We’re trying a new thing — this is your monthly opportunity to share! Use the comments section in this community thread to:Ask questions for the next Mailbag, in January (anyone can ask a question but mailbag episodes are a paid-sub-only perk)Share climate jobs/opportunitiesShare your climate-related work, ask for help, or find collaboratorsShare climate-related events and meetupsTalk about David’s Notes or whatever else is on your mind
David, you are basically the only reason I remain on Twitter/X. I don’t want to remain there. Is there any other platform that you can imagine moving to? Second question, at one point I believe you tweeted what you think are the 2 or 3 personal actions that have the most impact. I know this is not a newsletter/podcast about personal action, but I would find it helpful to be reminded for when the question comes up with normie friends. I can’t tell you how much I value and appreciate your work.
What's the world of climate education for young people look like? I've been developing my own construction kit and set of activities to engage kids in playful learning with sustainable energy (http://playingwiththesun.org/). But I'm interested in hearing about how other educators work with kids and climate change. How do they address the political elephant in the room?
One thing I don't understand is based on previous episodes on utilities, utilities are "allowed" a profit on new infrastructure projects that they don't get for routine maintenance activities. If that's the case, why aren't utilities all in on constructing new distributed grid/battery/PV production hubs within their territories? Seems like a lot of new infrastructure that they can use for profit margins. Clearly I'm missing something.
Sorry, long reply, and even this is just a first whack. First, here's the basic theory on returns in traditional utility ratemaking. Utilities are allowed a return on long-lived assets to compensate them for the time value of money that is tied up in those assets. Roughly speaking, the total amount of capital tied up long-term is the utility's "rate base" and its rates are set to allow them a chosen annual rate of return on that amount (both often heavily litigated in front of the regulators who set the rates). Short-term expenses ("operating expenses") are regarded as basically being quickly passed through and collected from ratepayers, so there's traditionally no return allowed on those short term expenses. Going one detail further, there can be a "lead-lag study" that accounts for the average amount of credit or deficit the utility is carries due to the timing mismatch between paying its opex bills and collecting those costs from customers. That results in an adjustment to the rate base so that the utility can earn a return on any small amount of capital tied up as a result of this churn in short-term expenses, but this is pretty marginal compared to the actual capex.
The issue that often arises is that renewables built within a utility's territory are not actually owned by the utility. This can be because (a) the utility has to allow the developer to interconnect under FERC's open access transmission policies, and the developer is going to transmit and sell the power to someone other than the utility, (b) the utility has to take power from the developer under PURPA, or (c) the utility is buying the power from the developer under a PPA, but still doesn't own the project. In none of those cases does the utility own the capital facilities--even in (b) and (c) it just pays for the power each short-term billing period, resulting in opex with no allowed return. In (a) it gets some return on the transmission assets involved, through its transmission rates, but not on the generation capex. This dynamic often leads to criticism that utilities slant their new resource RFPs to favor projects they would build and own themselves over ones that developers would build and sign PPAs. You can see that the utility would have an incentive to build a self-build project that it can earn a profit on, even if an independent developer's project could be better for ratepayers.
I'm not sure what I'm describing exactly tracks the distributed / hub idea you mention, but the same principles apply for utilities still subject to traditional rate base/rate of return ratemaking any time they're looking at serving their ratepayers with resources whose capital costs would be borne by others. So if we're talking about a utility building out infrastructure to facilitate others connecting DG, batteries, PV, whatever to the utility system, those resources would tend to cannibalize the rate base of resources the utility itself would own, cutting into profits. Also, if it builds anything too expensive, it runs the risk of ratepayer advocates and regulators challenging the reasonableness of the cost and trying to get it excluded from rates, and this risk may be (or be perceived as) greater for new types of infrastructure that haven't routinely been included in utility rates in the past.
Regulators and legislatures are trying some things to better align utility incentives with public policy goals. For example, here in Washington, our 100% clean electricity bill passed in 2019 allows utilities to earn a return on the opex in their PPA payments to developers. RCW 80.28.410(2)(b) https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=80.28.410
Others may be better informed on alternative approaches, or how any such efforts are working out.
Thanks for the additional info! My basic premise was one based on the utility building out the PV, battery, ext network so they would have the ownership and rates associated, but if those would be challenged for being too novel, then we're in a tricky situation.
Welp, looks like I mostly missed the point. My bad. But I do think those downward pressures on rates are probably part of the problem in your scenario. Possibly also utilities just being very cautious about adopting new tech. Would love to hear others' thoughts who are closer to the issue, because I agree with you that for utility-owned capital investments, all things being equal (which all things never are) they *should* want to build that sort of thing.
Not to be one of *those* people, but I have more of a comment than a question: I started working for a national climate advocacy org in early 2022. I come from a background in progressive organizing, but had no specific expertise in climate or environmental issues. I genuinely don't think I could do my job without volts (an exaggeration, but not a big one). I've learned so much from Volts and It's the main reason I don't sound like a complete idiot when discussing electrification and clean transition issues with anyone, whether a grassroots volunteer, local state legislative candidate, or incumbent congressional rep. I just wanted to say thank you, David!
Hi, I wonder if there is discussion happening at municipal, state or federal level about the mismatch in gas vs electric pricing and how that affects the move to electrification. For example in Chicago residential electric through ComEd is $.0687 per KWh; gas through People’s Gas fluctuates now between $.36 and $.57 per therm, which equates at the upper end to roughly $.02 per KWh -- less than one-third the price for electricity. Even with a gain in efficiency of more than 50% the homeowner bill goes up after electrification, and as we know heat pumps, electric water heaters and stoves, etc cost more up front to boot. Do you know of plans to tilt the playing field in favor of a better future? Or is Chicago an outlier in terms of pricing?
Living in Chicago, I know what you mean. But, there's a few things in electricity's favor. You can use hourly pricing with Comed, which can lower the rate significantly and allow you to time-shift. Also, there's some very large capital costs being pushed through by People's Gas for the last number of years which changes the cost structure enough that you need to evaluate the total cost, not the supply cost in the evaluation.
Mailbag question or (even better) idea for future episode:
What has *changed* since the 1970s to make nuclear power plants so much more expensive? This is NOT intended to open up the big Pandora's box of debates around how much we should or should not be supporting nuclear power today. Instead it's a narrow factual question: Americans used to build nuclear power plants and (presumably) break even financially, but they no longer do. Why? Tighter safety regulations? More NIMBYism? Removal of government subsidies? Supply chain issues? Is there any hope of returning to whatever previous status quo allowed for the construction of new nuclear plants?
I'm interested in this as well. Mostly from the prospect of what has the potential to replace existing nuclear as aging large plants retire here in the U.S. and around the world.
These are obviously targeting this size to compete with advanced nuclear SMRs from NuScale, Terrapower, X-energy (Xe-100), BWX, Hermes, Holtec and E-Vinci from Westinghouse - I realize some of these are microreactors and different scale.
Question: What is the potential for any of these to bring power to the grid by 2035/2040 and start replacing aging nuclear?
We'll see how much SMRs will be used for bringing power to the grid. Ontario will have it's first SMR operational in 2029, and as your article states, 3 more coming after that. But most other recent projects have sadly fallen apart.
There is a much larger potential for them to be used for behind the meter industrial projects. Dow Chemical's Seadrift location should be powered by one of X-energy's reactors be the end of decade. Generational mining projects, oilsands, and even microsoft datacenters are all currently looking at SMR tech.
I think this is a positive development. Industrial usage is just as large as residential/commercial, but is much more concentrated, and often better suited to the heat and steam pressure available from nuclear.
