As U.S. Election Nears, Polling Shows 82 Percent of Voters Support 100 Percent Clean Energy Transition
13h
Energy
The majority of voters support a transition to renewable energy, including wind and solar. paedwards / Needpix
By Jessica Corbett
With an estimated 66 million ballots already cast and only a week to go until Election Day, new polling released Tuesday shows the vast majority of U.S. voters believe the nation should be prioritizing a transition to 100% clean energy and support legislation to decarbonize the economy over the next few decades.
<p><br/></p>
<p>Climate Nexus, the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, and the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication <a href="https://climatenexus.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Public-Gas-Poll-Climate-Change.pdf" target="_blank">surveyed</a> over 2,000 registered voters online in late September and early October. The poll's margin of error is plus/minus 2.2% at the 95% confidence level.</p><p>Pollsters found that 82% of voters somewhat (33%) or strongly (49%) agree that "the primary goal of U.S. energy policy should be achieving 100% clean energy."</p><p>Respondents were also asked to weigh in on legislation introduced in Congress "that would set the goal of achieving a 100% clean economy (eliminating fossil fuel emissions from the transportation, electricity, buildings, industry, and agricultural sectors) in the United States by the year 2050."</p><p>Over seven in 10 said they somewhat (31%) or strongly (40%) support such legislation—the same total percentage who said they somewhat (32%) or strongly (39%) support "requiring electric utility companies in the United States to generate 100% of their electricity from renewable sources, like wind and solar, by the year 2035."</p><p>"The conventional wisdom has clearly changed," Anthony Leiserowitz, director of Yale's program, said in a statement about the survey results Tuesday. "Voters strongly support a national transition from dependence on coal, oil, and gas to renewable sources like solar and wind."</p><p>The poll shows majorities of voters believe that transitioning to a 100% clean energy economy would positively impact jobs and economic growth, energy bills, rural and farming communities in their state, and communities of color in their state.</p><p>A majority of respondents (62%) also said they would be more likely to or would only vote for a candidate who supports "providing a multi-trillion-dollar federal economic stimulus that prioritizes investments in clean energy infrastructure."</p>
<div id="5206f" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="584d1641628f692ff103aee7ed74b45e"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1321080152328208384" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Biden should get "uncontrolled climate change would cost $486 trillion" tattooed on his forehead imo https://t.co/nTbVdHa9gD</div> — Emily Atkin (@Emily Atkin)<a href="https://twitter.com/emorwee/statuses/1321080152328208384">1603805027.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>While support for hydraulic fracturing to increase production of natural gas and oil in the U.S. was split, 61% said there needs to be more regulation of fracking and 80% somewhat or strongly support requiring energy companies to install technology to reduce leaks of the potent greenhouse gas methane.</p><p>When presented with two statements about natural gas, the majority of voters reiterated that they believe the U.S. should reduce the use of fossil fuels :</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDYyNDgxNy9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0MjgyNTE5Nn0.IzDbXLrMILJe7QvUmc11Po392wuun8MJkbvuzQMuUwA/img.png?width=980" id="85ad7" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="4a76b08bea09fe2057707ebc45dbf566" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
<p>"The natural gas industry has spent decades convincing people their product is clean energy, and voters have believed them," said Edward Maibach, director of George Mason's center. "But we now know alarming spikes of methane emissions—caused in part by gas production—are making global warming worse. The public is beginning to catch on to the threat."</p><p>Nearly three-quarters (74%) of the poll's respondents somewhat or strongly support creating a jobs program for currently unemployed fossil fuel workers to safely close down tens of thousands of abandoned oil and gas wells that cause water and methane pollution; the same total percentage believe dirty energy companies should be required to cover at least some of the costs.</p><p>The new survey echoes polling results released last week following the <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/10/22/watch-joe-biden-and-donald-trump-face-final-presidential-debate-election-day" target="_blank">final debate</a> between President Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden. After Biden said that he would phase out the U.S. oil industry in a shift toward clean energy, a Morning Consult/Politico poll <a href="https://assets.morningconsult.com/wp-uploads/2020/10/23190208/2010136_crosstabs_POLITICO_RVs_v1.pdf" target="_blank">found</a> that 57% of voters support a "concerted oil-to-renewables transition," with even greater support among Democrats.</p>
<p>Referencing those findings on Tuesday, <em>Our Daily Planet</em> <a href="https://www.ourdailyplanet.com/story/post-debate-poll-finds-57-of-registered-voters-support-phasing-out-fossil-fuels/?utm_source=Our+Daily+Planet+Subscribers&utm_campaign=e1bd284529-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_10_27_02_10&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_15a39131a0-e1bd284529-62405541&mc_cid=e1bd284529&mc_eid=9b209ce257" target="_blank">detailed</a> "why this matters":</p><blockquote>As Election Day draws near, new polls by Pew Research found that <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/10/06/how-important-is-climate-change-to-voters-in-the-2020-election/" target="_blank">68% of registered voters</a> consider climate change to be a "very important" or "somewhat" important issue. Many experts (and even <a href="https://www.ourdailyplanet.com/story/trumps-losing-record-on-coal/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">some coal workers)</a> agree that investing in renewable energy will <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/21/climate/green-new-deal-questions-answers.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">help create jobs and boost the economy</a>. Renewable energy is <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/05/us/politics/trump-coal-industry.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">more economically viable than ever</a> and voters support it. Moderate Dems may have been nervous that <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/10/23/energy-202-biden-draws-gop-attacks-with-call-transition-oil/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Republicans will try to skewer</a> Biden over this remark, but these polls suggest that might not work. The question will be whether it flips any voters in a crucial swing state. Only time will tell.<br></blockquote><p>In response to the fossil fuel discussion at last week's debate, 350 Action North America director Tamara Toles O'Laughlin <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2020/10/23/350-action-responds-final-presidential-debate" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">said</a> in a statement that climate is a top issue for voters and "Biden demonstrated the capacity for leadership our country needs and deserves, including tackling the climate crisis at scale." </p><p>"While we may not always agree with his approach, we can see his willingness to listen, proven by a commitment to ending federal subsidies to the oil industry, and we look forward to finding solutions and common ground," she added. "On the other hand, we have Donald Trump, unhinged and desperate, flailing about, spewing a combination of lies and hateful rhetoric at every turn."</p><p>350 Action is among the climate advocacy groups that have <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/09/24/clarion-call-all-progressive-environmentalists-defeat-trumps-planetary-destruction" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">endorsed</a> Biden. The Democrat has also won the backing of various climate scientists as well as the first-ever endorsement from the editors at <em>Scientific American</em>, who <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/09/15/matter-life-and-death-after-175-years-scientific-american-backs-biden-magazines" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">warned</a> last month that "the 2020 election is literally a matter of life and death."</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/10/27/election-nears-polling-shows-82-voters-believe-100-clean-power-should-be-primary-us?cd-origin=rss" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>.</em></p>
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Researchers have determined that U.S. climate goals will not be met without federal leadership. Another Believer / Wikimedia Commons / CC by 3.0
After President Trump announced that the U.S. will exit the Paris Climate Agreement, many U.S. states, cities, and businesses stepped up with their own commitments to cut carbon pollution.
