Global CCS Institute

With key contracts signed, Summit Power’s Texas CCUS project on track for July groundbreaking | Global CCS Institute

The Texas Clean Energy Project, a 400-megawatt, coal-fired plant designed to perform carbon capture, use and storage recently cleared two key milestones and is moving towards a July groundbreaking.

In February, TCEP inked a deal securing supplies of water and, on Valentine’s Day, the project announced agreements for engineering, construction and maintenance services for the new plant outside Odessa, Texas.

I’ve been keeping an eye on TCEP since last autumn when, on behalf of the Global CCS Institute I spoke with Laura Miller, the charismatic ex-mayor of Dallas who, after leaving public office moved to the Summit Power Group to help advance CCS solutions by becoming TCEP’s project manager.

TCEP is on track to be the world’s first integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) poly-generation facility, as well as one of the world’s cleanest coal-fueled power plants.

Summit Power’s Texas facility is designed to snare 90 per cent of the CO2 it generates, as well as 99 per cent of sulfur dioxide, 90 per cent of nitrogen oxide, and 99 per cent of mercury. Of the roughly 2.5 million standard tons of CO2 the plant will capture annually, about four-fifths will flow via pipeline to West Texas, where it will be shot into the ground to enhance oil recovery. TCEP’s remaining CO2 will be fed to a chemicals production facility to make urea, a feedstock for fertilizer.

Miller explained via email that of its 400-mw gross electric output, TCEP will sell 200 mw to a local utility (more on that below), about 85 mw will power commercial operations to make urea and compress CO2, and another 100 mw will be used internally to run project components.

Sited in Penwell, Texas, about 15 miles west of Odessa, TCEP is scheduled to come on line in 2015. If it can hit that deadline, the project will likely be the second US commercial CCUS facility to be sending CO2 to the oil patch: Southern Co’s 582-mw Plant Ratcliffe Project is currently under construction in Mississippi and is scheduled to fire up in 2014.

With a price tag of US$2.4 billion, TCEP is being financed mostly by private sources and has also been granted US$450 million from the Department of Energy’s Clean Coal Power Initiative.

The recent news: On 14 February, TCEP announced that it had signed engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contracts, as well as a 15-year operations and maintenance (O&M) contract for the new complex. According to a company press release:

The two, firm-price, turnkey EPC contracts that guarantee price, schedule and performance for the integrated coal gasification combined cycle (IGCC) project were finalized in December by the project’s three EPC contractors: Siemens Energy Inc.; Selas Fluid Processing Corp., a subsidiary of The Linde Group; and SK Engineering & Construction, a major Korean contractor. The total value of the EPC contracts is approximately $2 billion.

Selas Fluid Processing and SK E&C will supply a complete chemical block capable of producing syngas by gasifying Powder River Basin coal. A portion of the syngas fuels a Siemens power block, and the balance is used for the production of granulated urea. The chemical block captures 90% of the CO2 from the syngas and compresses the CO2 for sale to the mature, enhanced oil recovery (EOR) market in West Texas. The chemical block EPC contract also includes coal handling, coal gasification based on two Siemens SFG-500 gasifiers, gas cleanup, mercury removal, ammonia and urea production facilities, sulfuric acid plant, water treatment, CO2 compression, site preparation, plant buildings and other goods and services.

In the second EPC contract, Siemens Energy will supply a nominally rated 400MW combined cycle power plant capable of operating on syngas and natural gas. The power block is comprised of an SGT6-5000F gas turbine capable of operating on high-hydrogen syngas or natural gas. The power block includes an air-cooled condenser for plant cooling, which greatly reduces the water needed for the project, and a high-voltage switchyard.

A separate, 15-year O&M contract was also signed for the complete, turnkey operation and maintenance of the entire 600-acre facility, including day-to-day operation, and short term and long term maintenance. The contract, signed by Linde’s Gases Division, includes guarantees of performance and availability by Linde’s Gases Division and Siemens for the full 15-year contract period.

TCEP has cleared most of the other major milestones necessary to begin construction. It has signed a 25-year power purchase agreement to supply 200 megawatts of electric power to the municipal utility of San Antonio, CPS Energy. Whiting Petroleum Corp has agreed to a 15-year deal to buy the plant’s CO2 stream. And Summit has also signed a long-term deal with an un-named company to purchase the plant’s urea output.

Until recently, water supplies were an open question. Texas has been hammered by a millennial drought over the past few years. While the facility is designed to operate using minimal net amounts of water, securing water rights was a lingering challenge. TCEP tied up that loose end in February as well, Miller wrote, with a contract to buy “brackish underground Capitan Reef water” from a landowner west of the project. TCEP will pipe in the water and desalinate it on site.

So what next? Miller wrote to me that TCEP is hoping to close financial terms in June, and to break ground in July.

Before then, only one substantial hurdle remains. TCEP faces a frustrating glitch in the federal tax code, requiring the partnership to pay about US$150 million on its US$450 million federal grant. Summit Power is working with lawmakers to get an exception passed for the quirk. The effort is being led by US Sen. John Cornyn (R., Tex.) and US Congressman Mike Conaway (R., Odessa, Tex.).

Recently, the stakes got higher for TCEP’s success. Delays have slowed a similar project, Hydrogen Energy California (HECA), being planned for a sitebetween San Francisco and Los Angeles. As originally conceived, partners BP and Rio Tinto were working with the DOE to develop an IGCC facility, fuelled by a 3:1 mix of coal and petroleum coke, with full CO2 capture for enhanced oil recovery.

Last May, SCS Energy took over the project, and subsequently tweaked the design to also produce urea, similar to TCEP’s approach. According to an Energy Dept. source involved in the project, the revisions improve HECA’s economic viability and the project is currently progressing through front-end engineering design.

Writing for the Institute, NRDC’s George Peridas recently summarized the obstacles HECA has navigated:

After years of development, the project as we knew it came to an end. The price of power that was required to make the project viable (reported to be in the region of $300/MWh) was, unsurprisingly, not one that tickles the interest of local utilities.

Subsequently, the project changed ownership and management (from Rio Tinto/BP to SCS Energy) and is now undergoing design changes before proceeding with the permitting process afresh. Reportedly, these entail the co-production of fertilizer at the plant, and the use of out-of-state coal for the majority of its fuel needs.

It is not yet clear if and how fast the new version of the project will proceed, but we will likely know more in the coming months.

GreenBiz

Will Greener Shoes and Uniforms Bring Nike More Olympics Gold? | GreenBiz

Will Greener Shoes and Uniforms Bring Nike More Olympics Gold?Nike hopes to win both green and gold at this summer’s Olympics in London.

On Tuesday in New York City, the sporting-goods giant unveiled a new line of sportswear designed to help Olympians go faster, farther and longer. Nike is manufacturing its 2012 Olympic kits using less material — and more recycled plastics — than in the past.

The announcement came as part of a series of “cutting-edge, lightweight performance innovations designed for the track, the basketball court and beyond for this summer,” CEO Mark Parker said.