Nuclear plants didn't really "break even". A plant completed on budget and then effectively run without any surprises, was an insanely valuable financial asset. The other outcome was financial disaster. Utilities went bankrupt. Entire states were put into financial distress. There wasn't much of a middle ground of just breaking even.
Given this high risk high reward profile, it's easier to understand why a few changes can make them much harder to get built.
Interest rates: the sharp increase of interest rates in the 70's was a disaster for *all* large projects, not just nuclear. Now we are seeing this again. Projects by up and comers like NuScale are being cancelled now for this reason.
Banking regulations: this is much too complicated to go into here, but it is now orders of magnitude harder for banks to invest in projects like these. Investment Bankers actually love financing these types of deal, but sadly can rarely do so because of an astoundingly large web of regulatory factors. Hamstringing our largest source of long term capital was a bad decision. 0% chance this gets fixed anytime soon.
Natural Gas: It's just so freaking, unbelievably, cheap. The companies capable of building nuclear plants would much rather do something safe and easy and very likely to be profitable.
I think capturing and using waste energy is under hyped and is going to be big. Any chance of a Volts podcast on it. (I think I've heard mention of Sharc Energy Systems on Volts, but I think there is much more possible)
Are there any plans for more collaborations with environmental justice activists? Also, what’s your general opinion on Buen Vivir, on degrowth, solarpunk, and the contrasting idea of Up Wing politics?
We got a Mitsubishi Hyper-Heat HVAC early in '22. This is now our 2nd winter with it. It is quiet and cheap all year long, except for right now. Living in Michigan, it's currently 5°F and the machine is running fine, but to keep the house comfortable (above 60°) it cost us ~$600/mo from late December through March. Just before this cold spell hit, we installed a wood-burning stove insert, and it's taking a lot of burden off the electric heat strip backup (because we didn't want a gas backup).
Being a long-time listener, we had pretty good expectations going into the process, but not everyone listens to Volts, or is able to make two major heat-related purchases over consecutive years.
I know several friends and colleagues who did not have the same understanding about efficiency dropoff curves as the temps go down, and are feeling like they got scammed by this new tech, or are at least now in a more precarious situation paying down a new HVAC, having high winter bills, or keeping the internal temps lower than is comfortable, all while remembering that they used to just be able to keep cranking the gas up, and the cost penalty wasn't quite as bad.
Have you seen this kind sentiment out in the wild? I know there are some bad faith voices out there trying to stir the pot, but there's also some not ideal outcomes that folks are experiencing as they make the switch.
Is there anyone out there working on what the 2nd wave of the electrification movement looks like now that it's picking up steam?
How can we minimize these "buyer's remorse" scenarios?
What's the deal with Washington state's carbon pricing program and its impact on fuel prices at the pump? Before it was passed I saw competing claims -- opponents said the full cost of around 50 cents per gallon would be passed directly on to consumers, and (at least some) supporters said it would end up increasing prices by only a few cents per gallon. Since then, prices have gone up a lot! Two questions: (1) how much of the subsequent increases can be attributed to the program? (2) If it's close to 50 cents per gallon, why? Is there some sort of price fixing by the companies designed to undermine the legislation, or was there a flaw in the analysis that suggested a much smaller consumer price impact?
A couple issues that are vexing me with passing policy and implementing energy transition:
1) Unions. It would be very helpful to learn some fundamentals about the relationship of unions in this country.
- Some unions in some places present (IBEW in CA) opposition to the energy transition, but I'm not sure how regional or national unions are. How did unions get tied to utilities? Is that bond unbreakable? Clearly prevailing wage in IRA helps, but is it enough? Is it moving union opinions on energy transition?
- There are weird union relationships for doing work, which I believe is also regional. Refrigerant piping in WA state is one example I've run into. Apparently, the sheet metal union used to do refrigerant piping and the pipe fitters focused on water and steam. Some time in the recent past (10 years ago??), the pipe fitters decided that they wanted responsibility for refrigerant piping. During this transition period, it's often the case that projects need both a sheet metal and a pipe fitter present, which significantly increases the cost of commercial heat pump projects. I'm wondering if there are other similar examples that could be smoothed out to ease the energy transition.
- I don't have a good context for thinking about unions and I've heard some people say "The union is against X", but I think there's way more nuance to how various unions interact with one another.
2) Integrating IT solutions into manufacturing corporations: It has been my experience that many of the long lived manufacturing companies are not great at software development. It seems common to assume that some black box in the home will tell all this equipment when to run when the grid is lightly loaded.
People buy the equipment with the brand name (and the brand name companies have the capital and manufacturing capacity) because they can rely on that company being around to service the equipment through its lifetime.
The legacy companies are understandably scared about security glitches.
They also realize that the data is valuable and whether intentionally or through not understanding IT make their data hard to access (for instance, building control systems).
It can happen that big companies buy startup tech companies, but corporations don't often have IT expertise to buy the right company, and can bury the start IT programmers under layers of bureaucracy.
Is there any hope of tech/legacy manufacturing partnerships to make the interactions we want happen?
Some examples of problems:
* GM issues with software crashes in their latest EVs (Equinox) Infotainment systems when they tried to move away from CarPlay
* Our hot water heater's app is generally clunky. I have no idea how to make it run based on what the grid wants
* Mitsubishi heat pumps are great, but their control systems are straight out of the 1990s. Warranty is voided if you try to run it with an ecobee or nest. ecobee and Nest have no idea how to ramp variable drives up and down, only to ask for warmer/colder
For areas that will predominantly need to continue using hydrocarbon fuels (e.g., aviation, shipping), what should be the role of scaling adoption of carbon neutral fuels (using biofuels or e-fuels integrating both DAC and green hydrogen) vs. continuing to burn unabated fossil fuels paired with a rigorous, credible use of Direct Air Capture? Most of these pathways for creating carbon neutral fuels are very capital intensive with high efficiency losses and suffer from their own challenges (biofuel concerns over land-use and limited feedstock availability and e-fuels being extremely expensive and inefficient due to needing to utilize both DAC and green H2 facilities). In most cases, wouldn't it be much more efficient and far cheaper (with equivalent climate outcomes) to continue burning fossil hydrocarbons and separately ensuring that sufficient levels of DAC are deployed to offset the emissions? What am I missing here?
Dave, for many years, you've been arguing that new coal power plant construction in the US is dead - and not because of government regulation or left-wing activism or anything like that, but just because the pure economics no longer make any sense. And yet, China is permitting two new coal power plants per week. Why the huge difference? Why does coal (apparently) still make economic sense in China but not in the U.S.? Does China's continued coal construction boom imply that coal power may be more economically viable than you thought?
My (not Dave) take: China's energy demand is growing, they have massive coal reserves and barely any natural gas production (www.eia.gov/international/overview/country/CHN). Consequently, they're building out all forms of energy production as fast as possible to keep pace with demand, which is why they are a leader in solar (by a mile), they're adding nuclear and still opening coal plants. The US domestic natural gas/petrol market undercut coal because of its massive scale, its [cheap] prices and ability to secure financing. And now there's cheap solar.
Mailbag question or maybe an idea for a longer pod. In the podcast on offshore wind with Samantha Woodworth there was some discussion of the ways in which the Jones Act raises costs for new offshore wind projects. Samantha references briefly, and I don't think David totally picked up on it, that in fact Congress has been considering stronger Jones Act requirements for offshore wind (https://rollcall.com/2023/05/04/offshore-energy-fight-returns-in-coast-guard-authorization/ background)--the exact opposite of what David asks hopefully about with regards to exemptions to speed up deployment. So how to stay clear eyed but constructive when being a climate hawk? How can we disagree without being disagreeable? Allies in labor like the Blue Green Alliance are helpful, but this Jones Act situation seems like one where climate hawks just have to disagree with labor. Similar to how sometimes conservation groups can be helpful but other times they get too NIMBY about new projects on public lands. Should we just shut up about these issues and go along with our coalitional partners, or are there ways to be constructive?