<iframe style="border: none" src="//html5-player.libsyn.com/embed/episode/id/16201685/height/45/theme/standard/thumbnail/yes/direction/backward/" height="45" width="100%" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen oallowfullscreen msallowfullscreen></iframe>
<p>Carla Frisch is with the Rocky Mountain Institute, a non-profit think tank. She's part of a team that's been crunching numbers to figure out what's happening on the ground in the United States on climate.</p><p>"And figure out what's the impact of those actions," she says. "So what does it really add up to?"</p><p>The researchers estimate that in 10 years, if the states, cities, and businesses fully implement their plans, U.S. greenhouse gas emissions will be 25% less than they were in 2005.</p>
<p>That's significant. But to stay in line with the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement, the U.S. needs to cut emissions by almost twice that.</p><p>The researchers found that making those larger cuts in carbon pollution is still feasible, but Frisch says it will require a nationwide commitment to transitioning to renewable energy and electric vehicles, among other strategies.</p><p>"We have to have federal leadership and we have to have leadership from states and cities and businesses, so this is not an either/or situation," Frisch says. "But together we can put the U.S. on track to drastic emissions reductions."</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2020/10/u-s-cant-meet-paris-climate-goals-without-federal-leadership-researcher-says/" target="_blank">Yale Climate Connections</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- World Leaders Agree to Historic Global Climate Agreement ... ›
- 60 Countries Representing 48% of Emissions Have Officially Joined ... ›
- Trump vs. the Paris Climate Agreement - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Report Reveals Auto Giants Knew About Car Emissions and Climate Change — in the 1960s
27 October
Climate
Scientists at General Motors and Ford Motor Co. knew of the connection between car emissions and climate change as early as the 1960s. J/J Images - J Morrill Photo / Getty Images
By Jessica Corbett
"Another cog in the climate denial machine rattles loose."
So said Harvard University climate denial researcher Geoffrey Supran in response to a groundbreaking investigative report published Monday by E&E News revealing that scientists at auto giants General Motors and Ford Motor Co. "knew as early as the 1960s that car emissions caused climate change."
<p>Those discoveries, notes <em>E&E News </em>reporter Maxine Joselow, "preceded decades of political lobbying by the two car giants that undermined global attempts to reduce emissions while stalling U.S. efforts to make vehicles cleaner."</p><p>Supran is co-director of the Climate Social Science Network and a research associate in Harvard's Department of the History of Science. He investigates the history of climate politics—particularly the communications, denial, and delay tactics of fossil fuel interests—alongside professor Naomi Oreskes, who also highlighted the revelations.</p>
<div id="71d13" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8da145d0ce5495a0af282306945503af"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1320728404078043136" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">"There was never any doubt for a minute", former GM scientist Ruth Reck says of her pioneering climate science rese… https://t.co/DaYzkpPG7q</div> — Geoffrey Supran (@Geoffrey Supran)<a href="https://twitter.com/GeoffreySupran/statuses/1320728404078043136">1603721164.0</a></blockquote></div>
<div id="94cd8" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="1812eaef4972b9dc93486f1643265be2"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1320737159154991104" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">More details about what corporate America knew about #climatechange in the 1960s and 70s... and also how they funde… https://t.co/lSCrsvA44P</div> — NaomiOreskes (@NaomiOreskes)<a href="https://twitter.com/NaomiOreskes/statuses/1320737159154991104">1603723251.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>"From fossil fuel companies, to car manufacturers and utilities, we know it's not only Exxon that knew about the climate crisis decades ago," <span style="background-color: initial;">Lindsay Meiman of 350.org told <em>Common Dreams </em>on Monday, referencing previous <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/content/Exxon-The-Road-Not-Taken" target="_blank">reporting</a> on climate research conducted and concealed for decades by oil giant ExxonMobil.</span></p><p>"Now, with climate disasters at our doorsteps, it's Black, Indigenous, and communities of color who bear the costs of these lies," Meiman added. "The silver lining: we know exactly who is responsible for the climate crisis. It's up to all of us to hold polluters and billionaires accountable for their deception and destruction."</p><p>Joselow's exposé is based on nearly five months of reporting as well as documents on GM from the General Motors Heritage Center and Wayne State University in Detroit, documents on Ford's climate research unearthed by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), and additional materials on both manufacturers provided by the Climate Investigations Centers.</p><p>According to <em>E&E News</em>:</p><blockquote>Researchers at both automakers found strong evidence in the 1960s and '70s that human activity was warming the Earth. A primary culprit was the burning of fossil fuels, which released large quantities of heat-trapping gases such as carbon dioxide that could trigger melting of polar ice sheets and other dire consequences.<br><br>A GM scientist presented her findings to at least three high-level executives at the company, including a former chairman and CEO. It's unclear whether similar warnings reached the top brass at Ford.<br><br>But in the following decades, both manufacturers largely failed to act on the knowledge that their products were heating the planet. Instead of shifting their business models away from fossil fuels, the companies invested heavily in gas-guzzling trucks and SUVs. At the same time, the two carmakers privately donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to groups that cast doubt on the scientific consensus on global warming.</blockquote>
<p>While spokespeople for each company responded to the revelations by recognizing the reality of human-caused climate change and detailing to <em>E&E News</em> their respective efforts to reduce emissions by increasing production of electric vehicles, climate action advocates were outraged.</p><p>"It's jaw-dropping," Jamie Henn, director of Fossil Free Media and co-founder of 350.org, told <em>Common Dreams</em>. "GM and Ford not only knew their cars were fueling the climate crisis, but anytime a political effort came together to address the emergency, they helped steer it into a ditch. Think of the millions of premature deaths from air pollution that could have been prevented if the world's largest automakers had committed to go all-electric back in the 1970s."</p><p>"This reporting drags the automakers back into the center of the climate fight," added Henn. "It puts immense pressure on them to support any new climate legislation or regulations, especially around electric vehicles and auto emissions. I think it also raises the question of whether GM and Ford should be included in future climate liability lawsuits."</p><p>Henn explained that unlike the major fossil fuel companies, who he called "irredeemable polluters," big auto companies like Ford and GM now have a choice to make. "They can get swept away with the likes of Exxon and Chevron or embrace a clean energy future by going all-electric and supporting mass transit," he said. "Activists will be working hard to make sure it's the latter."</p>
<div id="bb72f" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="161d579460176537e601275315796462"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1320759585209262082" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Just like #ExxonKnew, General Motors + Ford have known for decades how they contribute to the climate crisis. Inst… https://t.co/noRVIUGiBt</div> — 350 dot org (@350 dot org)<a href="https://twitter.com/350/statuses/1320759585209262082">1603728598.0</a></blockquote></div>
<div id="3c362" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="928139734c26121a3902b39abb34b69d"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1320739545529393152" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">A critical, and damning, look at how #FordandGMKnew that vehicle emissions were driving climate change and they lob… https://t.co/nXJyEZQd4W</div> — Allison Considine (@Allison Considine)<a href="https://twitter.com/AD_Considine/statuses/1320739545529393152">1603723820.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>In a statement, CIEL president Carroll Muffett said the investigation "demonstrates auto companies were aware of emerging climate science and on notice of potential climate risks decades earlier than was previously recognized." The group also detailed key takeaways from the reporting:</p><ul><li>In a 1956 letter, Ford scientist Gilbert Plass rejected the idea that excess warming from burning fossil fuels poses "little danger to the Earth," observing that burning known reserves of fossil fuels would raise global temperatures by 7⁰C.</li><li>In multiple articles written while at Ford, Plass detailed the science linking fossil fuel combustion to the planetary "greenhouse effect.""</li><li>Ford continued an active program of climate-relevant research into the 1970s and beyond.</li><li>General Motors employed its own climate scientists from the early 1970s, with a research focus on establishing competing theories of global warming.</li><li>In testimony to Congress in 1967, a Ford executive argued against federal investments in electric vehicle research, arguing that industry was actively developing EV technology and would be ready to bring electric cars to market within a decade.</li></ul><p>"Like the oil industry, leading car companies had early notice that the carbon dioxide emitted by their automotive products posed potential risks for the climate at a planetary scale," said Muffett. "Ford and GM had both the opportunity and the responsibility to design products that would reduce emissions, and warn the public of risks that couldn't be eliminated. Instead, they spent decades denying climate science and obstructing climate action."</p><p>In other words, Muffett added, "like the major oil and gas companies, leading car companies took a calculated risk that they—and the world—could delay action to address the drivers of climate change. We are all paying for that gamble."</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/10/26/gm-and-ford-knew-too-reporting-reveals-auto-giants-recognized-looming-climate-crisis" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- 12 Eastern States Aim to Curb Tailpipe Emissions - EcoWatch ›
- How Norway Convinced Drivers to Switch to Electric Cars - EcoWatch ›
- Stop Idling Your Car And Cut Carbon Dioxide Emissions - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Support Ecowatch
Japan's Prime Minister Suga Yoshihide poses for a portrait on September 14, 2020 in Tokyo, Japan, after being elected Liberal Democratic Party President. Nicolas Datiche / Pool / Getty Images
Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga announced that Japan will become country carbon neutral by 2050, Bloomberg reported.