To me, the most visibly different ecoinnovation is Nike’s Flyknit shoe design.

Instead of the conventional assembly of fabrics, rubber, leather and other materials, the Flyknit comprises a single piece of a flexible mesh knit, a strong yet pliant fabric that fits like a sock over a wearer’s foot.

Eliminating so much material cuts each shoe’s weight by approximately 20 percent to about 160 grams. That may not sound like much, but multiplied by the 40,000 steps it takes to run a marathon, that totals about the weight of a car — a ton or so — that elite marathoners will no longer need to lift, said Martin Lotti, Nike’s global creative director for the Olympics.

U.S. Olympic team members Carl Lewis and Abdi Abdirahman discuss Nike's Flyknit shoe.Less material also means lower environmental impact. It’s an example “that sustainability can improve performance,” Hannah Jones, Nike’s vice president of sustainable innovation, told me.

Nike is rolling out two versions of the Flyknit: a racing flat and a training shoe. Athletes from Great Britain, Kenya, Russia and the U.S. plan to wear the Flyknit at the games. At the event this week, 10-time gold-medal winner Carl Lewis spoke with 2012 Olympic team member Abdi Abdirahman (both pictured at right) about the Flyknit shoes.

A similar idea helped shape the company’s new line of Olympic uniforms. Here, Nike has boosted its use of recycled polyester to produce lighter fabrics for a variety of shorts and tops – and even a wearable racing skin called Nike Pro TurboSpeed. It’s basically a speed suit that’s covered in dimples, which act like the surface of a golf ball, reducing drag by creating a thin layer of turbulence as an athlete cuts through the air.

By making the fabrics from discarded plastic bottles, the recycled polyester fabrics cut energy consumption by roughly a third compared with virgin materials.

Next page: How recycled plastic helps athletes as much as the environment

The national basketball teams from Brazil, China and the U.S. will wear Nike Hyper Elite uniforms made from plastic reclaimed from 22 recycled bottles (pictured below). The shorts are ethereally light, weighing just about 5 ounces, a quarter of the weight of uniforms worn by today’s NBA pros.

Lighter uniforms translate into less fatigue, more comfort and better performance, said Deron Williams of the New Jersey Nets, who endorses Nike and is expected to play for Team USA in the 2012 games.

These products, the USA Basketball tank top and Nike Pro TurboSpeed track suit, are made from recycled plastic bottles.Soccer players tend to be a bit smaller than basketball players, so just 13 bottles are necessary to make each of their kits. Still, it adds up: Nike’s reuse of plastic bottles has diverted more than 82 million of the containers from landfills.

Speaking with me after the announcement, Lorrie Vogel, Nike’s general manager of Considered Design, told me how competitive Nike’s designers are.

“It’s a company full of ex-athletes, where we’re constantly scored on our performance, and green-design benchmarking is no exception,” she said.

I wondered if that competition makes Nike protective of its proprietary-materials innovations. The recipe for an ultra-lightweight shoe that may be worn on the Olympic podium this summer is worth protecting.

The company shares sustainability know-how strategically, Jones told me. New product or new material design recipes are typically strictly confidential, but design tools and shared materials knowledge is just the opposite, she said.

Jones, pictured at right, believes that among the many industries pushing the sustainability frontier, sports gear makers are among the most collaborative. For example, Nike and its competitors, Adidas and Puma, “recognize the benefit of sharing the recipe for green rubber with our suppliers,” she explained. “We know that if our competitors start ordering it too, the price will fall, supplies will improve, and that will lead to the faster change on a larger scale.”

Hannah Jones, vice president of sustainable innovation at Nike, discusses the company's Olympic innovations.Consistent with that collaborative approach to competition, Jones reminded me that today’s announcement follows a burst of intraindustry green-design initiatives that Nike has announced in the past 18 months. These include:

  • Waterless dyeing. Earlier this month, Nike announced it was rolling out a water-free dyeing method. Though limited in application for now, the approach has the potential to radically reduce the enormous volumes of water the industry consume using conventional methods to color textiles.
  • Zero toxins. The waterless dyeing fits into a broader push to cut toxic emissions to nil. Last fall, as part of a coalition that also includes Adidas, C&A, H&M, Li Ning, and Puma, Nike released a roadmap toward a goal of achieving “zero discharge of hazardous chemicals for all products, across all pathways in our supply chain, by 2020.” The initiative ties together separate efforts in water reduction, organic cotton, green chemistry and materials traceability and sustainability.
  • Design tool sharing. Throughout 2011, Nike launched a series of proprietary tools to help designers speed up their selection of sustainable materials. Nike released its Environmental Apparel Design Tool, a data set and calculator incorporating more than a decade’s worth of knowledge about material attributes. The company uses a similar tool for its Considered Design methodology to assess the impact of its products.

As part of her ongoing “How She Leads” series on women in sustainable businesses, Maya Albanese interviewed Hannah Jones for GreenBiz.com earlier this month. Check out their conversation here.

~

View the full article here: http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2012/02/23/will-greener-shoes-uniforms-bring-nike-more-olympics-gold

GreenBiz

Green Gamification Takes Root in the Big Apple | GreenBiz

Green Gamification Takes Root in the Big Apple

In my green lexicon, “gamification” gets a special prize: it’s among the clunkiest words to enter the sustainability conversation, yet may just have some of the greatest potential to alter the behavior of consumers, employees and households.

Businesses are fast picking up on the promise. Gamification has unique synergy with green behaviors, with a knack for turning virtuous green actions — such as carpooling or switching to CFLs — from worthy but kinda joyless chores into tasks that earn rewards, gain recognition, and can turn ambivalent consumers into eager eco evangelists.

As part of Social Media Week‘s sprawling, 12-city lollapalooza of digital media events, the New York series included a panel entitled “Gamification: Combining Social Media & Game Mechanics to Promote Sustainability” that I caught late last week.

The panel brought together two recently sprouted startups with two established green brands.

Practically Green and The Mutual are both building businesses predicated on the power of gamification to alter green behavior, attract advertisers, and help organizations spur change.

Joining them were two groundbreaking companies, each born from innovative new approaches to recycling,Recyclebank and TerraCycle, each of which is increasingly using gamification to extend its reach.

Here’s a quick run down of how these companies talked about how gamification is changing their businesses.

A Social Media Approach to Greener Behaviors

Practically Green helps organizations become greener by using technology and social networking to educate, motivate and reward people for making green changes to their work and home life.

Conceived in 2009, founder Susan Hunt Stevens took her inspiration for the Boston-based company from LEED, the exhaustive guide to designing and building greener buildings.

But instead of LEED’s focus on building insulation or low-flow faucets, Stevens’ approach tallies up over 400 green behaviors, from commuting by bike to buying local produce.

Speaking on the panel, Stevens described the program as “LEED meets Weight Watchers,” for its blend of points and behavioral reinforcement through peer groups.

One of the challenges with sustainability, Stevens said, is that communicating how and why to do it is tricky. “The content can be technically complex. Some of it is political for some folks. And much of it is preachy.” Gamification breaks down the complexity into small, learnable steps, and depoliticizes the issue, she added.

