Tag Archives: global warming

GARP

Hotter, sooner: A landmark effort refines — and raises — the warming outlook | GARP

Improved climate model narrows prediction uncertainty and raises the odds of serious climate impacts from global warming

Risk managers and climate scientists share a fundamental challenge: How to identify, weigh, and process a dizzying mix of signals to better model a range of possible future outcomes. Accordingly, the complex mathematical methods underlying both disciplines tend to advance slowly. It’s rare to see big improvements in the precision of their forecasts.

Yet this past July, climate scientists achieved just such a leap, with the publication of an outlook — conducted under the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) and published in the Review of Geophysics — for global warming that, for the first time, merges three disparate data sets and methodologies. Important as the technical improvements are, however, the conclusions have broader bearing for both climate science and risk managers.

The improved model predicts more warming in a world where CO2 levels hit twice their pre-industrial level, a threshold anticipated to hit mid-century, rather than closer to 2100. The findings thus boost the probability of serious climate impacts to energy operations, financial markets, human health, and the environment.

How much more warming by when?

To better understand the recalibration of this forecast, it’s helpful to revisit its predecessor. Since a landmark study published in 1979, scientists have expressed their outlook for temperature increase as a range — given a doubling of CO2 to pre-industrial levels — from a lower bound of 1.5°C to an upper limit of 4.5°C. From regulators to boardroom executives, planners have used this range as a reference for policy and business strategy over the past 40-odd years.

The new study narrows the bounds of this forecast range. It raises the lower limit of the estimate to 2.6°C while slightly reducing the upper bound, to 3.9°C by 2100. (See chart, via Science.)

“Narrowing the uncertainty is relevant not only for climate science but also for society that is responsible for solid decision making,” said Masahiro Watanabe, a professor at the University of Tokyo’s atmosphere and ocean research institute and one of the report’s authors, in an interview with The New York Times.

The study underscores a rising sense of certainty that the rate of warming is increasing. Today, global temperatures are already 1.2°C higher than their pre-industrial average.

The goal of the 1.5°C target was enshrined in the 2015 Paris climate accords, and has galvanized policy, business and public attention in part because it also represents what many scientists believe may be a critical threshold, a temperature gain beyond which the destabilizing effects of warming could accelerate sharply.

How is this study different?

For the first time, the new assessment unifies findings from three previously independent fields of climate research and analysis spanning vastly different eras.

The oldest numbers were taken from records of prehistoric temperatures preserved in sediment layers and tree rings. The next youngest come from direct measurement of temperatures taken since the start of the industrial revolution in the 1800s. And the most recent set of inputs was drawn from satellite measurements and computer models beginning in the 1980s.

On their own, none of these data sets could help refine the range of the temperature outlook. Simply synthesizing the disparate data sets was a challenge without precedent. The researchers were also able to enhance the precision of how feedback loops shape the outlook — for instance, how the loss of highly reflective white sea ice accelerates how quickly polar waters absorb heat. By merging and refining each vintage of findings, the meta-analysis delivered precision greater than the sum of its parts.

What’s more, the data proved to be more convergent than researchers anticipated. Co-author Gabriele Hegerl, a professor of climate system science at the University of Edinburgh, told The New York Times that she was surprised by the way the models converged. “We don’t expect these three lines of evidence to agree completely,” she said, but they did.

Data from the refined forecast will be used by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for its next major assessment in 2021 or 2022, Science magazine reports. From there, the data is likely to ripple into other national, academic, and private-sector models and inform projections for sea-level rise, economic damage, and other climate impacts.

Implications for risk managers

When offered equally probable good and bad outcomes, most folks tend to be too optimistic. Human nature is biased to think the good outcome is more likely; conversely, people tend to spend too little time thinking through the implications of the bad outcome. Put plainly, a lot of us tend to translate uncertainty as things should be okay.

Yet as risk professionals know all too well, uncertainty is always a double-edged sword. In the realm of climate change the risks vary from less severe and arriving more slowly to more intense and happening faster. To date, evidence is mounting that the outlook is tilted towards the bad, with disruptive changes happening faster and sooner than prior models anticipated. This has much to do with the complexity of the science behind modeling planet-sized physical systems. It also stems from science’s conservative culture: scientists tend to err on the side of caution when forecasting.