<p>As the world's third-largest economy, this will require a "fundamental shift" away from coal, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/japan-climate-emissions/2020/10/26/b6ea2b5a-1752-11eb-8bda-814ca56e138b_story.html" target="_blank">The Washington Post</a> reported.</p><p>Suga replaced former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe last month, after he resigned due to health issues. This was Suga's first parliament policy speech since taking office. </p><p>He announced, "The Suga administration will seek to make a virtuous cycle between the economy and the environment," Bloomberg reported. "We will put all possible efforts into creating a green society."</p>
<p>Additionally, "Responding to climate change is no longer a constraint on economic growth," <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/japan-climate-emissions/2020/10/26/b6ea2b5a-1752-11eb-8bda-814ca56e138b_story.html" target="_blank">The Washington Post</a> reported from Suga's speech. "We need to change our thinking to the view that taking assertive measures against climate change will lead to changes in industrial structure and the economy that will bring about great growth."</p><p>However, Suga did not offer any details about how carbon neutrality will be achieved, although he referenced carbon recycling and next generation solar cells. The Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Hiroshi Kajiyama told reporters that more details will be presented in a report later this year, according to Bloomberg, including wind energy, hydrogen and improved battery storage.<br></p><p>The move follows commitments from other major economies responsible for an outsized share of greenhouse gas emissions, including the world's largest emitter, China.<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/china-climate-action-2060-2648140974.html?rebelltitem=5" target="_self"> China has set a 2060 target </a>for carbon neutrality. Japan is the world's fifth-largest contributor of greenhouse gas emissions, according to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/26/business/japans-carbon-neutrality.html" target="_blank">The New York Times</a>.</p>
<p>Japanese policy experts believe a number of factors drove the announcement, including mounting pressure from inside Japan to tackle the climate crisis, plus international competition. It would be "somewhat embarrassing for Japan to have a net zero emissions timeline later than China," Takeshi Kuramochi, a climate policy researcher at the NewClimate Institute told The New York Times.</p><p>Sam Annesley, executive director of Greenpeace Japan, added that sustainability should also include a move away from nuclear power. "Nearly 10 years on from Fukushima we are still facing the disastrous consequences of nuclear power, and this radioactive legacy has made clear that nuclear energy has no place in a green, sustainable future," <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/26/japan-will-become-carbon-neutral-by-2050-pm-pledges" target="_blank">The Guardian</a> reported.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Student Climate Protesters Urge Universities to Go Carbon Neutral ... ›
- This Country Is Already Carbon Neutral and Now Plans to Go 100 ... ›
- Climate Action Must Go Deeper Than 'Carbon Neutral' - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
Trump Administration Plans Seismic Testing for Oil in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge This Winter
26 October
Politics
A caribou in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Danielle Brigida / CC BY 2.0
The Trump administration released on Friday its plan to start oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) this winter, as The Hill reported.
<p>The <a href="https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2003258/510" target="_blank">plan</a> was put forth by the Kaktovik Iñupiat Corporation and released by the Bureau of Land Management. The plan calls for the start of <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/seismic-airgun-blasting">seismic testing</a> on millions of acres, spanning an 847.8 square mile area, on the east side of the refuge in an area where polar bears and other <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife">wildlife</a> reside. The seismic testing will allow the Kaktovik Iñupiat Corporation to detect the presence of oil in the area.</p><p>Seismic testing works in a way that is similar to ultrasound technology. It generates acoustic waves deep underground that produce a picture that can pinpoint oil deposits, according to The Hill.</p>
<p>The Bureau of Land Management said it would allow for 14 days of public comment before deciding if it should issue a permit, according to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/24/climate/anwr-seismic-tests-arctic-refuge.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">The New York Times</a>.</p><p>Environmental activists have argued that the short timeframe means it is impossible to conduct an adequate environmental review of the proposal. The plan involves using heavy trucks fanned out across the area to create a grid pattern. It also requires a crew of 180 workers who would need ample supplies and mobile living quarters, according to The New York Times.</p><p>The National Wildlife Federation argues that the rushed comment period in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic ensures that public opposition will not be heard adequately.</p>
<p>"This is a desperate attempt to jam through a plan that could kill denning polar bears, imperil other wildlife, threaten the Gwich'in people, and cause long-lasting damage to the Arctic," said Tracy Stone-Manning, associate vice president for public lands at the National Wildlife Federation, in a <a href="https://www.nwf.org/Latest-News/Press-Releases/2020/10-23-20-Arctic-Seismic-Testing" target="_blank">statement</a>. "By rushing this plan through while ordinary Americans are focused on the COVID-19 pandemic and their own health and safety, it's clear this administration wants to cut the public out of public lands in order to advance its dangerously myopic and misguided energy agenda."</p><p>The company intending to conduct the seismic test said it will exercise caution should it encounter any wildlife during its exploration. Environmentalists countered that it's not the interactions that worry them as much as the permanent alterations to the Arctic tundra that could upset the delicate balance of the ecosystem that polar bears and other animals depend on.</p>
<p>"Allowing huge thumper trucks and camps onto sacred lands where they leave deep and lasting wounds is a threat to my people, the animals, our food, and our way of life," said Bernadette Demientieff, the executive director of the Gwich'in Steering Committee, in a statement, as The Hill reported. "We have raised concerns repeatedly about this administration rushing the process and shortcutting our review."</p><p>The Wilderness Society also sees the plan as a politically motivated move that will silence the public.</p><p>"The submission of this application and BLM's choice to act on it so close to the election shows how desperate the administration is to turn over one of the nation's most sensitive landscapes to the oil industry," said Lois Epstein, director of the Arctic program for the Wilderness Society, in a statement, as The New York Times reported. "The federal government is recklessly rushing and irresponsibly denying the public adequate time to assess the application and submit comments."</p><p>The New York Times also noted that the proposal calls for the work to be carried out by Houston-based SAExploration, which declared bankruptcy, and was accused of accounting fraud earlier this month by the Securities and Exchange Commission.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Exposed: Chevron's Secretive Drilling Site in the Arctic National ... ›
- Trump Admin Pushes Final Drilling Plan for Arctic National Wildlife ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Purdue researcher Joseph Peoples uses an infrared camera to compare the cooling performance of white paint samples on a rooftop. Purdue University photo / Jared Pike
By Kayla Wiles
What if paint could cool off a building enough to not need air conditioning?