Working with large organizations including NBC Universal, Eileen Fisher and the Seattle Mariners, Practically Green customizes workplace programs where staff sign in, and register their green behaviors, earning points and badges along the way.

For companies looking at ambitious sustainability programs, Stevens said, the program offers a easy-to-deploy, web-based solution that can quickly speed up employee involvement with green programs. This, by the way, is one way Practically Green earns revenue: charging a dollar or so per month per employee to companies it engages with.

(For more, Practically Green’s Stevens spoke with Chrissy Coughlin for Nature of Business Radio here at GreenBiz last September.)

‘Groupon for Good’

Not yet a year old, The Mutual is a Brooklyn-based startup that has been called “The Groupon for good.”

To join, a member picks a pledge level — say $10 per month — and a charity to steer the donations towards: options include think tanks such as World Resources Institute, conservationists such as Oceana, and climate groups like Carbonfun.org.

The Mutual, in turn, relays four-fifths of the donation to your charity, and uses the remainder — a share that’s on par, or less, than the take of a typical charity fundraiser for overhead — to grow its network of members and business partners.

Members, in turn, are rewarded with perks from business members looking to connect with a big pool of green-minded consumers.

For example, using FourSquare, I checked into a recent Mutual event at Brooklyn Brewery, and thereby qualified for a contest, discounts at the brewery, and earned points online at themutual.com.

“I describe us as a social enterprise that rewards people for donating to charity with Perks from great brands,” said founder and CEO Dan Vallejo.

The startup is scaling fast, with the bulk of early participants from the Bay Area, New York and Boston.

Green Gamification’s Greatest Success Story

Now eight years old, Recyclebank offers one of the best known success stories in the power of green gamification.

Recyclebank’s original business — and still its core offering — is an ingenious system that rewards household recycling. It does so by tracking and identifying how much recycling a given household is putting out on the curb.

In around 300 cities in the U.S. and U.K., public garbage trucks automatically weigh recycling bins, use radio tags to identify which home the material came from, and records the transaction to a web site. Consumers can then track the volume of their recycling online.

That’s all well and good, but the real carrot is the points that the recycling earns for the household. The more a home recycles, the more points they earn.

Consumers can convert those points with a network of scores of well known brands that participate in the tracking program, offering perks that can be redeemed for products and services from the likes of WalMart, Coca Cola to Procter & Gamble, to Bed Bath & Beyond.

The model has proved scalable and increasingly adaptable. Cities like it because it boosts recycling rates, which lowers their landfill costs since more trash is diverted to reuse. Consumers, and especially households where kids get highly involved, like the rewards scheme. And the marketing partners are on board for access to consumers who have proven be top quality prospects, with a high likelihood of redeeming the perks, using the products, and spending more.

That was just the beginning though. In recent years, as Samantha Skey, Recyclebank’s chief revenue officer, told attendees, Recyclebank is proving its business model works for more than just recycling.

The company is expanding its business model, marketing partnerships, and web technology to extend to many other frontiers of green behavior, such as e-waste recycling, responsible junk disposal, and energy reduction.

Growing from Worm Poop to Packaging Reuse

TerraCycle, the Newark, N.J. based brand has evolved into a $20 million-a-year operation, since it was founded in 2001 by Princeton University dropout Tom Szasky.

In a few short years, the company has pivoted but not abandoned its original focus on “worm poop” fertilizer — the innovative organic plant food, packed in recycled bottle, that was brewed from worm-rich compost piles — towards a broader focus on packaging reduction and reuse.

Partnering with schools and numerous major consumer packaged good companies, TerraCycle is capturing both pre- and post-consumer packaging waste to upcycle it: such as converting Capri sun bags into satchels, pencil cases, and other merchandise.

What’s the gamification angle here? Albe Zakes, TerraCycle’s global vice president, media relations, explained: Since TerraCycle’s community skews heavily towards kids and moms, a teachable-game fit the bill.

Partnering with Manhattan-based Guerillapps, TerraCycle developed Trash Tycoon. Played in Facebook, players earn points, and privileges by cleaning up a small town, and building sustainable businesses from the trash. It works like a mash-up between SimCity and Farmville, but with a decidedly green wrinkles. Treehugger.com, for instance, provides real-time news feeds of eco-current events that appear in the game.

Customized to help kids learn about waste and recycling, Zakes explained the game is being customized so that virtual activity mirrors and reinforces the real-world efforts of its classroom brigades, the groups of school kids who raise funds — and compete with other class groups — by recycling packaging materials.

Balancing Real and Virtual to Boost Sustainability

Threading through the discussion was a concern that converting virtual do-gooderism into real world action is a challenge. The panelists acknowledged that there’s a risk that they may be able to induce a player to click a mouse — say, to “like” a green action, or to win a badge — but may not be able to actually spur that person to do the deed.

In Practically Green, Stevens explained, finding the mix of virtual incentives and balancing them against real world programs in the workplace is as much art than science. What’s more, she said, the workplace is a powerful arena in which to educate and stimulate such behaviors, because many people are driven more by peer perception in work environments than they are in their private lives.

This spurs competitive behaviors and, interestingly, lowers the risk of false claims where folks claim to have completed a green task, such as recycling their office paper: “Their friends and colleagues know, and they notice, and will call out their friends if they’re cheating,” explained Stevens.

For TerraCycle, which built its business in part from the fabric of social dynamics at schools, Zakes explained its game actually complements and extends an existing foundation of existing actions.

Still, at the splash screen of the game, there’s this encouragement: “Trash Tycoon is great, but make sure to get outside and collect some actual recycleables once in a while.”

Held in collaboration with Baruch College’s Robert Zicklin Center for Corporate Integrity at the City University of New York (CUNY), the panel was curated by Ashok Kamal (a graduate of Ziklin’s MBA program) who co-founded Bennu, which provides social media marketing for green businesses.

For a broader look at the origins and breadth of gamification, check out Kamal’s overview of the gamification phenomenon here in GreenBiz.

Last but not least, you can watch a video of the full panel presentation from Social Media Week through the group’s website. Scroll to the very bottom of the page, where you’ll find two video links. The lower of the two is the first 90 minutes, including the four company presentations. The video above that is the final half hour, comprised mostly of Q&A.

Joystick photo via Shutterstock.

~

Read the original story here: http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2012/02/22/green-gamification-takes-root-big-apple

GreenBiz

Venture capital investment in cleantech shrank by 4.5% in 2011 | GreenBiz

Why Sinking Cleantech Investment Data Aren't the End of the World

In cleantech, as in most realms of emerging technology, venture capital acts as a sort of incubator for the youngest, most promising technologies. That’s why it’s a cause for concern when venture capital investment slows or shrinks.That’s just what happened last year. In 2011, venture capital investment in early-stage cleantech companies fell by 4.5 percent, to $4.9 billion, compared with the 2010 tally, according to a round-up of full-year data by Ernst & Young published Feb. 1, based on data from Dow Jones VentureSource.Whether this downtick is cause for concern is open to argument. The question links to hot-button issues being debated in Congress, on the campaign trail, and in the media. I, for one, believe that given the headwinds facing cleantech, the numbers are cause for optimism. They’re good news, but I wish they were better.figure 1To make my half-full case, note that cleantech venture capital investment has been resilient despite both economic and political headwinds. Last year’s funding remains 29 percent higher than its 2009 total, when overall venture flows crashed in the wake of the global financial crisis.