In the here and now, energy risk planners are already reckoning with climate phenomenon that are hitting energy markets and operations harder and faster than anticipated:

  • Wildfires are happening earlier, growing larger and impacting wider areas, in Australia, Russia, and the western U.S., damaging facilities and disrupting the extraction, processing, generation, and distribution of energy.
  • The intensity of hurricanes and tropical storms is rising at unseen speeds in the warming waters of the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico, imperiling petrochemical plants.
  • Heat and heat-related illnesses kill more Americans each year than any other form of severe weather, according to the National Weather Service. Worldwide, similar patterns are likely, as heat stress raises physical and liability risks for workers and customers.

For business leaders, the challenge is growing more urgent. While the new scientific study shifts up the long-term temperature forecast, it remains in many ways a pure abstraction — an estimate off in the future.

And for risk managers, the challenge is to take these multi-decadal temperature forecasts and translate them into material risk recommendations. How will another degree — or more — of warming change business conditions? Over the next five years, the next decade, or by mid-century? Where and in what ways could the increase manifest?

Further reading: For a deeper look at the science behind the revised assessment, see Paul Voosen’s “After 40 years, researchers finally see Earth’s climate destiny more clearly” at sciencemag.org.

—

Originally published at garp.com on 2020-09-09, https://climate.garp.org/insight/hotter-sooner-a-landmark-effort-refines-and-raises-the-warming-outlook/

Global CCS Institute

Exploring alternative ways to capture carbon using enzymes | Global CCS Institute

CO2 Solution, in Quebec City, Canada is continuing its work to develop biology-based carbon capture technologies with Codexis, based in Redwood City, Calif.

The renewed partnership between CO2 Solution and Codexis, helped pave the way for the duo to establish a collaboration agreement with an unnamed global leader in energy and infrastructure projects. The collaboration agreement covers the development and testing of a pilot scale system for coal-fired power plants.

The process being developed by CO2 Solution and Codexis is adapted from a naturally occurring enzyme, carbonic anhydrase, which occurs in humans and other mammals and plays a crucial role in the transfer of carbon dioxide from out blood streams into the lungs to be released during process.

By adapting the enzyme to work within a heavy-duty reactor that can soak up carbon dioxide from industrial and power plant exhaust, the company has created a sort of “industrial lung”. Once the carbon dioxide is captured, the enzyme also assists in concentrating the gas into a pure stream, so it can be stored underground or used in oil recovery.

According to Codexis, its enzymes are functional and stable in relatively inexpensive and energy-efficient solvents for 24 hours at temperatures up to 75 degrees Celsius. In its natural state, the enzyme doesn’t function at these sorts of temperatures; it must do so to be able to process hot exhaust gases from power plants or factories.

The company anticipates that once its enzymes are fully developed, the solvents can cut the energy needed to capture CO2 within a plant by 30%. This improvement, says Codexis, can help lower the cost burden posed by carbon capture to 35% more than conventional power, a significant improvement over than the 80% premium current processes add.

The newly-extended joint development agreement between CO2 Solution and Codexis now lasts until June 30, 2012, or six months after the expiry of any third-party collaborations, whichever is later.

via globalccsinstitute.com

Global CCS Institute

Could natural gas emissions exceed coal? The case for gas with CCS | Global CCS Institute

Though natural gas extracted from shale is the fastest growing energy source for power plants in the U.S., shale gas is now facing fresh challenges, with the release of a new study suggesting the fuel’s carbon intensity is as high as or higher than coal’s.

Given the rapid growth of natural gas, the findings could upend a consensus view that it’s a greener alternative to coal. The natural gas industry maintains that the fuel emits only about half the CO2 of coal, and therefore has promise as a “bridge” from today’s carbon-intensive fuel mix to future low-carbon options. The new findings suggest that, if natural gas emissions are undercounted, there’s greater urgency to develop CCS for natural gas plants, alongside coal.

Already, the low cost of natural gas—along with its low emissions of conventional air pollutants—has led many utilities to shutter older, dirtier coal plants and replace them with gas turbines.  Earlier this week, for instance, the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) agreed to a landmark deal with the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to shutter 11 of its most polluting coal plants, replacing some with natural gas.

Yet if shale gas is as carbon intensive as coal, the results of swapouts like these could cause greenhouse gas emissions to actually rise.

“Compared to coal, the footprint of shale gas is at least 20 percent greater and perhaps more than twice as great on the 20-year horizon and is comparable when compared over 100 years,” Robert Howarth, a Cornell ecologist writes in a pre-publication version of the paper, originally obtained by The Hill newspaper, and which can be viewed here.