<p>Purdue University engineers have created white paint that can keep surfaces up to 18 degrees Fahrenheit cooler than their ambient surroundings – almost like a refrigerator does, but without consuming energy.</p><p>According to the researchers, the paint would replace the need for air conditioning by absorbing nearly no solar energy and sending heat away from the building. Without the building heating up, air conditioning wouldn't have to kick on.</p><p>"It's very counterintuitive for a surface in direct sunlight to be cooler than the temperature your local weather station reports for that area, but we've shown this to be possible," said <a href="https://engineering.purdue.edu/ME/People/ptProfile?resource_id=29343" target="_blank">Xiulin Ruan</a>, a Purdue professor of <a href="https://engineering.purdue.edu/ME" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">mechanical engineering</a>.</p>
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="835862ffe8b025c2f0ae633c999ecb08"><iframe lazy-loadable="true" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/caFzYvYAUo4?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>The paint would not only send heat away from a surface, but also away from Earth into deep space where heat travels indefinitely at the speed of light. This way, heat doesn't get trapped within the atmosphere and contribute to global warming. A video about this project is available on <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caFzYvYAUo4&feature=youtu.be" target="_blank">YouTube</a>.</p><p>"We're not moving heat from the surface to the atmosphere. We're just dumping it all out into the universe, which is an infinite heat sink," said Xiangyu Li, a postdoctoral researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who worked on this project as a Ph.D. student in Ruan's lab.</p><p>Earth's surface would actually get cooler with this technology if the paint were applied to a variety of surfaces including roads, rooftops and cars all over the world, the researchers said.</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU4OTQ2My9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxMDU3NDQwMn0.xNNLbN-QJDjH_tm0v2mGlBVP3w2F0UrMGiUhBtkpdQY/img.png?width=980" id="b3aaa" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3179d1bb2c45edb948b3ca392a64bb31" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
An infrared camera image shows that white radiative cooling paint developed by Purdue University researchers (left, purple) can stay cooler in direct sunlight compared with commercial white paint. Purdue University image / Joseph Peoples
<p>In a paper published Wednesday (Oct. 21) in the journal <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrp.2020.100221" target="_blank">Cell Reports Physical Science</a>, the researchers show that compared with commercial white paint, the paint that they developed can maintain a lower temperature under direct sunlight and reflect more ultraviolet rays.</p><p>Their proof is infrared camera images taken of the two paints in rooftop experiments.</p><p>"An infrared camera gives you a temperature reading just like a thermometer would to judge if someone has a fever. These readings confirmed that our paint has a lower temperature than both its surroundings and the commercial counterpart," Ruan said.</p><p>Commercial "heat rejecting paints" currently on the market reflect only 80%-90% of sunlight and cannot achieve temperatures below their surroundings. The white paint that Purdue researchers created reflects 95.5% sunlight and efficiently radiates infrared heat. </p><p>Developing this paint formulation wasn't easy. The six-year study builds on attempts going back to the 1970s to develop radiative cooling paint as a feasible alternative to traditional air conditioners.</p><p>The researchers considered over 100 different material combinations, narrowed them down to 10 and tested about 50 different formulations for each material. They landed on a formulation made of calcium carbonate, an earth-abundant compound commonly found in rocks and seashells.</p><p>This compound, used as the paint's filler, allowed the formulation to behave essentially the same as commercial white paint but with greatly enhanced cooling properties. These calcium carbonate fillers absorb almost no ultraviolet rays due to a so-called large "band gap," a result of their atomic structure. They also have a high concentration of particles that are different sizes, allowing the paint to scatter a wider range of wavelengths.</p>
<p>According to the researchers' cost estimates, this paint would be both cheaper to produce than its commercial alternative and could save about a dollar per day that would have been spent on air conditioning for a one-story house of approximately 1,076 square feet.</p><p>"Your air conditioning kicks on mainly due to sunlight heating up the roof and walls and making the inside of your house feel warmer. This paint is basically creating free air conditioning by reflecting that sunlight and offsetting those heat gains from inside your house," said Joseph Peoples, a Purdue Ph.D. student in mechanical engineering and a co-author of the work.</p><p>Cutting down on air conditioning also means using less energy produced by coal, which could lead to reduced carbon dioxide emissions, Peoples said. The researchers have further studies underway to evaluate these benefits.</p><p>The researchers are working on developing other paint colors that could have cooling benefits. The team filed an international <a href="https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2020072818&tab=PCTBIBLIO" target="_blank">patent application</a> on this paint formulation through the <a href="https://www.prf.org/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Purdue Research Foundation</a> <a href="https://www.prf.org/otc/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Office of Technology Commercialization</a>. For further discussion on this intellectual property, please contact D.H.R. Sarma at <a href="mailto:dhrsarma@prf.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">dhrsarma@prf.org</a> and reference track code 2020-ABDE-68815.</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/releases/2020/Q4/this-white-paint-could-reduce-the-need-for-air-conditioning-by-keeping-surfaces-cooler-than-surroundings.html" target="_blank">Purdue University</a>.</em><br/></p>From Your Site Articles
- Paint: The Big Source of Ocean Microplastics You Didn't Know About ›
- Researchers Develop Solar Paint That Turns Water Vapor Into ... ›
- Can Reflective Roofing Save Energy and Help the Environment? ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Coast Guard members work to clean an oil spill impacting Delaware beaches. U.S. Coast Guard District 5
Environmental officials and members of the U.S. Coast Guard are racing to clean up a mysterious oil spill that has spread to 11 miles of Delaware coastline.
<p>When the spill was first discovered Monday, it covered only three-fourths of a mile along Broadkill Beach, <a href="https://eu.delmarvanow.com/story/news/2020/10/21/delaware-bay-oil-spill-affects-wider-area-day-three/6004537002/" target="_blank">Delaware Now reported</a>. However, the tides have extended the reach of the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/oil" target="_self">oil</a> every day, spreading it along seven miles of Delaware Bay coastline by Tuesday and 11 by Wednesday.</p><p>"We are focused on cleanup operations and getting the oil off our beaches and out of our coastal communities as quickly as possible," Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) Secretary Shawn Garvin said in a <a href="https://news.delaware.gov/2020/10/21/unified-command-incident-command-post-established-for-oil-cleanup-efforts-on-delaware-shore/" target="_blank">Wednesday press release</a>. "Expediency is key. We want to capture as much of the oil as we can before it disperses further and causes more environmental harm."</p>
<p>DNREC is working under unified command with the U.S. Coast Guard to clean the spill, which now extends from Fowler Beach, which borders the Prime Hook National Wildlife Refuge, to Cape Henlopen State Park. It was estimated initially that more than 215 gallons of oil had spilled, but the actual amount may be larger, <a href="https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2020/10/22/oil-spill-off-delaware-beach-appears-to-be-spreading/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">CBS Philly reported</a>.</p>
<div id="d251e" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="7e03c3596cb3f2b3cf90bb8da0df1a82"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1318672504018317314" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">The oil line from the spill now extends approximately 11 miles from Fowler Beach bordering Prime Hook National Wild… https://t.co/c4TfENSvGw</div> — DNREC (@DNREC)<a href="https://twitter.com/YourDNREC/statuses/1318672504018317314">1603230999.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>As of Tuesday, recovery efforts had removed around two tons of oily sand and debris, according to DNREC. There are currently more than 75 contractors, DNREC workers and Coast Guard members responding to the spill.</p>
<div id="2bfe2" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="96675d12f78afda6e8606f0fb7d1fe93"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1319010494993358849" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Approximately two tons of oily sand and debris was removed from the affected areas as of 7 p.m., Tuesday. https://t.co/bdCxr8ZNda</div> — DNREC (@DNREC)<a href="https://twitter.com/YourDNREC/statuses/1319010494993358849">1603311582.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>The oil has already impacted some <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife" target="_self">wildlife</a>. <a href="https://tristatebird.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Tri-State Bird Rescue and Research</a> had responded to reports of 24 seagulls covered in oil as of Wednesday.<br></p><p>The spill has mostly taken the form of oil patties that range in size from a quarter to a manhole cover, the <a href="https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDHSCG/bulletins/2a6cad4?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=twitter&utm_term=01335c08-da44-4982-a064-9551c1d7e263&utm_content=&utm_campaign=" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Coast Guard said Tuesday</a>.</p><p>Cape Henlopen park watch volunteer Julie McCall got a first-hand view of the strange black blobs when she was conducting a bird count on Beach Plum Island Monday.</p><p>"On the way back, after the tide had gone out quite a bit, I started seeing these bigger patches, and I thought, 'That looks like oil,'" McCall <a href="https://whyy.org/articles/seven-mile-oil-spill-fouls-delaware-coastline/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">told WHYY</a>. "Some were bigger than my foot."</p><p>The Coast Guard said it would use the blobs to try and determine the source of the spill.</p><p>"Working with our partners at DNREC and state agencies, we will continue to monitor the future potential to the Broadkill Beach area, continue cleanup operations and conduct an investigation to try and determine the source," Capt. Jonathan Theel, the commanding officer of Sector Delaware Bay, said in a press release.</p><p>However, officials think the oil is probably heavy fuel oil that leaked from a vessel, WHYY reported.</p><p>McCall said she was worried about how the oil would impact people and animals.</p><p>"It's very scary," she told WHYY. "Of course, we're always concerned about the marine animals, and any kind of toxic material in the water. I'm also concerned about <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/birds" target="_self">birds</a>, any kind of wildlife. A lot of people fish at Beach Plum Island and people walk their dogs and there are kids on the beach. So I'm concerned about exposure to people and animals."</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Trans Mountain Pipeline Spills up to 50,000 Gallons of Oil on ... ›
- Citgo Must Pay $143M for a Delaware River Oil Spill, Supreme ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
What happened to all that plastic you've put in the recycling bin over the years? Halfpoint / Getty Images
By Dr. Kate Raynes-Goldie
Of all the plastic we've ever produced, only 9% has been recycled. So what happened to all that plastic you've put in the recycling bin over the years?