There is also a critical need to amend the Jones Act to deal with dredging. The US simply does not have the dredging fleet that we're going to need to keep up with climate resilience needs. This is a pretty 'climate' adjacent issue, but it is probably worthy of a nerdy deep-dive.
These new techniques are a way to unstick the last mile of electrification and help the workforce, utilities and customers all achieve more from the existing distribution grid and in-home grid. Think of it as a "Non-wires alternative for the home".
I was excited to see the new hydrogen rules, which sounded pretty good. It's probably too soon after the last hydrogen podcast to revive the subject on Volts, but I am curious if anyone here knows how citizens can lift their voices to support the strict new rules and prevent their being watered down. I gather there's a public comment period, but haven't been able to find where to leave such comments. (Apologies if this is the wrong place to ask--I'm a little mystified by the comment structure/format.)
Hi David. I've been plagued by what seems be to a super low effort, but very high yield climate action individuals can take for a long time now -- moving their retirement nest egg to invest in a fund which votes their shares in a climate positive manner.
I was wondering if you'd be willing to take your journalistic expertise and dig into this topic a bit? There's a few funds which do what I'm talking about, and full disclaimer -- I am personally invested in the Sphere 500 Climate Fund.
- The Sphere 500 Climate Fund (ticker: SPFFX). This fund seeks to track the SP500 index without the fossil fuel polluters. Currently this tracks about 415 companies and votes your shares for the planet in shareholder meetings hundreds of times per year.
- The Engine No. 1 Transform 500 ETF (ticker: VOTE): Similar to sphere except tracks the entire SP500. Famously used their votes in a shareholder meeting to place new people on Exxon's board.
- Others I am less familiar with, like Carbon Collective.
This has been nagging at me so much because this seems like such a monumental action people can take. Voting once per year or once every other year in political elections pales in comparison to voting literally hundreds of times per year on climate. The funds we're currently invested in likely vote against the planet by default, too.
Finally, these funds typically don't fall under the amorphous ESG category. You and I share a hatred for that branding.
My key question is: why aren't more people talking about this? This seems like such a sticky action people can presumably take in mere minutes.
Instead, it suggests I should think about investing even in businesses I don't like, and pocketing their filthy profits, as long as the fund I do it "through" is consistently active in pushing through effective climate policy supporting resolutions using their votes as shareholders. I didn't have faith such resolutions made any real difference but this cited paper at least suggests otherwise. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3731-z So yes I would like to see some digging in on the climate impact of shareholder resolutions and (news I could use!) which ETFs have had consistent success in crafting and passing impactful shareholder resolutions.
Here are ideas if you're interested to dig into them. Hopefully this is the right place to post this.
- Washington State's Climate Commitment Act and the effort to repeal it in 2024, to help inform voters and policy makers.
- A "food for thought" interview with Paul Stamets on the value of fungi and his opinion of "The Last of Us" on public opinion.
- An interview with Suzanne Simard on healthy forests, forest fire and carbon storage and release.
- An interview with Grant Canary on replanting burned forests faster and increasing biodiversity.
- An interview with Joe Brewer on Gaia Theory, cultural evolution and regeneration.
- An interview with Tony Seba on innovation economics and what he calls "The Great Transformation"
- An interview with Johan Rockström about planetary boundaries, overshoot, priorities to solve and how.
- An interview with Kate Raworth on Doughnut economics and her ideas on updating the rules that govern our economy.
- An interview with RJ Scaringe on what it's like to start an automotive company from scratch, what's new in electric trucks and why hikers, skiers, hunters, fishermen, wildlife watchers, farmers and other rural residents might like to go electric.
- A discussion with Chad Higgins about how Agrivoltaics can improve food production and benefit family farms.
- A discussion about battery electric tools replacing gas chainsaws, trimmers, mowers, blowers, tractors and other loud, stinky equipment. I can't think of an expert for this one though.
- What's going on with lithium mining from the Salton Sea?
For what it's worth. Thanks for the opportunity to share ideas.
Trip idea: The Philippines and neighbors, because there’s increasing national interest in renewables and nuclear power, and intense geopolitical competition between US allies and China, but also some of the world’s highest energy prices; best to get outside of Manila for more unique perspectives
A general comment which I also raised on a certain single-letter discussion platform: I love to hear about innovative possible solutions like much more effective prospecting for critical minerals or low carbon ways of making steel or concrete.... but I can't get very excited about hearing about such ideas based solely or largely on interviews with people directly involved with commercializing these things - especially when they are still at an early stage. Maybe it is the journalist in me but I only want to hear about them if there's at least one third party expert as well who is invited to discuss other approaches and/or why this new approach might not work.
David doesn't seem he's big on windshield time, but maybe a road trip to renewable energy development "conflict" sites in the PNW, most easily central & eastern WA. E.g. Proposed Horse Heaven wind farm. Some other solar and pumped hydro. Or wind farms off a bit of the Oregon coast. Turn over some rocks and try to find supporters among the locals or progressive enviros. Find someone who might think we've gone too far in accepting every claim of "damage to cultural resources." Critique the local press coverage which seems to create echo chambers, amplifying minor objections. You could use Bromberg's "New Lee Highway Blues" as theme music... "All through Northern Oregon... that goddamned road seemed like it went forever... Nothing over there but the same damned town."
Am replying for the first time. With regard to future trips, I read an article recently about Uruguay being 100% renewable. One man in the government is responsible apparently so that could be an interesting and inspiring narrative.
I have hit Dave up directly on this and he hinted at good things but I will just re-raise this - how about comparing Canadian and American approaches to, say, EV policy or green hydrogen production or on and offshore wind? Here in Atlantic Canada we are wrestling with these issues and coming to some interestingly different conclusions. We (well, some of us) are hoping that we can move from a focus on offshore oil to offshore wind via green hydrogen. But even with one of the most promising sources of wind power and a convenient port for hydrogen export, the economics of green hydrogen are still unclear. You could also do a piece on the complicated politics of carbon pricing here in Canada and how (and why) it seems to be coming apart
Trip idea: Given the EU just agreed to an updated EPBD (Energy Performance of Buildings Directive) it’s a great time for a return trip to Austria. I recommend you consider the World Sustainable Energy Days conference in Wels, Austria in early March. Lots of EU policy makers will be discussing building sector decarbonization policy. That region of Austria also is a leader on industrial decarbonization, so great for site visits, and the massive trade show.
Excited for the discussion community. Already the format is awkward. Would be really excellent if you can setup a proper forum, for example https://www.discourse.org/ so the interface gets out of the way and information isn't lost.
Appreciate the suggestion, Discourse.org is really solid. However, it adds an extra layer of friction to ask people to sign into another site and we're currently optimizing for accessibility. Substack is where Volts content lives, and while its comments section is absurdly clunky, we're giving it a go. That being said, if enough subs participate and request a more robust forum, it's something worth considering!
It may help to reach out to Substack devs and request features to improve discussion. They'll likely put it on their list of to-dos and roll out improvements in a year more or less, depending on how long a to-do list they have. Just an idea I've found has worked... ask for what you want.
If you're travelling, Copenhagen is good, but I would recommend Gothenburg/Goteborg Energi. Goteborg is a major port and industrial center (e.g. Volvo, Northvolt) that still has ambitious emission reduction goals, involving integrated heating and electric systems with waste heat recovery. A month ago I saw a webinar celebrating Denver's world-changing 4-MW heat recovery system, but Gothenburg has had 160 MW of heat recovery since 1985, so, ? Also look into Stockholm Exergi heat re-use (https://www.stockholmexergi.se/fjarrvarme/sa-funkar-fjarrvarme/ - Chrome will translate everything but the video) as well as their seawater heat pumps (providing district heating since the 1980s). Also Sweden is cheaper than Dk, and in Gothenburg you can stay on the 4-masted Barken Viking in the harbor!