The gist of Howarth’s findings has been made public in the past and are already being fiercely debated. The issue has been re-energized since the study is being published in a peer reviewed scientific journal, Climate Science, boosting their credibility.

It’s important to emphasize Howarth’s findings are based on natural gas extracted from shale reserves, rather than natural gas from conventional reserves.

That said, prior analysis, including one by the EPA, have put to the test claims that natural gas emits 50% less green house gases than coal, as is often claimed. Earlier this year, as detailed by ProPublica, the EPA issued analysis (see the report here) that methane leakage during transmission and processing may cut in half the advantage that is frequently attributed to natural gas.

Howarth and his colleagues—Anthony Ingraffea and Renee Santoro, also at Cornell—contend the process of hydraulic fracturing releases far more methane than conventional drilling.  When fluids, which are pumped into the well to crack open shale and release the gas, resurface to be reused, they release large volumes of methane, according to the study. Howarth is quoted by the New York Times, saying:

“…we came up with two things that surprised me. First, I expected the indirect CO2 emissions from trucks moving frac water, the compressors, the drills, etc., to be greater than we found. They are actually pretty small, when you add up all the numbers. And second, the influence of methane is greater than I expected…”

Howarth’s finding could fuel critics of shale gas, especially in Northeast US states, where public anxiety is rising that fracking threatens underground sources of fresh water.

via globalccsinstitute.com

Global CCS Institute

US Senator Bingaman aims to jump-start CCS with a bill addressing liability | Global CCS Institute

All but lost in the din in the effort to pass a federal budget, a bi-partisan senate bill has re-surfaced that breathes fresh hope for U.S. federal support for carbon capture and sequestration, or CCS.

Introduced on March 31, and authored by Democratic Senator Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, the bill addresses the central question of liability facing new CCS projects.

While carbon dioxide has been used for decades for enhanced recovery in oil bearing rock formations, less is known about how the gas will behave in salt and other geological formations being considered for CCS.

“The liability question is one of the main impediments for the technology to penetrate more widely,” said Salo Zalemyer, an attorney at Bracewell & Giuliani Environmental Strategies Group in Washington who I spoke with about the bill’s prospects.

“And ultimately that technology hasn’t been adequately tested out yet.” Without some liability shield in place, at least for early movers, progress will be slowed, he said.

Senate bill S.699 authorizes the Energy Dept to set up agreements, providing technical and financial support, for up to ten large-scale CCS projects. Qualified projects would inject at least 1 million tons of carbon dioxide from industrial sources.

David Wagner, a lawyer at Environmental Law Review points out, that besides laying out liability terms, the bill also outlines procedures for long-term management of CCS sites:

To pave the way, proposed bill offers liability protection and federal indemnification for the CCS demonstration projects. Under the bill, DOE is authorized to indemnify projects up to $10 billion for personal, property and environmental damages that might be above what is covered by insurance or other financial assurance measures. Upon receiving the closure certificate for the injection site, the site may be turned over to the federal government for long-term site management and ownership. The proposed bill also outlines criteria for site closure certification and includes provisions for siting the demonstration projects on public land. In addition, it would establish and fund a CCS training program for state regulators.

The bill enjoys bi-partisan support from other Senators from big energy states. In addition to Bingaman, DemocratJay Rockefeller (West Virginia) signed on. The Republican co-sponsors are John Barasso (Wyoming) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska).

Prospects for passage are typically murky at this early stage.

This is Bingaman’s second try with CCS: The proposed law is similar to a bill he sponsored in 2009. With bipartisan co-sponsors S. 1013 made it out of committee to the Senate floor, but didn’t make the cut with a broader energy legislative package later that year.

Bingaman’s 2011 do-over version has been referred to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, and if it proceeds would next face a public hearing at an uncertain date in the future.

Officially, S.699 is titled: “A bill to authorize the Secretary of Energy to carry out a program to demonstrate the commercial application of integrated systems for long-term geological storage of carbon dioxide, and for other purposes.”

Check out the full text here, S.699.IS.

via globalccsinstitute.com

Global CCS Institute

Capturing carbon with sawdust | Global CCS Institute

Dead plants may work as well as living plants in mopping up carbon dioxide from admissions, a duo of Spanish scientists has found.