<p>Hands up if you grew up thinking that recycling plastic waste is key to saving the environment.</p><p>It turns out that for decades <a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/09/11/897692090/how-big-oil-misled-the-public-into-believing-plastic-would-be-recycled" target="_blank">the recyclability of plastics was grossly oversold</a> by the plastics industry.</p><p>The creation of this recycling "myth" is why, despite 30 years of being diligent recyclers, we have things like the <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/great-pacific-garbage-patch/" target="_blank">Great Pacific Garbage Patch</a>.</p><blockquote>In fact, we've only recycled 9% of <em>all</em> the plastics we've ever produced. And, our use of plastics is still increasing every year.</blockquote><p>The reality of the situation is that recycling plastics is actually really hard and expensive.</p>
Triangle of Mistruths
<p>The myth created around plastic recycling has been one of simplicity. We look for the familiar triangle arrows, then pop the waste in the recycling bin so it can be reused.</p><p>But the true purpose of those triangles has been misunderstood by the general public ever since their invention in the 1980s.</p><p>These triangles were actually created by the plastics industry and, according to a report provided to them in July 1993, <a href="https://www.npr.org/transcripts/912150085" target="_blank">were creating "unrealistic expectations"</a> about what could be recycled. But they decided to keep using the codes.</p><p>Which is why many people still believe that these triangular symbols (also known as a <a href="https://sustainablepackaging.org/101-resin-identification-codes/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">resin identifier code</a> or RIC) means something is recyclable.</p><p>But according to the American Society for Testing and Materials International (ASTM) – which controls the RIC system – the numbered triangles "<a href="https://www.astm.org/Standards/D7611.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">are not recycle codes</a>." In fact, they weren't created for the general public at all. They were made for the post-consumer plastic industry.</p><p>In other words, the symbols make it easier to sort the different types of plastics, some of which cannot be recycled – <a href="https://www.ecobin.com.au/understand-recycling-codes/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">depending on the recycling facility</a>.</p><p>"Unfortunately, just placing your plastic into the recycling bin doesn't mean it will get recycled," says Lara Camilla Pinho. She is an architect and lecturer at the UWA School of Design who is researching novel uses of plastic waste.</p><p>"The recycling system is complicated and often dictated by market demand. Not all plastic is recyclable. We cannot recycle plastic bags or straws for example."</p>Behind the Scenes
<p>So, what makes recycling plastics so difficult?</p><p>"Essentially, there are two types of plastics – thermoplastics and thermosets. While thermoplastics can be re-melted and re-molded, thermosets contain cross-linked polymers that cannot be separated meaning they cannot be recycled," says Lara.</p><p>"Even thermoplastics have a limit to the amount of times we can recycle them, as each time they are recycled they downgrade in quality."</p><p>Even when plastics are recyclable, it is <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/13/war-on-plastic-waste-faces-setback-as-cost-of-recycled-material-soars" target="_blank">often more costly</a> than simply making new plastics.</p>Sugar, Seaweed and Mushrooms
<p>If the conventional recycling system isn't working, what else can we do with all the plastic we've created?</p><p>Lara is looking for ways to add value to recycled plastics such as using it in the design and development of architectural products. She hopes to use these architectural products to help underserved communities that are disproportionately affected by plastic waste.</p><p>In addition to recycling, we also need to find ways to reduce our use of virgin petroleum-based plastics.</p><p>Bioplastic is one such product that has been getting a lot of hype over the last few years. And although they're better than petroleum-based plastics, bioplastics also come with their own <a href="https://phys.org/news/2017-12-truth-bioplastics.html" target="_blank">set of challenges</a>.</p><p>"There are already a lot of bio-based alternatives to plastic, such as bagasse – a byproduct of sugar cane processing," says Lara.</p><p><a href="https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/the-mycelium-revolution-is-upon-us/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Mycelium</a>, a type of fungi we most often associate with mushrooms, are also providing an interesting plastic alternative.</p><p>"In the field of architecture, mycelium is starting to be used as an alternative to plastic insulation, but also as compostable packaging and bricks," says Lara.</p><p>"The bricks take around five days to make and are strong, durable, water resistant and compostable at the end of their use."</p><p><a href="https://www.arup.com/news-and-events/hyfi-reinvents-the-brick" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Hy-Fi Tower</a>, created by <a href="http://www.thelivingnewyork.com/living_about.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">The Living</a>, is an example of a building made from these bricks.</p><p>And finally, there's seaweed.</p><p>"[Seaweed is] cheap and can reproduce itself quickly without fertilizers. In architecture, there is use for seaweed as an alternative to plastic insulation but also as cladding," says Lara.</p>More Money, More Problems
<p>While all these alternatives are great, the main cause of our plastic dilemma is not scientific or technological, but economic.</p><p>As long as it remains <a href="https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask-an-engineer/why-is-it-cheaper-to-make-new-plastic-bottles-than-to-recycle-old-ones/" target="_blank">cheaper to create new plastics</a> from fossil fuels rather than from bioplastics or from recycling, we're going to be stuck with plastic garbage islands floating in our oceans.</p><p>The true cost to our health and our environment has yet to be included in the equation. But once it is, maybe that is when the real shift will happen.</p>From Your Site Articles
- The Complex and Frustrating Reality of Recycling Plastic - EcoWatch ›
- The Recycling Dilemma: Good Plastic, Bad plastic? - EcoWatch ›
- The Myth About Recycling Plastic? It Works - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
Donald Trump and Joe Biden arrive onstage for the final presidential debate at Belmont University in Nashville, Tennessee, on Oct. 22, 2020. JIM WATSON / AFP via Getty Images
Towards the end of the final presidential debate of the 2020 election season, the moderator asked both candidates how they would address both the climate crisis and job growth, leading to a nearly 12-minute discussion where Donald Trump did not acknowledge that the climate is changing and Joe Biden called the climate crisis an existential threat.