Are there any fellow Volts fans in Las Vegas? I’m starting up a climate podcast club next month (like a book club, but instead of reading we all listen to a podcast and come together to discuss it every month) that will feature Volts pretty heavily in the rotation.
MEER.org presents: https://www.meer.org/upcoming-events/meertalk-january-2024. Join the MEER community for a talk by Herb Simmens tomorrow 1/7. MEER was founded by Dr Ye Tao who has been a guest on Volts. In addition to learning more about the work MEER does across the world, tune in for a monthly talk and discussion on an array of topics.
Missed it by 4 days! I will be hosting another Forestry, Climate, and Startups session at the Postdoc Brewery, next to Marymoor park in Redmond WA, tentatively on Jan 18th. Nothing formal about it, feel free to drop by and talk energy, environment, or tech more broadly.
I'd like to share https://www.greenneighborchallenge.org/ which is a free digital toolkit designed to help any resident in the US find and sign up for the various energy programs and incentives across local, state, and federal levels. Building it has been a labor of love of by over 50 volunteers over the last five years. From Green Pricing Programs, to Energy Efficiency Incentives, to Rooftop/Community Solar, to Energy/Weatherization assistance... we keep building or creating datasets to make it easy for (mostly) regular people to navigate their options. I'd love to connect with any organizations/journalists/etc that are interested in getting the word out their membership/audiences (Andrew@GreenNeighborChallenge.org).
Andrew! Four MN utilities are rolling out window rebates for high-performance windows next year. I will email you. The rebates will not offset the full cost of high-performance windows (HPW), but will help pay the cost differential for folks looking at HPW. This is a bid deal as there were ZERO utilities with windows rebates in 2023!
hi all, if anyone is interested in collaborating on climate video projects, i have a youtube channel https://youtube.com/zentouro and i'm always looking to elevate climate work and advocacy folks are doing. feel free to reach out via the contact email in my channel's about section.
I just started a newsletter focused on how we'll respond to climate change impacts on food and ag. It's essentially a live blog of the PhD I'm doing on this. If you're interested, you can read more here! https://toughgrowing.substack.com/
Thanks. I've gotten some great nuggets of wisdom from the webcasts, and have vivid memories of listening to the early ones while many of us were stuck at home trying to make sense of the pandemic. I'll reach out when I have more to share!
A friend and I have a new geeky blog about Alaska energy issues. https://www.alaskaenergy.org/ Alaska is an ignored US grid (and a lot of even more ignored microgrids), far behind on the energy transition, with expensive power, nearly all run by vertically integrated coops, staring down a near-term natural gas supply crisis.
Alaska specific: Capitol Glass/Northerm windows sells high-performance windows (U-factor of 0.22 or less) specifically in AK. There are non energy benefits that are notable in cold climates (comfort, sound, condensation, etc.), as well as the energy benefits and right-sizing of HVAC based on a better building envelope, or not needing as much exterior insulation to hit the same building envelope performance (cost savings). I'd be happy to discuss details if it's of interest! (I'm not affiliated with them, but work in a window-adjacent nonprofit role)
Listening to Volts inspired us to buy a decommissioned paper mill in Maine for redevelopment. We don’t have expertise in energy but we chose Rumford for its location with hydro, an active mill, transmission capacity on the grid and potential to become a green energy hub. So many episodes hit on concepts that could work in our region and we are developing our mill to become an asset for the energy transition.
Hope I'm in the right place! My work is to develop technical solutions that I hope can make a big difference, quickly. My company just launched a super cheap floating wind turbine (but just the 1:16 model, we have some growing to do!). But my big wish is to get help or collaboration on something not related to my company: that is to spread the word about green ammonia. This seemingly offers a way to decarbonize the whole world by 2050, cost effectively and rapidly. A few countries and large companies are pursuing it [the idea is to use remote desert sun, remote ocean wind, wilderness geothermal or hydropower etc. for cheapest clean energy, and ship it out as a liquid that can power the electric grid, transportation, heating etc.]. The technology exists, the costs look super attractive, there are small-entity opportunities (small villages or single farmers) and it bypasses terrible permitting and political barriers. We can get to net zero by 2050! But virtually nobody in the US is touting that vision. I know that there are imperfections and issues with ammonia, but they look eminently solvable, so what gives? Legislators and agencies and thought leaders seem oblivious. HELP NEEDED!
Hello Jim, this sounds interesting - do you have specific thoughts on how to spread the word about green ammonia? I agree would be nice to hear more about it here in western Canada (there are some projects out in Atlantic Canada)
(apologies only got to this post holidays haha - also happy to chat on LinkedIn if that’s easier!)
How does everyone keep track of all their data points/research articles? I feel like I have 100 statistics from 50 different sources and its semi-difficult to keep both track of what is what and be able to easily reference them.
In grad school, when writing writing papers where I had to track all my citations, I used Zotero, which has a chrome plugin, which makes tracking references alot easier.
Hey Nik - I really like Obsidian for keeping track of ideas and notes. It might take some time to get used to if you’ve never used Markdown, but it’s quick and simple. Maybe try it along with zotero
Help! I live in Seattle and bought a ~75 year old house last year and would like to investigate converting from natural gas hvac + water heater to electric. Oven / stove are already electric. I am a complete know nothing about home improvement. What sort of research resources and tradesperson / consultant do I start with?
Who's out there working on tricky carbon-specific transactional legal issues? I've been steadily getting more work in this super interesting and challenging area, but it's either under-lawyered or I just haven't found the right network yet.
I live in NM. I installed a dual-fuel packaged (rooftop) HVAC system from Trane five years ago. No inverter-driven packaged systems were available at the time. Bosch introduced one several years ago. I see it is catching on in places like Phoenix and Las Vegas but am not aware of installations in colder climates.
There are plenty of inverter-driven split systems and mini-split systems out there. For people with packaged systems on the roof these are expensive options when wanting to go all electric for heat and cooling.
It seems to me there is market here for both new and replacement systems that is being ignored/overlooked by both Bosch and other manufacturers. I have made inquiries with manufacturers to try and understand why there is so little interest in this area and get little or no response.
I would love to have someone with more cache/clout try to get an answer.
If you live in Colorado, this is a great job working as litigation staff at the Public Utilities Commission. This position gets to provide recommendations to the Commission regarding rate design, cost allocation, programs to promote EV adoption and building electrification, and all kinds of other interesting issues. It's an exciting time to work at the Commission! Applications due December 26.
Bloomberg NEF, Bloomberg's energy transition and commodities research group, is hiring for several analyst and intern positions across the US, Latin America, and Asia! Topics run the gamut from sector-specific topics like grids and utilities to broad national overviews of energy transition policy, investments, and overall readiness. Positions open with office location, then follow with title, link. and any relevant notes. More experienced applicants may be able to enter at higher levels (e.g. "Associate"); discuss with HR after applying.