What’s more, cleantech is nurtured by other streams of capital. As I reported last month, global investment in mature renewable energy technologies — new wind farms, solar panels, and the like — expanded by 5 percent, to $260 billion last year. That rise helped put total investment in renewable energy, efficiency, smart grid and related technologies over the trillion dollar mark last year.

Still, I’m a worrier. And there are reasons to furrow my brow at these numbers.

However promising cleantech may be, venture capitalists are finding more alluring options in other sectors. Cleantech’s decline comes despite a 10 percent rise of overall venture capital investment. Globally, for the year, investors placed $32.6 billion into 3,209 venture deals, according to Dow Jones Venture Source.

So while cleantech retreated, investment in healthcare and IT startups remained roughly steady. The big winner? Consumer information services — think Twitter, LivingSocial and Zynga — pulled in $5.2 billion, up 23 percent from the prior year.

But before I complain any further that clean technology shouldn’t be losing out to Twitter, let alone Facebook, here’s a bit more on what went down in cleantech over the past year.

• Battery technology is hot. Energy storage continues to attract interest, and growing flows of money. Venture investment in batteries rocketed up by 253 percent. And this is bound to accelerate. Growing volumes of electric vehicles, plus the graduation of wind and solar from emerging-tech status to mature technology, are all driving demand for energy storage, in a dizzying array of niches.

And while some segments of battery manufacturing are mature — increasingly subject to the sorts of commodity price dynamics driving down prices of solar PV — there is arguably bigger potential for scientific discovery to upend today’s batteries.

• Investment is tilting towards more mature plays. Cleantech companies already generating revenue garnered 69 percent of the funding, up from 50 percent in 2010.

• M&A exits dominate. Given the parlous state of IPO offerings, mergers & acquisitions continue to be the main path to maturity for cleantech players. In 2011, a total of $2.9 billion in M&A deals involved cleantech startups, some 79 deals, according to Ernst & Young’s analysis.

• IPO drought lingers. Just five companies IPO’d in 2011, not many more than the three that listed a year prior. Biofuels dominated last year’s public debuts, with Solazyme, Gevo, and KiOR. Intermolecular, a semiconductor R&D company focused on cleantech listed in the final quarter, as did Rentech, a clean energy solutions provider. The five raised a total of $688 million.

The low count of IPOs for cleantech is an indicator of a growing backlog and is one reason why new cleantech investment may be slowing. Without a clear line to exit, venture funders will steer their money to sectors where it’s easier to cash out.

Thus, Facebook. Good things may yet come of Facebook’s super-hyped IPO. Perhaps it will improve the atmospherics around cleantech IPOs?

But on balance I find the din disheartening. The very big IPOs by Twitter et al. smack of hype. To emphasize my point: Facebook’s pending IPO is likely to raise around $5 billion, more than was invested by VCs in the entire cleantech sector last year. Indeed, Facebook’s valuation is verging on speculation, maybe even magical thinking. The offering is slated to value the total company at $100 billion.

Compared with the foaming enthusiasm for all-things-Facebook, it can feel like cleantech has drifted into a period of backlash, however undeserved. Investment continues apace to be sure, but the narrative around cleantech is growing more polarized.

Long-time cleantech investor Ira Ehrenpreis put it this way, as quoted in GreentechMedia.com: “While I’ve never been more bearish on U.S. cleantech, I’ve never been more bullish about global cleantech.”

Blame domestic politics for the widening gap in cleantech prospects here compared with global markets. Leading the negative push—recklessly so—are House Republicans, who seem intent on vilifying federal support of renewable energy, using Solyndra’s failure as a political bludgeon against President Obama. Likewise, the GOP presidential aspirants have retreated on cleantech: far-right opposition of climate change is so dogmatic, even discussions of cleantech have become off limits despite the fact that practically all the Republican candidates have championed renewable investment in the past.

Meanwhile, media find it hard to resist the counter-intuitive appeal of the “cleantech is failing” tale, and are amplifying the meme. Picking up on the GOP’s talking points, the tally of stories of Solyndra’s failure far outpaces coverage of the fact that it’s been a record year for solar capacity growth in the U.S. Or that plummeting solar prices are a windfall for buyers of the technology, enabling even energy-poor regions such as India to light up.

Witness Wired magazine’s February story “Why the Clean Tech Boom Went Bust.” While its author, Washington Post’s Juliet Eilperin, actually offers a reasonably measured take on the impact of cheap natural gas and the Solyndra scandal, you’d have a hard time figuring that out from the headline or the explosive artwork illustrating the story (at right, by Dan Forbes).

Lurid pictures of exploding wind mills, fiery biodiesel canisters, and a shattering PV panel left me thinking that John Doerr must be on the verge of switching back coal heat for his mansion. Meanwhile, elsewhere on Wired.com, the breathless all-technology-is-pretty-much-cool coverage of green developments continues apace.

Wired’s schizophrenic take on cleantech is not unique, but it deserves special attention because the magazine has been such a vocal, effective champion for innovation as a driver of economic growth. The editors’ tabloid take on cleantech is sure to gather clicks: scores of contrary comments and irate tweets suggest the story has generated a lot of attention.

But in gunning for controversy, Wired goes off target, loosing sight of the bigger, better idea that cleantech is a near-ideal innovation catalyst for U.S. economic growth. That’s why we should keep our fingers crossed that venture capitalists will keep steering more money into the sector too.

See the original story here: http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2012/02/06/why-sinking-cleantech-investment-data-arent-end-world

Ensia

Peas on Earth: How PepsiCo is aiding Ethiopia’s chickpea farmers to secure its supply chain | Ensia

Say “Pepsi” and most folks think of the nose-tickling cola that has been Coke’s archrival for over a century. Or chips: About half of PepsiCo’s $58 billion in yearly sales comes from snack foods such as Lay’s and Doritos.

But chickpeas? Also known as garbanzo beans, the protein-rich legumes are a key ingredient in hummus, one of PepsiCo’s fastest-growing products. In 2007, the food and beverage giant inked a joint venture with Israel’s Strauss Group to sell Sabra-brand hummus and other foods in North America. Led by demand for the garlicky blend of chickpeas, olive oil and sesame, PepsiCo’s sales of dips in its Sabra line soared by 45 percent in 2010. In early 2011, the partners agreed to extend the deal to sell Sabra hummus and other spreads globally.

This lip-smacking growth gives PepsiCo a new challenge: How to secure a steady supply of chickpeas. In 2012, the company expects to buy several thousand tons; two years later, the shopping list calls for roughly twice that amount.