<p>In response to the question from moderator Kristen Welker, "How would you both combat climate change and support job growth?" Trump insisted that he loves the environment and wants clean air and water. He said that his administration has started to plant trees and there have been record drops in carbon emissions during his administration. </p><p>Trump then made a rambling remark about air pollution in India, China and Russia, before touting that he took the U.S. out of the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/paris-agreement">Paris agreement</a>, giving a false version of what the Paris agreement requires of the U.S. and insisting that it would have sacrificed "tens of millions of jobs."</p>
<p><br></p><p>By contrast, Biden noted that the climate crisis and a warming planet are "an existential threat to humanity."</p><p>"We have a moral obligation to deal with it and we're told by all the leading scientists in the world we don't have much time," he said and then pointed out that scientists say we have 8 to 10 years to tackle the crisis before we pass the point of no return, as <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/10/22/climate-change-biden-trump-debate/" target="_blank">The Washington Post</a> reported.</p><p>He then went on to list infrastructure investments in charging stations to promote the use of electric cars, and retrofitting older buildings so they do not leak their heating and cooling. Biden said those upgrades will save millions of barrels of oil, help clean the environment and create more than 18 million jobs.</p>
<p><br></p><p>Trump, in his response, insisted that Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and three other female Democratic lawmakers "know nothing about the climate." Trump then claimed the plan would cost $100 trillion, even though Biden's website says his plan will cost $2 trillion.</p>
<p>Biden turned his attention to the support he has received from both environmental groups and labor unions.</p><p>The moderator then asked Trump why people of color, who are disproportionately affected by pollution since their communities are often up against oil refineries and chemical plants, should give him four more years in office.</p><p>"The families that we're talking about are employed heavily and they're making more money than they've ever made," Trump replied. He then went on to claim that he saved the oil industry.</p><p>Biden replied by talking about the effect of living next to a fence line and how important it is to keep people safe by imposing restrictions on pollution.</p><p>Trump then stopped Welker from asking her final question and asked Biden if he would close down the oil industry. Biden insisted he would stop federal subsidies of <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fossil-fuels">fossil fuels</a> and usher in a transition to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/renewable-energy/">renewable energy</a>.</p><p>"We have to move towards a net zero emissions," Biden said.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- As Biden Embraces More Ambitious Climate Plan, Fossil Fuel Execs ... ›
- Climate Crisis Gets 10 Minutes at VP Debate - EcoWatch ›
- Climate Crisis Gets Just 10 Minutes at End of Presidential Debate ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
What will happen to all these batteries once they wear out? Ronny Hartmann / AFP / Getty Images
By Zheng Chen and Darren H. S. Tan
As concern mounts over the impacts of climate change, many experts are calling for greater use of electricity as a substitute for fossil fuels. Powered by advancements in battery technology, the number of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles on U.S. roads is increasing. And utilities are generating a growing share of their power from renewable fuels, supported by large-scale battery storage systems.
<p>These trends, coupled with a growing volume of battery-powered phones, watches, laptops, wearable devices and other consumer technologies, leave us wondering: What will happen to all these batteries once they wear out?</p><p>Despite overwhelming enthusiasm for cheaper, more powerful and energy-dense batteries, manufacturers have paid comparatively little attention to making these essential devices more sustainable. In the U.S. only about 5% of lithium-ion batteries – the technology of choice for electric vehicles and many high-tech products – <a href="https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/07/f64/112306-battery-recycling-brochure-June-2019%202-web150.pdf" target="_blank">are actually recycled</a>. As sales of electric vehicles and tech gadgets continue to grow, it is unclear who should handle hazardous battery waste or how to do it.</p><p>As engineers who work on <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=pPgKUOEAAAAJ&hl=en" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">designing advanced materials</a>, including <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=dD8UWYEAAAAJ&hl=en" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">batteries</a>, we believe it is important to think about these issues now. Creating pathways for battery manufacturers to build sustainable production-to-recycling manufacturing processes that meet both consumer and environmental standards can reduce the likelihood of a battery waste crisis in the coming decade.</p>
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="15499060d7b57be67100758264d9f877"><iframe lazy-loadable="true" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/iFchfHH0qzg?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
Hazardous Contents
<p>Batteries pose more complex recycling and disposal challenges than metals, plastics and paper products because they contain many chemical components that are both toxic and difficult to separate.</p><p>Some types of widely used batteries – notably, lead-acid batteries in gasoline-powered cars – have relatively simple chemistries and designs that make them straightforward to recycle. The common nonrechargeable alkaline or water-based batteries that power devices like flashlights and smoke alarms can be disposed directly in landfills.</p><p>However, today's lithium-ion batteries are highly sophisticated and not designed for recyclability. They contain hazardous chemicals, such as toxic lithium salts and <a href="https://www.britannica.com/science/transition-metal" target="_blank">transition metals</a>, that can damage the environment and leach into water sources. Used lithium batteries also contain embedded electrochemical energy – a small amount of charge left over after they can no longer power devices – which can cause fires or explosions, or <a href="https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/e/5/e5530917-434d-451c-8a6b-c5cdfad1b5ec/EED12407A6BF7DE6C86A4B39C25CF6A4.greenberger-testimony-07.17.2019.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">harm people that handle them</a>.</p><div id="007de" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="34d57a5a359e141bcf74c9b1f66eae5f"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1026491976722468865" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">The dangers of disposing of lithium batteries improperly - Battery blamed for Guernsey recycling site blaze https://t.co/Xcs76DI520</div> — Daniel Kinsbursky (@Daniel Kinsbursky)<a href="https://twitter.com/kbirecycling/statuses/1026491976722468865">1533569733.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>Moreover, manufacturers have little economic incentive to modify existing protocols to incorporate recycling-friendly designs. Today it <a href="https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/e/5/e5530917-434d-451c-8a6b-c5cdfad1b5ec/EED12407A6BF7DE6C86A4B39C25CF6A4.greenberger-testimony-07.17.2019.pdf" target="_blank">costs more to recycle</a> a lithium-ion battery than the recoverable materials inside it are worth.</p><p>As a result, responsibility for handling battery waste frequently falls to third-party recyclers – companies that make money from collecting and processing recyclables. Often it is cheaper for them to store batteries than to treat and recycle them.</p><p>Recycling technologies that can break down batteries, such as <a href="https://www.britannica.com/technology/pyrometallurgy" target="_blank">pyrometallurgy</a>, or burning, and <a href="https://www.britannica.com/technology/hydrometallurgy" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">hydrometallurgy</a>, or acid leaching, are becoming <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s41918-018-0012-1" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">more efficient and economical</a>. But the lack of proper battery recycling infrastructure creates roadblocks along the entire supply chain.</p><p>For example, transporting used batteries over long distances to recycling centers would typically be done by truck. Lithium batteries must be packaged and shipped according to the U.S. Department of Transportation's <a href="https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=83659c6aca8187cdb60b38763b2ffbb8&node=se49.2.173_1185&rgn=div8" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Class 9 hazardous material regulations</a>. Using a <a href="https://www.anl.gov/egs/everbatt" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">model developed by Argonne National Laboratory</a>, we estimate that this requirement increases transport costs to more than 50 times that of regular cargo.</p>
Safer and Simpler
<p>While it will be challenging to bake recyclability into the existing manufacturing of conventional lithium-ion batteries, it is vital to develop sustainable practices for solid-state batteries, which are a next-generation technology expected to enter the market within this decade.</p><p>A solid-state battery replaces the flammable organic liquid electrolyte in lithium-ion batteries with a nonflammable inorganic solid electrolyte. This allows the battery to operate over a much wider temperature range and dramatically reduces the risk of fires or explosions. Our <a href="http://zhengchen.eng.ucsd.edu/" target="_blank">team of nanoengineers</a> is working to incorporate ease of recyclability into next-generation solid-state battery development before these batteries enter the market.</p><p>Conceptually, recycling-friendly batteries must be safe to handle and transport, simple to dismantle, cost-effective to manufacture and minimally harmful to the environment. After analyzing the options, we've chosen a combination of specific chemistries in next-generation all-solid-state batteries that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1557/mre.2020.25" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">meets these requirements</a>.</p><p>Our design strategy reduces the number of steps required to dismantle the battery, and avoids using combustion or harmful chemicals such as acids or toxic organic solvents. Instead, it employs only safe, low-cost materials such as alcohol and water-based recycling techniques. This approach is scalable and environmentally friendly. It dramatically simplifies conventional battery recycling processes and makes it safe to disassemble and handle the materials.</p><img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU2NjkxOC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NDM3MjcyOX0.wyUKJaMauaSnDy5y2wkBWaI26DowukyA4vAk9MOLrI4/img.png?width=980" id="d54f2" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="f8a929e3797557d44277a9a62e6d715f" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