FULL TIME
-New York - US Energy Storage Analyst https://careers.bloomberg.com/job/detail/122079 (BNEF also has smaller US hubs in San Francisco; Washington, DC; and to a lesser extent Seattle and Boston - but alternate work locations cannot be guaranteed)
-New York - US Grids and Utilities Analyst https://careers.bloomberg.com/job/detail/121941 (BNEF also has smaller US hubs in San Francisco; Washington, DC; and to a lesser extent Seattle and Boston - but alternate work locations cannot be guaranteed)
-Mumbai - India Analyst https://careers.bloomberg.com/job/detail/120549 (other India analysts are based in Delhi; however the Delhi office is small and I cannot promise that the Mumbai location is negotiable)
Is David still dismissive of Congress passing an escalating carbon tax at the point of first entry into the economy coupled with a net pro rata "dividend" to all citizens, as proposed by Citizens' Climate Lobby? https://citizensclimatelobby.org/price-on-carbon/
Hey, David, I would love to hear you do a fresh interview with our mutual friend Nathanael Johnson on his journey from Grist sustainability journalist to electrician. I talked to him shortly after he started working as an apprentice under a master electrician but guarantee his learning journey since then "electrifying everything" around the Bay Area would make a great Volts show. Here's that early Sustain What chat - From Journalism to Junction Boxes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlKcdjaMp0I
Thanks. Not used to Substack threads despite writing here almost a year now. I do see Nathanael's experiences as directly on the climate/energy jobs front, though.
A podcast topic idea: Viking Link HVDC electricity interconnector just came online. It's a 1.4GW connection between the UK and Denmark that helps both countries balance their electricity production. I'm not sure how often David has discussed HVDC long distance electrical connections. It seems to me this is something that would greatly help with transmission issues but isn't often discussed.
I feel as if this recent podcast "buried the lede" - if Kobold or others do manage to figure out how to find critical minerals cheaply then great... But like most who don't understand mining I assumed that once it was clear we really do need much more of these critical minerals investment would flood in and mines would be built sufficient to meet supply. That the main barrier has simply been a lack of evident long-term Market demand. The first half of this podcast really frightens me because it suggests without fundamental change in the way prospecting works, the cost of providing these minerals could skyrocket instead of reducing as demand increases. I am sure I have heard other voices on this podcast suggesting we can substitute for certain minerals and in general that we will be fine but it is harder to understand how we can avoid a shortage of more basic stuff like copper. Could you dig into this seeming contradiction a little deeper in a future episode? Http://www.volts.wtf/p/getting-better-at-mining-the-minerals
I follow the retirements on the PJM RTO, but is there a good way to follow the new generation coming online anywhere on their site? I can't seem to find a very clean way to find this information, unlike this:
Hi David, I have a remark about your trip to Iceland. I was on a similar press trip to Iceland in 2022, and I uncovered some interesting issues.
While Iceland produces almost 100% electricity from renewables, the Icelandic power companies sell green electricity certificates to EU countries for most of that electricity. At the same time, within Iceland they advertise that they supply their customers with renewable electricity, and the customers claim that electricity as well. My reporting has led to a temporary ban on these certificate exports, but that did not last long.
About a year ago, France adopted national legislation mandating solar canopies on ALL EXISTING parking lots with 80 or more spaces within 5 years & within 3 years on very large parking lots. This is probably because French farmers are extremely unlikely to accept widespread solar “farms” on existing agricultural land, among other factors. It would be illuminating to see how this strategy is playing out. Does it seem to be working or not & why?
The logic behind this mandate is clear: Build widely distributed commercial scale solar capacity +battery storage behind the meter, right in neighborhoods where most energy is being consumed. No new utility transmission, land acquisition or other site improvement spending required. Shade hot asphalt heat islands, flip large commercial & multi-family residential properties to NetZero, accelerate widely distributed V2G charging infrastructure & reliable neighborhood micro grids......all together.
Two questions, both about ideas floated about a decade ago (I think both on NPR, but not sure about the first) and I've never heard about since:
1) Someone in the Pacific Northwest had invented a "solar" panel that was solar but also converted raindrops into energy. Anyone ever heard about that?
2) Heard this at least 10 years ago, maybe more: An Israeli was planning on starting his project in Israel and then expanding it to the US - a nationwide network of service stations where you would pull in, swap out your battery for your EV and then be on your way. That, of course, would require that all batteries were interchangeable, which makes sense and doesn't look like will happen, but so much better than sitting around waiting for your battery to charge. Any clue as to whether this ever made it past the planning stage?
On #2, you're thinking of Better Place. They declared bankruptcy in 2012, and ultimately liquidated in 2013. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Place_(company). I don't know what happened to the assets / technology but I don't think I've heard about anyone seriously attempting batter swapping since then, though I'm not especially focused on EVs.
Yes that is Better Place! They had received huge sums of capital and had major partnerships with auto OEMS like Renault, but they spent a lot of money prematurely scaling before they had any real adoption or product-market fit. I believe there has been some traction with battery swapping with EVs in China.
I’d like some futurism, specifically: what could happen to the clean energy landscape if Republicans take over in 2024 or in 2028? I’m sure David could think of someone fun to invite on the pod to theorize about that
------- JANUARY MAILBAG QUESTIONS -------
David, you are basically the only reason I remain on Twitter/X. I don’t want to remain there. Is there any other platform that you can imagine moving to? Second question, at one point I believe you tweeted what you think are the 2 or 3 personal actions that have the most impact. I know this is not a newsletter/podcast about personal action, but I would find it helpful to be reminded for when the question comes up with normie friends. I can’t tell you how much I value and appreciate your work.
I believe David is also over on Bluesky!
What's the world of climate education for young people look like? I've been developing my own construction kit and set of activities to engage kids in playful learning with sustainable energy (http://playingwiththesun.org/). But I'm interested in hearing about how other educators work with kids and climate change. How do they address the political elephant in the room?
I'm involved in this at the college level. It would be a great topic.
My team at NREL is growing quickly. Explore our current job postings at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mAwuud6C7z5NSzZ8SqG2_reRJXH2_0yxMy_TsSJRDHo/edit
I think this comment should go under the "Climate jobs & opportunities" category.
One thing I don't understand is based on previous episodes on utilities, utilities are "allowed" a profit on new infrastructure projects that they don't get for routine maintenance activities. If that's the case, why aren't utilities all in on constructing new distributed grid/battery/PV production hubs within their territories? Seems like a lot of new infrastructure that they can use for profit margins. Clearly I'm missing something.
Sorry, long reply, and even this is just a first whack. First, here's the basic theory on returns in traditional utility ratemaking. Utilities are allowed a return on long-lived assets to compensate them for the time value of money that is tied up in those assets. Roughly speaking, the total amount of capital tied up long-term is the utility's "rate base" and its rates are set to allow them a chosen annual rate of return on that amount (both often heavily litigated in front of the regulators who set the rates). Short-term expenses ("operating expenses") are regarded as basically being quickly passed through and collected from ratepayers, so there's traditionally no return allowed on those short term expenses. Going one detail further, there can be a "lead-lag study" that accounts for the average amount of credit or deficit the utility is carries due to the timing mismatch between paying its opex bills and collecting those costs from customers. That results in an adjustment to the rate base so that the utility can earn a return on any small amount of capital tied up as a result of this churn in short-term expenses, but this is pretty marginal compared to the actual capex.
The issue that often arises is that renewables built within a utility's territory are not actually owned by the utility. This can be because (a) the utility has to allow the developer to interconnect under FERC's open access transmission policies, and the developer is going to transmit and sell the power to someone other than the utility, (b) the utility has to take power from the developer under PURPA, or (c) the utility is buying the power from the developer under a PPA, but still doesn't own the project. In none of those cases does the utility own the capital facilities--even in (b) and (c) it just pays for the power each short-term billing period, resulting in opex with no allowed return. In (a) it gets some return on the transmission assets involved, through its transmission rates, but not on the generation capex. This dynamic often leads to criticism that utilities slant their new resource RFPs to favor projects they would build and own themselves over ones that developers would build and sign PPAs. You can see that the utility would have an incentive to build a self-build project that it can earn a profit on, even if an independent developer's project could be better for ratepayers.