To help meet this need, PepsiCo is combining its business agenda with the development goal of helping 10,000 Ethiopian farmers double their production of chickpeas in a program it’s calling Enterprise EthioPEA. “This initiative will positively impact the livelihood of local farmers, address the critical issue of famine in the Horn of Africa and create sustainable business opportunities for PepsiCo,” said Indra Nooyi, chairman and CEO of PepsiCo in a statement.

The strategy is as unconventional as it ambitious. After all, Ethiopia is better known for famine than for food export. Enterprise EthioPEA aims to reverse that condition by bringing together international partners with local stakeholders. From overseas, PepsiCo, the United Nations World Food Programme and the U.S. Agency for International Development are joining forces. Within the country, the effort is led by the Ethiopian Institute for Agriculture Research, the Ministry of Agriculture and Omega Farms.

For Ethiopia, where half of all kids are stunted by malnutrition, chickpeas offer a familiar but underexploited dietary option, explains Tara Acharya, PepsiCo’s director of global health and agriculture policy.

With around 22 percent protein, chickpeas offer a nutritious alternative to meat and require fewer inputs to grow. The crop is also a rich source of complex carbohydrates, fiber, minerals and vitamins.

Ethiopian farmers routinely grow chickpeas today, but typically as a secondary crop between regular harvests of grains. In addition, dependence on less-productive seed strains and a paucity of irrigation limits harvests, says Acharya. As a result, yields have historically been too low to ensure stable market prices, and farmers tend to keep most of what they grow, for food and as seed stock for future crops. In 2008, Ethiopian farmers produced 287,000 tons of chickpeas, exporting roughly 14 per cent of that. For most farmers, chickpeas “haven’t had significant commercial importance,” says Acharya.

But with PepsiCo’s commitment to buy excess production, if all goes to plan, both output and prices will rise. Working with farmers in Ethiopia’s wetter, more fertile north, Enterprise EthioPEA is introducing more vigorous seed strains along with technical and financial assistance to deploy low-cost flood irrigation. “Irrigation would also allow farms to add a second crop of chickpeas, during the dry season,” Acharya says, “and once installed, irrigation will help other crops, too.”

As harvests grow, Enterprise EthioPEA is working with local food processors to create an affordable supply of chickpea-based ready-to-consume supplementary food that will be used to feed 40,000 malnourished Ethiopian children.

Famine continues to take a toll in Ethiopia and neighboring countries. Rains did not fall in southern stretches of the country or in neighboring regions in late 2010, nor did they come in time in 2011 to save spring plantings. In parts of Kenya and Ethiopia, 2010–11 was one of the driest years since 1950–51. The tragic result is that today, some 13 million people face famine across the region. In Ethiopia’s southern provinces, 3.7 million are receiving food assistance from WFP.

Making a dent in these numbers will take time. Enterprise EthioPEA started last fall, and is slated to last through August 2013. By the following year, PepsiCo hopes crop yields will have doubled, producing enough to not only supply Ethiopia’s domestic needs, but also allow for export of about one-fifth of the crop, thereby doubling export income to farmers. By that time, PepsiCo hopes it can count on Ethiopia for about a tenth of its global chickpea needs.

Should Enterprise EthioPEA succeed, PepsiCo hopes to copy and repeat the strategy with other crops in other developing markets, says Acharya. A recipe that successfully blends profit with sustainable development is one few would want to keep secret.

ADAM ASTON is a Brooklyn-based writer covering energy, environment and green biz. Follow his work at adamaston.com or on twitter at @adamanyc.

Please check out the original article at Momentum, here: http://environment.umn.edu/momentum/issue/4.1w12/connections.html

GreenBiz

Dan Hendrix: The Future of Interface is Bright & Greener than Ever | GreenBiz

Dan Hendrix: The Future of Interface is Bright & Greener than Ever

Because of the enduring green epiphany of its charismatic founder, Ray Anderson, the influence of Interface has always been outsized in the world of sustainability.

In the wake of Anderson’s death last autumn at age 77, following a nearly two-year battle with cancer, the focus has shifted to Daniel Hendrix, Interface’s CEO and president. Yesterday, at theGreenBiz Forum 12 in New York City, senior writerMarc Gunther caught up with Hendrix to see how the billion-dollar carpet maker is moving ahead with its founder’s eco-vision.

At Interface, sustainability continues to evolve from an operations focus into tool for innovation and market development, Hendrix reported. One example of this shift will soon be found up in the air.

After a four-year development process, the company’s carpet tiles were okayed for use on commercial jets. Developing the product required reducing the weight of the tiles by nearly half, while meeting stringent fire and toxicity standards as well as passing Boeing’s grueling performance tests.

Southwest Airlines will be among the first to start using the tiles as part of its Green Plane initiative, a project to outfit a Boeing 737 cabin with green products. “It’s a big win for us, and for the airline industry,” said Hendrix.

Promoted to his post in 2001, Hendrix has been running Interface’s day-to-day business for over a decade. Hendrix, who will celebrate his 30th anniversary with the company next year, worked closely with Anderson through an acquisitive period in the 1980s to scale-up the business. A decade later, when Anderson had his green epiphany and declared this intention to transform how the company would make tiles, Hendrix recounted that he was a disbeliever: “I thought Ray had lost his mind.”

It didn’t take long for Anderson to convert Hendrix, or the rest of the company. To aid his effort, Anderson turned to a green “dream team” to make the case to his colleagues. A veritable who’s-who of sustainable manufacturing, the team included Paul Hawken, Bill McDonough, and Amory Lovins, among others. The case altered the thinking of Interface’s leadership, and re-set the company’s course towards a goal of making carpets using less oil, water, and other inputs, with less waste overall.

The company has tracked these metrics steadily since 1996. Since then, the company has lowered the oil intensity of its products to 60 percent from 90 percent, Hendrix reported. Roughly 40 percent of its carpet are produced from post-consumer recycled materials, remade from used carpet tiles where fiber is shaved off for reuse, and the heavy backing is re-melted to recapture its embodied energy. “We’ve seen an 82 percent reduction in water use, and a similar improvement in waste sent to landfill,” Hendrix said.

One of the latest efforts to deepen Interface’s green practices is a program to develop environmental product declarations, or EPDs, a sort of successor to a life cycle assessment (LCA). “It creates transparency,” said Hendrix, as a kind of environmental nutritional label for each product, showing key content such as carbon footprint, toxicity data, and water usage.

“It’s like an LCA but with more detail. It takes a lot of the mystery out of what impact this product has on the environment,” said Hendrix. “It’s far from being standardized. And we’re one of the first to pursue it in the U.S.”

After nearly 20 years of sustainability efforts, the process of extending green practices within the organization, born with Anderson, continues today. “Ray gave Interface a wonderful gift: There’s a tremendous emotional capital that continues to motivate our people to get up everyday and think there’s a higher purpose than just a paycheck,” Hendrix said.

Interface is looking to its employees for guidance on how and where to innovate. “We call the exercise ‘appreciative inquiry,'” said Hendrix. “We interviewed employees and a few customers, to help push towards a goal of zero emissions.” A lesson that emerged from this exercise was to cross-pollinate staff between offices, sending high performers from Bangkok to Europe, or from the U.S. to Australia, to learn and to exchange innovative ideas.