A proposed procedure for recycling solid-state battery packs directly and harvesting their materials for reuse. Tan et al., 2020, CC BY
<p>Compared to recycling lithium-ion batteries, recycling solid-state batteries is intrinsically safer since they're made entirely of nonflammable components. Moreover, in our proposed design the entire battery can be recycled directly without separating it into individual components. This feature dramatically reduces the complexity and cost of recycling them.</p><p>Our design is a proof-of-concept technology developed at the laboratory scale. It is ultimately up to private companies and public institutions, such as national laboratories or state-run waste facilities, to apply these recycling principles on an industrial scale.</p>
Rules for Battery Recycling
<p>Developing an easy-to-recycle battery is just one step. Many challenges associated with battery recycling stem from the complex logistics of handling them. Creating facilities, regulations and practices for collecting batteries is just as important as developing better recycling technologies. China, South Korea and the European Union are <a href="https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/d/c/dc43cdc9-ef56-4f8c-b442-d325aa8acf72/D775B276380B37ABF9A49BFD581DD1A5.sanders-testimony-07.17.2019.pdf" target="_blank">already developing battery recycling systems and mandates</a>.</p><p>One useful step would be for governments to require that batteries carry universal tags, similar to the internationally recognized standard labels used for plastics and metals recycling. These could help to educate consumers and waste collectors about how to handle different types of used batteries.</p><p>Markings could take the form of an electronic tag printed on battery labels with embedded information, such as chemistry type, age and manufacturer. Making this data readily available would facilitate automated sorting of large volumes of batteries at waste facilities.</p><p>It is also vital to improve international enforcement of recycling policies. Most battery waste is not generated where the batteries were originally produced, which makes it hard to hold manufacturers responsible for handling it.</p><p>Such an undertaking would require manufacturers and regulatory agencies to work together on newer recycling-friendly designs and better collection infrastructure. By confronting these challenges now, we believe it is possible to avoid or reduce the harmful effects of battery waste in the future.</p>
Read More
Show Less
Trending
A Stop the Money Pipeline protester holds a banner outside JP Morgan headquarters in NYC on Feb. 25, 2020; JP Morgan is a top contributor to the fossil fuel industry. Erik McGregor / LightRocket / Getty Images
By Jessica Corbett
Green groups applauded Sen. Jeff Merkley on Wednesday for introducing a pioneering pair of bills that aim to "protect the long-term health and well-being of the American people and their economy from the catastrophic effects of climate chaos" by preventing banks and international financial institutions from financing fossil fuels.
<p>"How we invest our money reflects our values today and will drive our future tomorrow," the Oregon Democrat <a href="https://www.merkley.senate.gov/news/press-releases/merkley-introduces-pair-of-bills-to-protect-american-lives-and-livelihoods-from-climate-chaos-2020" target="_blank">said</a> in a statement about his new legislative proposals, citing a September report from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/09/09/while-trump-commission-warns-climate-risk-financial-system-recommendations-fall" target="_blank">warning</a> that the human-caused climate crisis endangers the U.S. financial system.</p><p>"Fossil fuel investments play a key role in accelerating climate chaos, which continues to spiral further and further out of control and claim lives and livelihoods in the process," Merkley added. "It's time to prioritize the interests of the American people and the planet above the wishes of fossil fuel CEOs who want to hold our economy hostage."</p><p>The <a href="https://www.merkley.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/20.10.21%20Protecting%20America's%20Economy%20from%20the%20Carbon%20Bubble%20Act%20of%202020.pdf" target="_blank">Protecting America's Economy from the Carbon Bubble Act of 2020 </a> "would help safeguard the economy by prohibiting financial companies from making new investments in fossil fuels," according to his office. The <a href="https://www.merkley.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/20.10.21%20Sustainable%20International%20Financial%20Institutions%20Act%20of%202020.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Sustainable International Financial Institutions Act of 2020</a> "would elevate that priority to the international stage by ensuring that the United States uses its voice and vote in international financial institutions to divest from fossil fuel investments."</p>
<div id="815e9" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="eb5133bc08c84a247e6c577bb4c4ba59"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1318967338482364416" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Yes! @SenJeffMerkley just introduced new legislation that would stop banks and other financial institutions from fu… https://t.co/Bk15N9Sewk</div> — Stop the Money Pipeline (@Stop the Money Pipeline)<a href="https://twitter.com/StopMoneyPipe/statuses/1318967338482364416">1603301293.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>The legislation was enthusiastically endorsed by members of Stop the Money Pipeline, a coalition of over 130 advocacy organizations that <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/01/09/climate-movement-takes-aim-wall-street-because-money-only-language-fossil-fuel" target="_blank">launched</a> in January to pressure asset managers, banks, and insurance companies to "stop financing fossil fuels and deforestation and start respecting human rights and Indigenous sovereignty."</p><p>"Sen. Merkley is showing real leadership by introducing the first-ever bills to cut the money pipeline fueling the climate crisis," declared David Arkush, director of Public Citizen's Climate Program, in a coalition statement Wednesday.</p><p>Kelly Martin, director of the Sierra Club's Beyond Dirty Fuels campaign, similarly said that "we applaud Sen. Merkley for his leadership in working to cut off the flow of money to dirty and destructive fossil fuels."</p><p>"Investments from major financial institutions are driving the climate crisis and environmental injustice worldwide," Martin added. "In order to tackle this crisis, we need to put a stop to business as usual and reinvest in a clean energy economy that works for all of us."</p>
<div id="f84b7" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="f6742078b73d4f72ad0cdb0b28c45bf8"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1318975843717287936" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">"When there’s an out of control fire, the worst thing you can do is pour more gas on it. It’s time for Congress ste… https://t.co/YfjbtiWeRY</div> — 350 dot org (@350 dot org)<a href="https://twitter.com/350/statuses/1318975843717287936">1603303321.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>Sue Stafford and Toby Woll of Mothers Out Front Corporate Responsibility Team called Merkley's legislation "important and necessary" while Nikki Reisch of the Center for International Environmental Law said that "ending financing for fossil fuels should be a no-brainer."</p><p>"As this year has made abundantly clear, fossil fuels are not just terrible for people and the planet, they are terrible investments, too," Reisch continued. "Sen. Merkley's bills would finally require financial institutions to do what they should have long since done on their own: stop bankrolling climate catastrophe."</p><p>While welcoming the senator's bills, campaigners also slammed financial institutions for "driving the destruction of the climate, deforestation, and furthering harms to public health and communities" by "pouring billions into the dying fossil fuel industry," in the words of Osprey Orielle Lake, executive director of the Women's Earth and Climate Action Network.</p><p>Lake urged Congress to urgently enact the measures—a call that was echoed by Lukas Ross from Friends of the Earth U.S., who warned that "whether it is Wall Street behemoths or public institutions like the Export-Import Bank, financial institutions are lending the climate over a cliff."</p>
<div id="f35ca" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="f0306ad9e315c3763299c349c4056f90"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1318969691767930880" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">BREAKING: @SenJeffMerkley just introduced new legislation that would help end the financing of fossil fuels! 👏👏👏 W… https://t.co/831xi0UPfo</div> — Moira Birss (@Moira Birss)<a href="https://twitter.com/moira_kb/statuses/1318969691767930880">1603301854.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>"Public and private banks are squandering over $4 trillion annually subsidizing the destabilization of our global climate by the fossil fuel industry," noted Daphne Wysham at the Center for Sustainable Economy. "Finally, in Sen. Merkley, we have a climate champion willing to stand up to this madness and call for banks to invest in a liveable future."</p><p><a href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2020/03/18/banking-climate-change-report-reveals-banks-funded-climate-chaos-trillions-paris" target="_blank">According to</a> a report released in March by climate advocacy groups, 35 global banks have collectively poured more than $2.7 trillion into the fossil fuel industry since the Paris climate agreement was finalized in late 2015. The four top spots were all held by U.S. institutions: JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citi, and Bank of America.</p><p>"Sen. Merkley's new divestment bills are exactly the sort of real climate leadership we need from our elected officials and regulators," said David Turnbull of Oil Change International (OCI). "If banks won't stop funding climate devastation, our government must force their hand, and Sen. Merkley's bills would force the action we need."</p><p>In addition to helping to ensure a habitable planet in the years to come, 350.org co-founder Bill McKibben pointed out that there could be some added benefits for lawmakers. As he put it: "Fighting the climate crisis and saving big money at the same time—a few more laws like this and people may start liking Congress!"</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from<a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/10/21/merkley-unveils-pioneering-bills-make-financial-institutions-stop-bankrolling?cd-origin=rss" target="_blank"> Common Dreams</a>.</em></p>
Read More
Show Less
GMC will begin producing an electric Hummer in 2021. GMC
General Motors is reintroducing the gas-guzzling, military-style vehicle known as The Hummer. This time, it's getting a green makeover as a zero-emissions, fully electric pickup truck, NPR reported.