I'm not sure what I'm describing exactly tracks the distributed / hub idea you mention, but the same principles apply for utilities still subject to traditional rate base/rate of return ratemaking any time they're looking at serving their ratepayers with resources whose capital costs would be borne by others. So if we're talking about a utility building out infrastructure to facilitate others connecting DG, batteries, PV, whatever to the utility system, those resources would tend to cannibalize the rate base of resources the utility itself would own, cutting into profits. Also, if it builds anything too expensive, it runs the risk of ratepayer advocates and regulators challenging the reasonableness of the cost and trying to get it excluded from rates, and this risk may be (or be perceived as) greater for new types of infrastructure that haven't routinely been included in utility rates in the past.
Regulators and legislatures are trying some things to better align utility incentives with public policy goals. For example, here in Washington, our 100% clean electricity bill passed in 2019 allows utilities to earn a return on the opex in their PPA payments to developers. RCW 80.28.410(2)(b) https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=80.28.410
Others may be better informed on alternative approaches, or how any such efforts are working out.
Thanks for the additional info! My basic premise was one based on the utility building out the PV, battery, ext network so they would have the ownership and rates associated, but if those would be challenged for being too novel, then we're in a tricky situation.
Welp, looks like I mostly missed the point. My bad. But I do think those downward pressures on rates are probably part of the problem in your scenario. Possibly also utilities just being very cautious about adopting new tech. Would love to hear others' thoughts who are closer to the issue, because I agree with you that for utility-owned capital investments, all things being equal (which all things never are) they *should* want to build that sort of thing.
Not to be one of *those* people, but I have more of a comment than a question: I started working for a national climate advocacy org in early 2022. I come from a background in progressive organizing, but had no specific expertise in climate or environmental issues. I genuinely don't think I could do my job without volts (an exaggeration, but not a big one). I've learned so much from Volts and It's the main reason I don't sound like a complete idiot when discussing electrification and clean transition issues with anyone, whether a grassroots volunteer, local state legislative candidate, or incumbent congressional rep. I just wanted to say thank you, David!
Hi, I wonder if there is discussion happening at municipal, state or federal level about the mismatch in gas vs electric pricing and how that affects the move to electrification. For example in Chicago residential electric through ComEd is $.0687 per KWh; gas through People’s Gas fluctuates now between $.36 and $.57 per therm, which equates at the upper end to roughly $.02 per KWh -- less than one-third the price for electricity. Even with a gain in efficiency of more than 50% the homeowner bill goes up after electrification, and as we know heat pumps, electric water heaters and stoves, etc cost more up front to boot. Do you know of plans to tilt the playing field in favor of a better future? Or is Chicago an outlier in terms of pricing?
Living in Chicago, I know what you mean. But, there's a few things in electricity's favor. You can use hourly pricing with Comed, which can lower the rate significantly and allow you to time-shift. Also, there's some very large capital costs being pushed through by People's Gas for the last number of years which changes the cost structure enough that you need to evaluate the total cost, not the supply cost in the evaluation.
Mailbag question or (even better) idea for future episode:
What has *changed* since the 1970s to make nuclear power plants so much more expensive? This is NOT intended to open up the big Pandora's box of debates around how much we should or should not be supporting nuclear power today. Instead it's a narrow factual question: Americans used to build nuclear power plants and (presumably) break even financially, but they no longer do. Why? Tighter safety regulations? More NIMBYism? Removal of government subsidies? Supply chain issues? Is there any hope of returning to whatever previous status quo allowed for the construction of new nuclear plants?
I'm interested in this as well. Mostly from the prospect of what has the potential to replace existing nuclear as aging large plants retire here in the U.S. and around the world.
Based on some research of my own it looks like the legacy companies, e.g. GE and Westinghouse are proposing systems that look like smaller version of existing designs around 300 MW, e.g. https://www.ge.com/news/press-releases/province-of-ontario-to-deploy-additional-ge-hitachi-bwrx-300-small-modular-reactors and https://www.westinghousenuclear.com/energy-systems/ap300-smr .
These are obviously targeting this size to compete with advanced nuclear SMRs from NuScale, Terrapower, X-energy (Xe-100), BWX, Hermes, Holtec and E-Vinci from Westinghouse - I realize some of these are microreactors and different scale.
Question: What is the potential for any of these to bring power to the grid by 2035/2040 and start replacing aging nuclear?
We'll see how much SMRs will be used for bringing power to the grid. Ontario will have it's first SMR operational in 2029, and as your article states, 3 more coming after that. But most other recent projects have sadly fallen apart.
There is a much larger potential for them to be used for behind the meter industrial projects. Dow Chemical's Seadrift location should be powered by one of X-energy's reactors be the end of decade. Generational mining projects, oilsands, and even microsoft datacenters are all currently looking at SMR tech.
I think this is a positive development. Industrial usage is just as large as residential/commercial, but is much more concentrated, and often better suited to the heat and steam pressure available from nuclear.
Nuclear plants didn't really "break even". A plant completed on budget and then effectively run without any surprises, was an insanely valuable financial asset. The other outcome was financial disaster. Utilities went bankrupt. Entire states were put into financial distress. There wasn't much of a middle ground of just breaking even.
Given this high risk high reward profile, it's easier to understand why a few changes can make them much harder to get built.
Interest rates: the sharp increase of interest rates in the 70's was a disaster for *all* large projects, not just nuclear. Now we are seeing this again. Projects by up and comers like NuScale are being cancelled now for this reason.
Banking regulations: this is much too complicated to go into here, but it is now orders of magnitude harder for banks to invest in projects like these. Investment Bankers actually love financing these types of deal, but sadly can rarely do so because of an astoundingly large web of regulatory factors. Hamstringing our largest source of long term capital was a bad decision. 0% chance this gets fixed anytime soon.
Natural Gas: It's just so freaking, unbelievably, cheap. The companies capable of building nuclear plants would much rather do something safe and easy and very likely to be profitable.
I think capturing and using waste energy is under hyped and is going to be big. Any chance of a Volts podcast on it. (I think I've heard mention of Sharc Energy Systems on Volts, but I think there is much more possible)
Are there any plans for more collaborations with environmental justice activists? Also, what’s your general opinion on Buen Vivir, on degrowth, solarpunk, and the contrasting idea of Up Wing politics?
We got a Mitsubishi Hyper-Heat HVAC early in '22. This is now our 2nd winter with it. It is quiet and cheap all year long, except for right now. Living in Michigan, it's currently 5°F and the machine is running fine, but to keep the house comfortable (above 60°) it cost us ~$600/mo from late December through March. Just before this cold spell hit, we installed a wood-burning stove insert, and it's taking a lot of burden off the electric heat strip backup (because we didn't want a gas backup).
Being a long-time listener, we had pretty good expectations going into the process, but not everyone listens to Volts, or is able to make two major heat-related purchases over consecutive years.
I know several friends and colleagues who did not have the same understanding about efficiency dropoff curves as the temps go down, and are feeling like they got scammed by this new tech, or are at least now in a more precarious situation paying down a new HVAC, having high winter bills, or keeping the internal temps lower than is comfortable, all while remembering that they used to just be able to keep cranking the gas up, and the cost penalty wasn't quite as bad.
Have you seen this kind sentiment out in the wild? I know there are some bad faith voices out there trying to stir the pot, but there's also some not ideal outcomes that folks are experiencing as they make the switch.
Is there anyone out there working on what the 2nd wave of the electrification movement looks like now that it's picking up steam?
How can we minimize these "buyer's remorse" scenarios?