For more on Anderson’s legacy, check out Joel Makower’s memorial to the ” iconic and iconoclastic industrialist“. And in the first of an ongoing series called “Radical Industrialists” here at GreenBiz.com, read an essay contributed by Interface’s Lindsay James and Mikhail Davis, “Mind the Void: Interface after Ray.”

Photo by Sophia Wallace.

Check out the original story here: http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2012/01/25/dan-hendrix-future-interface-bright-greener-ever 

GreenBiz

Why the Big Apple Can Be the World’s First VERGE City | GreenBiz

Why the Big Apple Can Be the World's First VERGE CityAs if recent football results weren’t enough to heat up the rivalry between New York, Boston, and San Francisco, add to the contest the quest for title of “greenest city.”

At the GreenBiz Forum 12 in New York City today, this rivalry took the form of a panel question: Can the Big Apple be the first VERGE city in the U.S., or maybe even the world?

Of course, New York has a long history of leadership in finance, media, and fashion. But green? Why not Masdar, or one of the new built-from-the-ground-up green utopias, asked session moderator Andrew Shapiro, co-founder of GreenOrder.

The city’s strength is partly its age, size and complexity. “The reality is that the majority of cities aren’t green field opportunities,” said panelist David Bartlett, IBM’s vice-president of industry solutions during the session. “Old infrastructures are where the opportunity for innovation lies. I think that makes New York the best candidate,” he added.

The city’s aged infrastructure is more opportunity than obstacle, said panelist Steve Cohen, Director and CEO of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, pointing out that it’s better for a city like New York to have an aged subway, in need of repair, than to have to build a new system from scratch, at nearly insurmountable costs.

“It’d be nice to have a computer controlled subway system, but I’d rather have what we’ve got, than to dig up the whole city today,” said Cohen. That said, the city has a track record of committing to billion-dollar scale green infrastructure, from the 3rd Water Tunnel, to the 2nd Ave Subway line. “This city is used to spending billions on capital. We’re not going to go through the anti-tax disinvestment cycle,” that has taken hold in other areas of the country, said Cohen.

In New York, the political leadership starts with Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has led a sweeping effort to ready the city for the stresses of climate change and an additional million residents expected by 2030. The resulting blueprint, PlaNYC (pronounced plan-why-see) points the way to increased building efficiency, higher levels of renewable energy, less waste, cleaner air and water.

The technology tools that will make possible this smarter, more efficient future are entering service today. “There’s a huge proliferation of smart sensor technology where we can see — with much better x-ray vision — what’s happening with our building, with our transport system, with our energy networks,” said Bartlett. “Visibility, control, and automation, they’re the heart of smart.”

“No one is listening holistically to buildings,” said Bartlett. There’s automation device by device, or system by system, but no one is watching the sum of the systems, and doing do can deliver savings of 40 percent or more. “It’s a concept I call ‘the building whisperer,'” he said.

The city’s competitive edge also includes its “brain base”. “Boston is known as a college town,” said Cohen. “But we have more students in New York City than there are people in Boston,” said Cohen, implying perhaps this may be a reason the Giants will have an edge over the Patriots in Super Bowl XLVI.

The city is deepening its considerable R&D resources. Cornell University recently beat out Stanford University, winning a beauty contest to build a cutting-edge green campus for a new engineering school on Roosevelt Island.

Uptown, Columbia University is building a new satellite campus in northern Manhattan, which will be home to a brain and behavior research science center, along with additional capacity for engineering, business and continuing education. “The west side of Manhattan used to be full of factories and stevedores,” said Cohen, “And now those stretches are filled with brain workers.”

In many ways, cities offer more fertile ground for VERGE technologies to flourish than national or regional efforts. City mayors are “among the least ideological people around because the do real things: making sure the garbage gets picked up,” Cohen said. “The best minds in the world want to be here,” and even if they don’t want to live here, “It’s never hard to have a meeting here,” he added.

The challenges facing cities mirror the larger test facing the nation. At the national level, pragmatism is painfully absent, and has led to the polarization of energy debates into debilitating over simplifications, most recently with the Keystone XL pipeline, about which Cohen writes at his blog at Huffington Post.

The issue we need to address is America’s role in a sustainable global economy. How do we compete and protect the planet that sustains us? How do we ensure that other nations join us in an effort to achieve global sustainability?

“We’re talking about a post-industrial way of living. It will require innovation and creativity,” said Cohen today. “This is a little bit like arguing about landlines for telephones 20 years ago.” Energy technologies now on the blackboard may make debates about pipelines quaintly obsolete in the near future.

The rivalry for greenest city continues next week, as the GreenBiz Forum 12 heads to San Francisco on January 30 to ask a similar question: Can San Francisco be America’s first VERGE city?

My friend and GreenBiz impresario Joel Makower suggested the Bay Area may be the natural leader of the greenest city race, at least until the final minutes of the contest, when it fumbles away its lead to lose by a hair to New York.

No hard feelings from here in Giants land: At least in the green race, both cities can be winners.

Manhattan photo via Shutterstock.

Check out the original story at GreenBiz.com, here: http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2012/01/24/why-big-apple-can-be-worlds-first-verge-city

GreenBiz

Clean Energy Makes Big Strides, but Just How Sustainable is the Growth? | GreenBiz

Clean Energy Makes Big Strides, but Just How Sustainable is the Growth?

Global investment in clean energy capacity expanded by 5 percent in 2011 to $260 billion. The growth comes despite the considerable drag from economic crisis in Europe and weak growth in the U.S.

The new research, compiled by Bloomberg New Energy Finance, was announced yesterday in New York at United Nations headquarters building, site of the Investor Summit on Climate Risk & Energy Solutions.

Up from $247 billion in 2010, last year’s rise in spending on clean energy capacity offered reasons for optimism along with rising cause for concern. Note that this data includes spending on renewable energy technologies, but not advanced coal, nuclear or conventional big hydro.

The good news: Spending has quintupled in the past seven years, with outlays for solar power leading the expansion — soaring by 36 percent to $137.5 billion during 2011.

And in the global horse race for green energy leadership, the U.S. regained its lead over China for the first time since 2008. U.S. spending hit a record, at $55.4 billion, up 35 percent, as investment in China rose by just one percent to $48.9 billion.

“The performance of solar is even more remarkable when you consider that the price of photovoltaic modules fell by close to 50 percent during 2011, and now stands 75 percent lower than three years ago, in mid-2008,” Michael Liebreich, chief executive of Bloomberg New Energy Finance, said in a statement.

But lurking behind those big numbers are worries that U.S.’ resurgence in 2011 may turn out to be the lunge that precedes a stumble. Spending in the U.S. was buoyed by a big surge of stimulus funds, originally set aside in the 2008 stimulus bill, that will taper off sharply in the year ahead.

“The U.S. jumped back into the lead in clean energy investment last year,” Liebreich added. “However before anyone in Washington celebrates too much, the U.S. figure was achieved thanks in large part to support initiatives which have now expired.”