Reporting for the Royal Society of Chemistry on Mar 18, Yaundi Li writes that sawdust is showing promise as a porous solid, able to absorb carbon dioxide in its pores. Other solids, such as zeolites, are already used in this way, but most are hard to fabricate and can absorb only about 3 mmol of carbon dioxide per gram (3mmol CO2/g).

A research group at Spain’s National Institute of Carbon in Oviedo have been able to convert sawdust into a lower cost material that absorbs up to 50% more of the greenhouse gas per volume—potentially the largest ever carbon uptake at room temperature, in fact.

I’ll leave it to Yi to describes the process:

The two step synthesis involves hydrothermal carbonisation of the sawdust, creating a hydrochar, which is then activated using potassium hydroxide. The KOH treatment creates pores in the sawdust structure by oxidation of carbon and carbon gasification from K2CO3 decomposition. These pores are responsible for the material’s uptake capabilities, bestowing it with a capacity as high as 4.8mmol CO2/g. In addition, [the] material has good selectivity for CO2 over N2, fast adsorption rates and can be easily regenerated.

More work must be done in advance of commercialization. But the find is promising given that raw material is plentiful and the fabrication process is “not complex” according to Antonio Fuertes, the lead researcher, as quoted in the article.

Caption: Magnified image of sawdust before (left) and after
(right) being heated and activated showing the pores, via RSC.org.

For the serious carbon scientists I know we have here in the GCCSI community, I waited until the end for the serious technical stuff, so as not to scare off too many layfolk. Here’s the abstract for Sevilla and Fuertes’ study. For more, click here to go to the full journal citation at Energy & Environmental Science.

Sustainable porous carbons have been prepared by chemical activation of hydrothermally carbonized polysaccharides (starch and cellulose) and biomass (sawdust). These materials were investigated as sorbents for CO2 capture. The activation process was carried out under severe (KOH/precursor = 4) or mild (KOH/precursor = 2) activation conditions at different temperatures in the 600–800 °C range. Textural characterization of the porous carbons showed that the samples obtained under mild activating conditions exhibit smaller surface areas and pore sizes than those prepared by employing a greater amount of KOH. However, the mildly activated carbons exhibit a good capacity to store CO2, which is mainly due to the presence of a large number of narrow micropores (<1 nm). A very high CO2 uptake of 4.8 mmol·g-1 (212 mg CO2·g-1) was registered at room temperature (25 °C) for a carbon activated at 600 °C using KOH/precursor = 2. To the best of our knowledge, this result constitutes the largest-ever recorded CO2 uptake at room temperature for any activated carbon. Furthermore, we observedthat these porous carbons have fast CO2 adsorption rates, a good selectivity for CO2–N2 separation and they can be easily regenerated.

via globalccsinstitute.com

Global CCS Institute

Greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. power plants surged by 5.6% in 2010, largest-ever increase in a single year | Global CCS Institute

Amidst increasingly acrimonious political fighting in Washington over the fate of U.S. environmental programs in general, and about climate policy in particular, carbon dioxide emissions from power plants have resumed their upward climb after a recession-related retreat. News of rising emissions is likely to intensify the tug-of-war over federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions.

While official data for overall US emissions has not yet been released for 2010* by the Energy Information Administration (EIA), data from power plant emissions—which account for about 40% of total U.S. emissions—point to a return to upward growth in overall emissions as the economy heats up. With demand for electricity falling, overall emissions contracted by 6% during the recession of 2008 and 2009, bucking a trend of steady 0.4% annual growth since 1990. The retreat temporarily deflated the national debate on climate policy.

Now it looks like emissions are climbing again, in sync with the economic recovery. U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from power plants surged by 5.6%, after declining sharply in 2009. The rise last year is largest in a single year since the EPA began tracking the data 15 years ago, according to a study by the Environmental Integrity Project, a Washington, D.C.-based nonpartisan, nonprofit organization established in March 2002 by former EPA enforcement attorneys to advocate for more effective enforcement of environmental laws.

Reflecting the recovery the economy, growth in emissions mirrors increased demand for power. “Last year’s rise was driven in part by a 3.0% net increase in overall generation for the 12 months ending in November of 2010,” the report noted.

In 2010 carbon dioxide emissions from power plants grew to 2.42 billion metric tons, or gigatonnes, up from 2.30 gigatonnes in 2009, based on data from the EPA’s Clean Air Markets website. Total carbon emissions from power plants were still below the record of 2.57 gigatonnes set in 2007.