What's the deal with Washington state's carbon pricing program and its impact on fuel prices at the pump? Before it was passed I saw competing claims -- opponents said the full cost of around 50 cents per gallon would be passed directly on to consumers, and (at least some) supporters said it would end up increasing prices by only a few cents per gallon. Since then, prices have gone up a lot! Two questions: (1) how much of the subsequent increases can be attributed to the program? (2) If it's close to 50 cents per gallon, why? Is there some sort of price fixing by the companies designed to undermine the legislation, or was there a flaw in the analysis that suggested a much smaller consumer price impact?
A couple issues that are vexing me with passing policy and implementing energy transition:
1) Unions. It would be very helpful to learn some fundamentals about the relationship of unions in this country.
- Some unions in some places present (IBEW in CA) opposition to the energy transition, but I'm not sure how regional or national unions are. How did unions get tied to utilities? Is that bond unbreakable? Clearly prevailing wage in IRA helps, but is it enough? Is it moving union opinions on energy transition?
- There are weird union relationships for doing work, which I believe is also regional. Refrigerant piping in WA state is one example I've run into. Apparently, the sheet metal union used to do refrigerant piping and the pipe fitters focused on water and steam. Some time in the recent past (10 years ago??), the pipe fitters decided that they wanted responsibility for refrigerant piping. During this transition period, it's often the case that projects need both a sheet metal and a pipe fitter present, which significantly increases the cost of commercial heat pump projects. I'm wondering if there are other similar examples that could be smoothed out to ease the energy transition.
- I don't have a good context for thinking about unions and I've heard some people say "The union is against X", but I think there's way more nuance to how various unions interact with one another.
2) Integrating IT solutions into manufacturing corporations: It has been my experience that many of the long lived manufacturing companies are not great at software development. It seems common to assume that some black box in the home will tell all this equipment when to run when the grid is lightly loaded.
People buy the equipment with the brand name (and the brand name companies have the capital and manufacturing capacity) because they can rely on that company being around to service the equipment through its lifetime.
The legacy companies are understandably scared about security glitches.
They also realize that the data is valuable and whether intentionally or through not understanding IT make their data hard to access (for instance, building control systems).
It can happen that big companies buy startup tech companies, but corporations don't often have IT expertise to buy the right company, and can bury the start IT programmers under layers of bureaucracy.
Is there any hope of tech/legacy manufacturing partnerships to make the interactions we want happen?
Some examples of problems:
* GM issues with software crashes in their latest EVs (Equinox) Infotainment systems when they tried to move away from CarPlay
* Our hot water heater's app is generally clunky. I have no idea how to make it run based on what the grid wants
* Mitsubishi heat pumps are great, but their control systems are straight out of the 1990s. Warranty is voided if you try to run it with an ecobee or nest. ecobee and Nest have no idea how to ramp variable drives up and down, only to ask for warmer/colder
How about an interview with Dr. John Bistline from EPRI?
- Future of energy systems modeling
- Life after the IRA- What comes next?
- Looking beyond 2035
- Penetration of solar with and without storage.
For areas that will predominantly need to continue using hydrocarbon fuels (e.g., aviation, shipping), what should be the role of scaling adoption of carbon neutral fuels (using biofuels or e-fuels integrating both DAC and green hydrogen) vs. continuing to burn unabated fossil fuels paired with a rigorous, credible use of Direct Air Capture? Most of these pathways for creating carbon neutral fuels are very capital intensive with high efficiency losses and suffer from their own challenges (biofuel concerns over land-use and limited feedstock availability and e-fuels being extremely expensive and inefficient due to needing to utilize both DAC and green H2 facilities). In most cases, wouldn't it be much more efficient and far cheaper (with equivalent climate outcomes) to continue burning fossil hydrocarbons and separately ensuring that sufficient levels of DAC are deployed to offset the emissions? What am I missing here?
Another mailbag question or future episode idea:
Dave, for many years, you've been arguing that new coal power plant construction in the US is dead - and not because of government regulation or left-wing activism or anything like that, but just because the pure economics no longer make any sense. And yet, China is permitting two new coal power plants per week. Why the huge difference? Why does coal (apparently) still make economic sense in China but not in the U.S.? Does China's continued coal construction boom imply that coal power may be more economically viable than you thought?
My (not Dave) take: China's energy demand is growing, they have massive coal reserves and barely any natural gas production (www.eia.gov/international/overview/country/CHN). Consequently, they're building out all forms of energy production as fast as possible to keep pace with demand, which is why they are a leader in solar (by a mile), they're adding nuclear and still opening coal plants. The US domestic natural gas/petrol market undercut coal because of its massive scale, its [cheap] prices and ability to secure financing. And now there's cheap solar.
Mailbag question or maybe an idea for a longer pod. In the podcast on offshore wind with Samantha Woodworth there was some discussion of the ways in which the Jones Act raises costs for new offshore wind projects. Samantha references briefly, and I don't think David totally picked up on it, that in fact Congress has been considering stronger Jones Act requirements for offshore wind (https://rollcall.com/2023/05/04/offshore-energy-fight-returns-in-coast-guard-authorization/ background)--the exact opposite of what David asks hopefully about with regards to exemptions to speed up deployment. So how to stay clear eyed but constructive when being a climate hawk? How can we disagree without being disagreeable? Allies in labor like the Blue Green Alliance are helpful, but this Jones Act situation seems like one where climate hawks just have to disagree with labor. Similar to how sometimes conservation groups can be helpful but other times they get too NIMBY about new projects on public lands. Should we just shut up about these issues and go along with our coalitional partners, or are there ways to be constructive?
There is also a critical need to amend the Jones Act to deal with dredging. The US simply does not have the dredging fleet that we're going to need to keep up with climate resilience needs. This is a pretty 'climate' adjacent issue, but it is probably worthy of a nerdy deep-dive.
Jones Act is also a big impediment to scaling offshore wind. But sadly I see no paths to reform given the brokenness of Congress.
------- DAVID'S NOTES & MISCELLANEOUS -------
A podcast topic idea: How to electrify without upsizing the electric panel. Contrary to popular belief you can fully electrify most homes on existing 100 Amp electric panels to save time and money. Some of my friends were part of this recent story about how to do so: https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/electrification/yes-its-possible-to-electrify-a-home-on-just-100-amps
These new techniques are a way to unstick the last mile of electrification and help the workforce, utilities and customers all achieve more from the existing distribution grid and in-home grid. Think of it as a "Non-wires alternative for the home".
I was excited to see the new hydrogen rules, which sounded pretty good. It's probably too soon after the last hydrogen podcast to revive the subject on Volts, but I am curious if anyone here knows how citizens can lift their voices to support the strict new rules and prevent their being watered down. I gather there's a public comment period, but haven't been able to find where to leave such comments. (Apologies if this is the wrong place to ask--I'm a little mystified by the comment structure/format.)
Perfect place for this comment! Page 2 of the unpublished proposed rule outlines the upcoming commenting period: https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2023-28359.pdf
The proposed rule just came out so I'd give it a few weeks until various orgs give guidance on how best to advocate for views.
trip ideas: would love to hear Dave’s perspective on India’s energy transition
Hi David. I've been plagued by what seems be to a super low effort, but very high yield climate action individuals can take for a long time now -- moving their retirement nest egg to invest in a fund which votes their shares in a climate positive manner.
I was wondering if you'd be willing to take your journalistic expertise and dig into this topic a bit? There's a few funds which do what I'm talking about, and full disclaimer -- I am personally invested in the Sphere 500 Climate Fund.
- The Sphere 500 Climate Fund (ticker: SPFFX). This fund seeks to track the SP500 index without the fossil fuel polluters. Currently this tracks about 415 companies and votes your shares for the planet in shareholder meetings hundreds of times per year.
- The Engine No. 1 Transform 500 ETF (ticker: VOTE): Similar to sphere except tracks the entire SP500. Famously used their votes in a shareholder meeting to place new people on Exxon's board.