As those incentives shrink, the global wind and solar industries are set to consolidate. Supply in both the wind and solar markets exceeds demand significantly, leading to bankruptcies and pullbacks. In the solar space, Solyndra is the most visible, but one of a growing number of startups that crashed under pressure from falling solar cell prices.

Dominated by mature conglomerates such as GE and Siemens, the outlook for wind is dimmer than for solar: Global investment fell by 17 percent to $74.9 billion. To try to compete with lower-cost Chinese manufacturers Vestas, the world’s largest producer of turbines, yesterday announced it was shuttering a factory, and cutting 2,335 jobs, or about 10 percent of its staff.

Of course, oversupply means lower-cost energy systems for buyers. And even as subsidies are declining in the wealthy West, non-financial policy support remains resilient. In the U.S., renewable portfolio standards in 29 U.S. states represent a $400 billion investment opportunity, as other states finalize similar commitments.

Meanwhile, stepped up subsidies in emerging markets — especially Brazil and India — are upgrading energy services to virgin markets. Spending in these areas will replace some of the investment that is retreating in North America and Europe, said Ethan Zindler, Head of Policy Analysis at Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

Financial innovation remains a weak spot, however, especially in the U.S., where clever capital solutions could help fill the gap left by shrinking federal subsidies. Given the multi-billion dollar scale of many clean-energy investment projects, there’s been a dearth of the sorts of high-efficiency financial instruments that can bundle up batches of projects, and finance them at low cost in public markets, Zindler added.

There have been some promising precedents — such as PACE loans and solar lease-to-own programs. But nothing has yet emerged to substitute for large-scale, multi-billion federal subsidy programs. Proposals such as green bonds or a national infrastructure bank are stuck in the starting gate, said Zindler.

Institutional investors, meanwhile, are hungry for more diversified ways to put money into greener projects. “Investors need diversified, sustainable strategies that maximize risk-adjusted returns in a volatile investment environment,” said Ceres head Mindy Lubber, which directs the Investor Network on Climate Risk, a network of 100 institutional investors with collective assets totaling about $10 trillion.

The retreat of subsidies may enhance the competitiveness of products and strategies already honed to deliver higher efficiency and energy savings, said Marc Vachon, vice president of ecomagination at GE. He added that GE’s ecomagination product line is growing at twice the rate of the rest of the company, having already generated $85 billion in revenues to date.

The event saw the release of two other reports of note for folks following investment trends in green business and clean tech:

• Global investment consultant Mercer issued a new report showing how leading global investors, including the nation’s largest public pension fund, CalPERS, are integrating climate change considerations into investment risk management and asset allocations. The report, “Through the Looking Glass: How Investors are Applying Results of the Climate Change Scenarios Study” comes on the heels of a Mercer report last year showing that climate change could contribute as much as 10 percent to portfolio risk over the next 20 years.

• Deutsche Asset Management also released a new report, “2011: The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly,” describing generally mixed results on climate investments and policy in 2011 but projecting long-term growth in cleaner energy markets to continue. Positive trends included China and Germany’s continued low-carbon leadership, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s issuance of new rules on hazardous air pollutants, Australia’s new carbon legislation, and Japan’s commitment to supporting the deployment of more renewable energy.

The report also highlights negative trends such as the weak performance of cleantech public equity stocks in 2011 and the expiration of several U.S. federal renewable energy incentive programs, including the “highly successful” Treasury Grant Program that expired Dec. 31, 2011. The report noted that the TGP program, in 2 1/2 years, leveraged nearly $23 billion in private sector investment for 22,000 projects in every state across a dozen clean energy industries.

Last but not least, a plug. If you, like me, have concluded that the “end of coal” is all but inevitable to prevent catastrophic climate change, check out this remarkable presentation — which ended with a standing ovation — by Richard Trumka, President of the AFL-CIO at yesterday’s summit.

Trumka, a former miner, spoke with passion about how the “end of coal” message is landing on the ground in blue-collar coal country, even as he acknowledged the dire need to address climate risks and build a low-carbon economy.

His message is cause to reflect on how labor’s interests are often misunderstood and under-represented in climate policy discussions. Where coal miners see their jobs, housing values, and culture imperiled, it’s no surprise that the politics of climate change become hard to swallow — no matter how chaotic the climate change signals may be. The same labor issues vex the proposed XL Pipeline, about which Trumka says labor remains divided, and natural gas fracking as well.

Read the transcript here or watch his talk below, starting just before the 14-minute mark. It’s well worth the 15-minute running time. If the embedded player isn’t working, point your browser here: http://www.unmultimedia.org/tv/webcast/2012/01/2012-investor-summit-on-climate-risk-and-energy-solutions-2.html:

Wind turbine photo CC-licensed by Samuel Stocker.

Global CCS Institute

A recipe to jumpstart CCS in the US – the rewards of collaborating with China, 3 of 3 | Global CCS Institute

This is the third and final installment of a Q&A with John Thompson of the Clean Air Task Force. Previously we talked about Canada’s leadership in CCS and the problems posed by focusing on CCS liability in advance of scaling the technology. In this last part of the Q&A, Thompson outlines his vision of the benefits available to the American CCS agenda by collaborating with Chinese utilities and oil companies.

For context on how quickly China is emerging as a hothouse of CCS pilots, a recent report from Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) estimated that China is home to nearly one-third of active pilot-scale CCS projects globally, many of which are focused on carbon use. China, after all, coined the term carbon capture use and storage (CCUS), notes BNEF, adding that China offers US utilities a test bed with lower labor costs, lower regulatory hurdles, ultra-fast construction timelines, ample capital, and an appetite to learn from the West.

To spur EOR, how can we bring down carbon capture costs?

There’s where we think China comes in. China has very low‑cost capture technology, but they have no or little EOR experience. Texas and the Gulf states have lots of EOR experience, but to get more oil from their mature fields will require anthropogenic CO2. We see a huge opportunity to partner with China here, to bring lower‑cost Chinese CO2 capture technology to the US. A bigger supply of lower-cost CO2 will in turn help capture more of our oil. In turn, we can export EOR technology back to China.

CATF recently hired a new staff person in Texas to develop this vision, Dr. Frank Chou. He’s a 30-year veteran of various refining and chemical companies, most recently Shell. Our aim is to develop links between China and the Gulf states region as a way to promote carbon capture in both countries. China builds projects at twice the speed of the US, and at a fraction of cost. If we can harness these global synergies, we have the potential to really drive down costs globally.

How far has this collaboration gone?

We’ve already brought AEP into partnership with Huaneng, and linked Duke with Huaneng as well. I mentioned Southern Co’s Plant Radcliff earlier: the technology there is a TRIG gasifier, developed in Mobile, Ala., by KBR and Southern Co. That technology is being built in China first, in a small, 120‑megawatt power plant about two hours from Hong Kong. That operational data will help refine the design as Kemper is built.

How has China become a leader in low-cost carbon capture?