<p>"The irony is not lost on anyone that this former gas-guzzler is coming back as an electric vehicle," Ivan Drury, <em>Edmunds</em>' senior manager of insights, told NPR. "With that said, by demonstrating that 'big' doesn't necessarily mean inefficient, the Hummer EV also represents a monumental paradigm shift."</p><p>The original Hummer, popular in the 90s and 2000s, was discontinued in 2010. Of note, the new zero-emissions version will still be powerful, and going from 0 to 60 mph in three seconds thanks to its 1,0000-horsepower engine, <a href="https://arstechnica.com/cars/2020/10/american-excess-is-back-with-the-1000hp-2022-gmc-hummer-ev-truck/" target="_blank">Ars Technica</a> reported.</p><p>As for size, Ars Technica added that it will measure more than 18 feet long and nearly 8 feet wide (when you include the mirrors), making it almost as big as a Cadillac Escalade.</p>
<p>The 2022 GMC Hummer EV will be available to the public starting in fall 2021. The first wave, called Edition 1, will retail for $112,595, including destination charges. Starting in 2022, later versions will start at $99,995, followed by models that will cost $10,000 less each year until 2024, <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/20/gm-unveils-hummer-ev-as-worlds-first-supertruck-for-112600.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">CNBC</a> reported.</p><p>While the top three vehicles in the country are pickup trucks, the average cost is about $51,000. However, General Motors, believes the target audience is not the average truck driver, but a client who appreciates technological advances.</p><p>"This is all about people who just love the best in automotive innovation, performance, capability and technology," GMC Vice President Duncan Aldred told CNBC. "These are the people who you may have seen buy the exotic sports car type brands. This will be the must-have item."</p>
<p>For example, the truck will be able to travel 350 miles on a single charge. It will also sport a new feature allowing it to drive diagonally in "CrabWalk" mode, <a href="https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/2022-gmc-hummer-ev-electric-truck-specs-horsepower-price-features/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">CNet</a> reported. </p><p>The new Hummer EV will have competition, including the Ford F-150 EV, scheduled to hit the market about the same time. Tesla's Cybertruck is also slated to start production in 2021, CNet reported. </p><p>"With all of these trucks launching over the next year or two, customers will have to debate whether it's worth rolling the dice and placing a reservation this far out without a test drive," Drury told NPR.</p>
<p><br/></p>
Read More
Show Less
World's Largest Solar Farm in Australia Will Also Supply 20% of Singapore's Electricity
21 October
Renewable Energy
Sun Cable hopes to start construction of the world's largest solar farm in 2023. Sun Cable
A large expanse of Australia's deserted Outback will house the world's largest solar farm and generate enough energy to export power to Singapore, as The Guardian reported.
<p><br/></p>
<p>The massive solar farm, which will be visible from space after it's constructed, will lie halfway between Alice Springs and Darwin, two cities in Australia's Northern Territory. The solar farm will occupy more than 46 square miles and cost $20 billion to build, according to <a href="https://www.unilad.co.uk/technology/worlds-largest-solar-farm-to-power-singapore/" target="_blank">Unilad</a>.</p><p>The remote area of the Outback where the solar panels will work is currently a massive cattle ranch, but the owner of the project, Sun Cable, hopes to start construction in 2023 with the aim of exporting energy by 2027. According to Unilad, the solar farm is expected to generate so much energy that not only will it power all of the Northern Territory, but two-thirds of the electricity will be exported via underwater cables that run 2,800 miles to Singapore, a city-state on the tip of the Malay peninsula.</p>
<p>Sun Cable has initiated the project by evaluating its environmental impact and making sure its project complies with regulation from the Northern Territory's Environment Protection Authority, as the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2020-10-20/newcastle-waters-station-nt-set-for-worlds-biggest-solar-farm/12785256" target="_blank">Australian Broadcasting Corporation</a> (ABC) reported.</p><p>"We'll be using thousands of hectares of land, and we need to closely examine the impact on the ground at the solar farm end," Sun Cable CEO David Griffin said, as ABC reported. "There's a lot of black soil in that country, but that's a bit problematic for us, so we're [planning to build] on a substantial area of soil that's a bit different and a bit friendlier for us to construct on."</p><p>Despite those challenges, Griffin believes the massive cattle farm called Newcastle Waters is an ideal location for the solar farm because it meets several critical requirements.</p><p>"It's on the Adelaide to Darwin rail corridor, which is brilliant for our logistics given the enormous amount of material we'll have to transport to the site," he said to The Guardian. The location is also just 18 miles off the main highway that runs the length of the sparsely populated Northern Territory.</p>
<p>The weather also provides ideal conditions for producing energy.<br></p><p>"It's a bit of a balancing act too, because it's far south enough to get away from the main patch affected by the wet season, so it's a steady solar resource throughout the year," Griffin told The Guardian. "There's plenty of sun and not many clouds."</p><p>The massive project is expected to supply 10 gigawatts of electricity. The sustainable energy will help the remote areas of the Northern Territory, which usually have to use energy from diesel-powered generators. The exported energy will supply 20 percent of Singapore's energy needs, according to Unilad.</p><p>The solar farm, which is three times larger than the world's current largest solar farm in northern China, is also expected to provide thousands of jobs related to construction and hundreds of jobs once construction is done. Griffin told The Guardian that many of the jobs will go to local <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/indigenous-peoples">Indigenous</a> communities.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Singapore Will Plant One Million Trees by 2030 - EcoWatch ›
- Australia to Build the World's Largest Solar Farm to Power Singapore ›
- Giant Water Battery Cuts University's Energy Costs by $100 Million ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less