Illinois, all states with substantial fossil fuel infrastructure.

The rapid switch to renewables would cost around $342bn until 2050, via capital and maintenance costs, although fuel costs would dwindle as renewables are cheaper to run than fossil fuels. The study added, however, that the financial benefits from addressing the climate crisis would dwarf this figure, at nearly $637bn.

“The cost are much lower than we expected and the deaths avoided are much higher; there really is a huge opportunity here to address climate change and air quality,” said Kathy Fallon Lambert, a study co-author and an air quality expert at the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health.

“This would be a huge leap in ambition and we’d see that in the health impacts, there would be millions of fewer asthma attacks, for example. And this doesn’t even consider the health impacts from heat and other climate-related causes.”

Lambert said a clean energy standard would be “extremely effective” at slashing emissions, far more so than other proposals such as a carbon tax.

Biden is facing pressure from environmentalists, as well as major companies such as Apple and Google, to implement the new standard after it was dropped from the infrastructure bill. The president has said the measure will be included in a new reconciliation bill that can pass along party lines, although that will require every single Democratic senator to vote for it, which will prove a challenge.

The White House is determined this will happen however, with Gina McCarthy, Biden’s top climate adviser, saying the measure is a “non-negotiable” in the next infrastructure package.

“We need to make sure that we’re sending a signal that we want renewable energy and that it’s going to win,” McCarthy told Punchbowl News last week.

 


Climate pledges see world closing on Paris goal, researchers say

Climate pledges see world closing on Paris goal, researchers say

BERLIN — Recent pledges by the United States and other nations could help cap global warming at 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) by the end of the century, but only if goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to “net zero” by 2050 succeed, scientists said Tuesday.

More than 190 countries agreed in Paris six years ago to keep average temperature increases below that level — ideally no more than 1.5 C (2.7 F) — by 2100 compared to pre-industrial times.

The Climate Action Tracker, compiled by a group of researchers who translate emission pledges into temperature estimates, projects that the world is currently set to overshoot the Paris accord’s target by 0.9 degrees.

But if 131 countries that make up almost three-quarters of global emissions meet their pledged or discussed “net zero” goal, then the 2-degree target could be met, said Niklas Hoehne of the New Climate Institute. That’s 0.1 C cooler than the previous optimistic forecast the group made in December.

 

Hoehne said U.S. President Joe Biden’s recent ambitious new climate goals had contributed significantly to the revised estimate, along with the European Union, China, Japan and Britain.

But the pledges still fall short and have to be further revised going forward, he said.

 

“We have to halve global emissions in the next 10 years,” he said.

Asked whether the more ambitious goal of 1.5 C is still within reach, Hoehne said it was technically and politically feasible.

Germany has invited about 40 countries to a virtual meeting this week to discuss further international efforts to curb global warming, ahead of a U.N. summit in Glasgow in November.

Germany’s top court last week ordered the government to set clearer goals for emissions reduction after 2030.

 


 

Source NBC News

Your Guide to the Clean Energy Implications of the 2020 Election

Your Guide to the Clean Energy Implications of the 2020 Election

Clean energy and climate change have received unprecedented levels of attention in the 2020 U.S. presidential contest between Donald Trump and Joe Biden. The candidates hold strikingly oppositional views on decarbonizing the economy and leading global partnerships to combat climate change. The differences between the two candidates on these matters have been on stark display throughout this year’s campaign, from last month’s presidential debates to Trump’s last-minute push to highlight fracking as a campaign issue in the contested state of Pennsylvania.

The stakes of this election’s outcome are high. To combat what he’s called an “existential threat to humanity” from climate change, Biden has pledged to rejoin the Paris Agreement, commit the country to decarbonizing electricity generation by 2035, and issue a series of executive orders that would surpass the climate ambition of the Obama-Biden administration. Trump, who has questioned the reality of climate change caused by human activity, has committed his administration to deregulating industries and rolling back energy efficiency and automotive fuel economy standards to increase economic competitiveness, as well as expanding the roles of the coal, oil and gas industries in the country’s energy future.