Across the U.S., 50 coal-fired power plants accounted for 750 million tons, or megatonnes, of carbon dioxide releases in 2010, nearly one-third of the nation’s total. Four power plants emitted over 20 megatonnes apiece in 2010, two in Georgia, one in Alabama, and one in Texas.

The heaviest emitting states were Texas with 257 million tons, nearly twice the volume of the number two state, Florida, where power plants released 130 million tons of carbon emissions. Rounding out the top-10 states were: Ohio, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Kentucky, Georgia, Alabama, and Missouri.

The resurgence in emissions come amidst sustained opposition to new coal burning facilities, and a shift by utilities to replace older coal plants with natural gas.

Nearly 4.5 gigawatts of new coal-fired electric generation came on line in 2010, the study notes, about half of that in Texas.

But power companies have also announced plans to retire almost 12 gigawatts of coal-fired capacity in coming years, including the January announcement last month that Xcel would close nearly 900 megawatts of coal-fired capacity at four different power stations in Colorado.

* U.S. greenhouse gas data for 2009 was released in draft form on Feb. 15, 2011. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads11/US-GHG-Inventory-2011-Complete_Report.pdf

via globalccsinstitute.com

BusinessWeek

A U.S./EU Dogfight Over Greener Air Travel | BusinessWeek

 

This August, U.S. airlines face their first big deadline to meet European Union rules on emissions linked to global warming. That’s when carriers landing in Europe will have to submit proposals to the EU on how they plan to track such emissions. This is a first step toward tough European “cap-and-trade” laws requiring airlines to either slash greenhouse gases or pay for permits to emit, starting in 2012. U.S. airlines are watching these developments anxiously, in part because they are already struggling with weak travel demand and yo-yo’ing fuel prices.

The Air Transport Assn. (ATA), which represents U.S. carriers, says the plan violates international law, and that the U.S. government is obliged to object. If the EU proceeds on its course, it faces a thicket of lawsuits, predicts Nancy Young, ATA’s vice-president for environmental affairs. “We adamantly oppose their scheme,” she says—adding that having to purchase credits will stifle funding for the very innovations airlines must develop to cut emissions.

Just how much new carbon costs might increase airfares is unclear. One aviation industry study estimates the annual operating costs of airlines landing planes in Europe will rise by billions of dollars if the EU enacts its plan. But green groups tell a different story. They point to an EU analysis that puts the average price increase for a cross-Atlantic round-trip ticket at just $6 to $56 by 2020, depending on the cost of carbon permits. The effect on prices is “within the range of fluctuations travelers are used to,” says Mark Kenber, policy director at the Climate Group in London.

Environmentalists argue that, compared with the auto and electric power sectors, airlines have had it easy when it comes to efficiency targets and carbon policies. Their special status dates back to 1997, when many countries enacted the Kyoto Accord, a global pact to cut greenhouse gas output. Kyoto didn’t set specific reduction targets for airlines or marine shippers, though both groups were asked to come up with their own plans. That’s because plane flights accounted for just 2% of total industrial emissions at the time, and because of murky jurisdiction issues when planes or ships cross national borders.

U.S. carriers have boosted their fuel efficiency by 31% since 1990 and have promised an equal gain by 2035. Airplane and engine builders, from Boeing (BA) and Airbus to General Electric (GE) and Rolls-Royce (RYCEY), are researching lightweight materials and plant-based jet fuel. Airlines are seeking streamlined flight paths to avoid wasting fuel. Still, because air traffic is growing so fast globally, the sector’s emissions are on track to more than double by 2035.

Outside the U.S., key carriers such as Air France-KLM (AFLYY), British Airways (BAIRY), Cathay Pacific (CPCAY), and Virgin Atlantic are supporting just the sort of carbon caps the ATA opposes. They’re making the case in the runup to the Copenhagen Accord, a process to replace Kyoto that will move into high gear in December. On May 24 the International Aviation Transportation Assn.—a global trade group—for the first time agreed to reduce emissions.

U.S. carriers, which consume 35% of the world’s jet fuel, may not be able to opt out of carbon limits much longer. The Waxman-Markey climate bill moving through Congress includes aviation in its gas reduction goals. “The writing’s on the wall,” says Jake Schmidt, international climate policy director at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Aston is Energy & Environment editor for BusinessWeek in New York.