We’ve all heard that ‘China builds one coal plant a week’. That may or may not be quite true at the moment, but they’re building at an incredible rate (see chart below), and much of the capacity is at the cutting edge of coal technology. They’re building an advanced coal gasification plant about once a month, where the US has only a handful.

It’s no different than China’s experience with factory manufacturing: there are economies of scale taking place that lower the cost to build advanced coal plants. For example, there’s a plant called Shidonkou, outside of Shanghai. They’re capturing CO2 at about $30 a ton. That same project in the United States would probably be double or triple that cost.

And then there’s the potential appetite in China for EOR. We estimate they have the potential, easily, to build 30 gigawatts of CCS capacity to supply EOR in China. Yet right now, there’s maybe only one EOR project there. With more know-how from the US, there’s huge potential for that number to grow.

But why would China be better able to solve the problem of scaling up carbon capture than here?

The math suggests that China may be able to build CCS on power plants using EOR with little or no incentives. In China, they refer to EOR-CCS as ‘CCUS’ where the ‘U’ is for utilisation.

Keep in mind the value of CO2 for EOR purposes is set by the global price of oil. So whether you’re in Texas, Norway or Beijing, you’re basically paying the same global price for oil and that price establishes the same economic value of the CO2 used for EOR regardless of where you are doing it. On the other hand, capture costs do vary by region and country and in China they’re a fraction of the costs elsewhere.

So, if you buy CO2 for EOR at roughly the same price in China and Texas, but your China capture costs are a third or half what they are in Texas, you may be able to do EOR‑CCS in China on power plants without any extra economic incentives, without any need for a price on carbon.

That’s not true in Texas yet, given today’s cost of capture. To develop power plant CO2 sources, you’re either going to need some kind of incentive or deep reduction in the cost of capture technology.

But we can lower capture costs with China’s help. We can harness that global synergy to scale up 30 gigawatts worth of CCS for EOR in China in a matter of years. That scale of development lowers costs of capture technology globally. Building that much CCS first in the West would take decades. China is a really significant strategic opportunity that we’re trying to exploit.

So a lot of what we’re trying to do in China is break down the barriers between Chinese CO2 suppliers and Chinese oil companies, because the oil companies have the knowledge. They understand the geology but they don’t produce the CO2. If we can create US-Chinese business partnerships, the transfer of technology both ways could take years off the time when CCS is widely deployed.

At the outset, I mentioned that for me, CCS can also mean ‘Copy Canada’s Successes’. Someday, it could also mean ‘Copy China’s Successes’ too. China could be the key to creating global synergies that allow us to develop CCS technology with little or no subsidies, and no price on carbon.

Global CCS Institute

A recipe to jumpstart CCS in the US – the liability barrier, 2 of 3 | Global CCS Institute

I started my three-part Q&A with John Thompson of the Clean Air Task Force by focusing on Canada’s leadership in CCS. In this installment, Thompson outlines the problems posed by focusing on CCS liability in advance of scaling the technology.

Outside of the Texas, Oklahoma and Louisiana oilfields, questions over liability of sequestered CO2 have distracted the discussion, and arguably slowed or even stymied projects. Do you see liability fears as a barrier?

My bias has always been to deemphasize those things because, while important and necessary, they’re not urgent at this stage. As soon as you start getting the incentives and a few pilots off the ground, then the people that matter come to the table and start figuring out what really works and what doesn’t work, including for liability.

Liability risks are very important, but they’re second tier at this stage. It’s a chicken and egg problem: there isn’t a reason to worry about these risks if we can’t develop the technology. It’s like deciding, in 1914, what are the speed limits and color of signs for the interstate highway system.

I’m a firm believer that the regulations on this have to evolve as we learn from projects. We have much of the necessary expertise to get these right, again, with the EOR industry, which is very comfortable with liability.

So a lot of the things that we’ve done in the United States — Class VI rules for saline injection, we’ve done by learning from rules developed for Class II wells for EOR. Certain states have accepted liability while others that have chosen different paths — all that’s well and good, and will become more important and will evolve as soon as we get real projects on the ground.

Do you see a difference in the liability outlook for CCS in oil formations versus in saline injection?

There is an advantage for the first round of CCS development to put CO2 into old oil fields instead of saline sites. EOR provides certainty and revenue needed to finance projects. The likelihood is strong that the cap rock must be pretty good. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have oil there or natural gas in the first place. The issue is whether you’ve punctured that geology with old wells, and whether those old wells are closed properly and won’t become a pathway to the surface. Saline is critical too, but often less is known about the geology and so more studies are needed.

The allure of saline injections, presumably, is that the geology is more common, which would minimize the CO2 transport networks. Isn’t that a good reason to explore saline first?

The challenge with saline is that everybody who has a power plant or a large industrial source wants to minimize the pipeline costs and inject directly beneath their site. So how do you set up a system that actually begins to develop the best saline sites first and discourages people from, say, injecting under their own property where geology might not be as good just because it’s the least costly option?

One of the things that we think would be really helpful on the saline side is something we call a geologic storage utility. It would be a utility charged with handling the CO2 in a one or two‑state area and figures out where the best sites are first and helps build out the pipelines, so that we actually develop what’s easiest to characterize, and avoid black eyes.

Speaking of black eyes, given rising public opposition to natural gas hydrofracking in the US, do you worry about resistance to CO2 injection trials?

Resistance will depend on the site and the scale and a lot of other things, but the risk is rising. And certainly, the last thing we want is one failed site — a CO2 leak — to discourage the whole industry. To reduce resistance, people need to feel the project is safe. They need to believe it is worthwhile. This is a point where better education is needed. Quite simply, it’s game over for avoiding the worst aspects of climate change if CCS isn’t widely used. Fossil fuels use worldwide is projected to rise 50 per cent by 2035. CCS is effective because it can capture 90 per cent of the CO2 from stationary sources — new, existing, gas, or coal.

In that sense EOR can turn the CCS story into a potential success story – it helps recover more oil – shifting the focus away from worry over what CO2 does in the ground. Is the EOR potential big enough to drive significant carbon capture investment?

I think that’s really the interesting, fun fact here. Policymakers don’t necessarily understand that if you want to really reach the full potential of domestic oil production in the lower 48, particularly in Texas, and Mississippi, you’ve got to capture CO2 from power plants.

We’re running out of low-cost natural sources of CO2. To really develop the residual oil zones that are in the watery layers below the traditional producing wells, you need high volumes of CO2 and it will have to come from industry. Some of that will come from low‑cost sources such as natural gas processing and chemical manufacturer refineries. But ultimately, it’s going to take power plants.

Thanks John. We will continue our conversation tomorrow with a focus on the Clean Air Task Force’s plans to spur collaboration between the utilities and the oil sector in the US and China to accelerate the development of CCS.

Next…

  • A recipe to jumpstart CCS in the US: the rewards of collaborating with China – A conversation with John Thompson of the Clean Air Task Force (Part III)

Writer, editor, content advisor, creative leader – energy, climate | Chief storyteller at RMI | Co-founder of T Brand at The New York Times