To help you make sense of what’s at stake, we’ve compiled Greentech Media’s essential coverage of the 2020 election and its consequences for clean energy.

 

What’s at Stake for Clean Energy in the U.S. Election?

If you read one piece on clean energy and the election, make it this one. Insights from GTM writers explain how the outcome of the election could impact solar, energy storage, utilities and wind.

 

Biden’s First 100 Days: What Would They Look Like for Clean Energy?

How could Joe Biden, if elected, pursue the climate and clean energy policies his campaign has laid out? Policy experts discuss the executive actions and congressional policies that are most likely to gain traction in the first 100 days of a Biden presidency.

 

Biden Pledges $2T in Clean Energy and Infrastructure Spending

In July, the Biden campaign laid out a $2 trillion plan designed to encourage clean energy deployment and accelerate the energy transition. The plan built on a climate platform released earlier that month and developed by a “unity task force” of supporters of both Biden and U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, a key rival for the Democratic Party nomination, and was geared to unite the progressive and moderate wings of the party on climate policy.

 

What the Kamala Harris VP Pick Means for Biden’s Energy and Climate Platform

A co-sponsor of the Green New Deal resolution (which the Biden campaign has not officially and entirely endorsed), U.S. Senator and vice-presidential nominee Kamala Harris framed the environmental policies of her presidential bid around environmental justice. She’s to the left of Biden on some environmental issues but matches him as a moderate in other respects. In response to her selection to fill out the Democratic ticket, environmental activists noted Harris’ willingness to listen to feedback.

 

Can U.S. Lawmakers Agree on Big Climate and Clean Energy Legislation?

Even if Biden wins, his administration faces a difficult path to pass significant clean-energy or climate-focused legislation in Congress. Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse shared the stage in an October event to discuss areas where bipartisan consensus may exist on energy policy.

 

WoodMac: Biden Loss Would End Hopes of U.S. Decarbonization by 2050

When it comes to the climate crisis, this election has extreme consequences. An analysis from Wood Mackenzie lays out the incredibly high stakes. “If Biden’s bid fails, the U.S. will forfeit four more years in the fight against climate change. This would dramatically reduce the possibility of eliminating carbon emissions from the region’s power grid before 2050,” writes Dan Shreve, WoodMac’s research director, in the report.

 

Would U.S. Solar Tariffs Disappear Under a Biden Administration? Don’t Count on It.

On most policies related to clean energy, Joe Biden and Donald Trump are leagues apart. But under a potential Biden administration, solar tariffs could “still be on the table.” GTM examines the likelihood that this divisive policy sticks around post-2020 if Democrats win the White House.

 

Energy Becomes a Hot Issue in the Final Days of the Election

The hosts of The Energy Gang recap the role of energy and climate in the 2020 election. The episode also highlights important down-ballot races to watch.

 

What to Watch for in Climate and Energy After Election Day

Th hosts of Political Climate, along with Josh Freed, founder of Third Way’s Climate and Energy Program, outline the policies that could take root in a Biden administration and how those contrast with what a continuation of the Trump presidency may look like.

 

Examining Efforts to Elect Climate Candidates

Joe Biden has pitched the most ambitious climate plans of any presidential candidate to date. Political Climate talks to two groups, Vote Climate U.S. PAC and Climate Cabinet Action Fund, that are pushing for more aggressive climate policies from candidates at the state level as well as those running for Congress.

 

John Podesta’s Climate Policy Recommendations for a Biden Presidency

John Podesta worked in Bill Clinton’s White House, led Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and founded think tank the Center for American Progress. The long-time Democratic strategist lays out his thoughts on how a hypothetical Biden administration should approach climate policy and what it could accomplish in its first 100 days.

 

How Joe Biden’s Climate Plan Stacks Up

Political Climate digs into Biden’s $2 trillion clean energy plan, which includes a nationwide clean electricity standard and investments in research, development and federal procurement.

 


 

Source: Green Tech Media