- Others I am less familiar with, like Carbon Collective.
This has been nagging at me so much because this seems like such a monumental action people can take. Voting once per year or once every other year in political elections pales in comparison to voting literally hundreds of times per year on climate. The funds we're currently invested in likely vote against the planet by default, too.
Finally, these funds typically don't fall under the amorphous ESG category. You and I share a hatred for that branding.
My key question is: why aren't more people talking about this? This seems like such a sticky action people can presumably take in mere minutes.
Hopefully this piques your interest as well.
If I read this report right (https://www.givinggreen.earth/investments-research/esg-funds-%26-climate-impact), personal investment in climate tech would only be clearly effective at early stages (and would therefore also be personally risky).
Instead, it suggests I should think about investing even in businesses I don't like, and pocketing their filthy profits, as long as the fund I do it "through" is consistently active in pushing through effective climate policy supporting resolutions using their votes as shareholders. I didn't have faith such resolutions made any real difference but this cited paper at least suggests otherwise. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3731-z So yes I would like to see some digging in on the climate impact of shareholder resolutions and (news I could use!) which ETFs have had consistent success in crafting and passing impactful shareholder resolutions.
Here are ideas if you're interested to dig into them. Hopefully this is the right place to post this.
- Washington State's Climate Commitment Act and the effort to repeal it in 2024, to help inform voters and policy makers.
- A "food for thought" interview with Paul Stamets on the value of fungi and his opinion of "The Last of Us" on public opinion.
- An interview with Suzanne Simard on healthy forests, forest fire and carbon storage and release.
- An interview with Grant Canary on replanting burned forests faster and increasing biodiversity.
- An interview with Joe Brewer on Gaia Theory, cultural evolution and regeneration.
- An interview with Tony Seba on innovation economics and what he calls "The Great Transformation"
- An interview with Johan Rockström about planetary boundaries, overshoot, priorities to solve and how.
- An interview with Kate Raworth on Doughnut economics and her ideas on updating the rules that govern our economy.
- An interview with RJ Scaringe on what it's like to start an automotive company from scratch, what's new in electric trucks and why hikers, skiers, hunters, fishermen, wildlife watchers, farmers and other rural residents might like to go electric.
- A discussion with Chad Higgins about how Agrivoltaics can improve food production and benefit family farms.
- A discussion about battery electric tools replacing gas chainsaws, trimmers, mowers, blowers, tractors and other loud, stinky equipment. I can't think of an expert for this one though.
- What's going on with lithium mining from the Salton Sea?
For what it's worth. Thanks for the opportunity to share ideas.
Trip idea: The Philippines and neighbors, because there’s increasing national interest in renewables and nuclear power, and intense geopolitical competition between US allies and China, but also some of the world’s highest energy prices; best to get outside of Manila for more unique perspectives
A general comment which I also raised on a certain single-letter discussion platform: I love to hear about innovative possible solutions like much more effective prospecting for critical minerals or low carbon ways of making steel or concrete.... but I can't get very excited about hearing about such ideas based solely or largely on interviews with people directly involved with commercializing these things - especially when they are still at an early stage. Maybe it is the journalist in me but I only want to hear about them if there's at least one third party expert as well who is invited to discuss other approaches and/or why this new approach might not work.
David doesn't seem he's big on windshield time, but maybe a road trip to renewable energy development "conflict" sites in the PNW, most easily central & eastern WA. E.g. Proposed Horse Heaven wind farm. Some other solar and pumped hydro. Or wind farms off a bit of the Oregon coast. Turn over some rocks and try to find supporters among the locals or progressive enviros. Find someone who might think we've gone too far in accepting every claim of "damage to cultural resources." Critique the local press coverage which seems to create echo chambers, amplifying minor objections. You could use Bromberg's "New Lee Highway Blues" as theme music... "All through Northern Oregon... that goddamned road seemed like it went forever... Nothing over there but the same damned town."
Where do you see the most potential for machine learning / AI to impact the clean energy transition?
Ah, DF, stay tuned this Wednesday!
Am replying for the first time. With regard to future trips, I read an article recently about Uruguay being 100% renewable. One man in the government is responsible apparently so that could be an interesting and inspiring narrative.
I enjoyed the pod, thank you!
I have hit Dave up directly on this and he hinted at good things but I will just re-raise this - how about comparing Canadian and American approaches to, say, EV policy or green hydrogen production or on and offshore wind? Here in Atlantic Canada we are wrestling with these issues and coming to some interestingly different conclusions. We (well, some of us) are hoping that we can move from a focus on offshore oil to offshore wind via green hydrogen. But even with one of the most promising sources of wind power and a convenient port for hydrogen export, the economics of green hydrogen are still unclear. You could also do a piece on the complicated politics of carbon pricing here in Canada and how (and why) it seems to be coming apart
Trip idea: Given the EU just agreed to an updated EPBD (Energy Performance of Buildings Directive) it’s a great time for a return trip to Austria. I recommend you consider the World Sustainable Energy Days conference in Wels, Austria in early March. Lots of EU policy makers will be discussing building sector decarbonization policy. That region of Austria also is a leader on industrial decarbonization, so great for site visits, and the massive trade show.
Excited for the discussion community. Already the format is awkward. Would be really excellent if you can setup a proper forum, for example https://www.discourse.org/ so the interface gets out of the way and information isn't lost.
Appreciate the suggestion, Discourse.org is really solid. However, it adds an extra layer of friction to ask people to sign into another site and we're currently optimizing for accessibility. Substack is where Volts content lives, and while its comments section is absurdly clunky, we're giving it a go. That being said, if enough subs participate and request a more robust forum, it's something worth considering!
It may help to reach out to Substack devs and request features to improve discussion. They'll likely put it on their list of to-dos and roll out improvements in a year more or less, depending on how long a to-do list they have. Just an idea I've found has worked... ask for what you want.
If you're travelling, Copenhagen is good, but I would recommend Gothenburg/Goteborg Energi. Goteborg is a major port and industrial center (e.g. Volvo, Northvolt) that still has ambitious emission reduction goals, involving integrated heating and electric systems with waste heat recovery. A month ago I saw a webinar celebrating Denver's world-changing 4-MW heat recovery system, but Gothenburg has had 160 MW of heat recovery since 1985, so, ? Also look into Stockholm Exergi heat re-use (https://www.stockholmexergi.se/fjarrvarme/sa-funkar-fjarrvarme/ - Chrome will translate everything but the video) as well as their seawater heat pumps (providing district heating since the 1980s). Also Sweden is cheaper than Dk, and in Gothenburg you can stay on the 4-masted Barken Viking in the harbor!
Maybe Copenhagen, Dave?
------- CLIMATE EVENTS & MEETUPS -------
Are there any fellow Volts fans in Las Vegas? I’m starting up a climate podcast club next month (like a book club, but instead of reading we all listen to a podcast and come together to discuss it every month) that will feature Volts pretty heavily in the rotation.
if there are any Volts fans in Vancouver BC would love to meetup!
MEER.org presents: https://www.meer.org/upcoming-events/meertalk-january-2024. Join the MEER community for a talk by Herb Simmens tomorrow 1/7. MEER was founded by Dr Ye Tao who has been a guest on Volts. In addition to learning more about the work MEER does across the world, tune in for a monthly talk and discussion on an array of topics.
Missed it by 4 days! I will be hosting another Forestry, Climate, and Startups session at the Postdoc Brewery, next to Marymoor park in Redmond WA, tentatively on Jan 18th. Nothing formal about it, feel free to drop by and talk energy, environment, or tech more broadly.
I'll post again when we get closer, the last event details were here: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7138010781387800577/
------- SHARE WORK, ASK FOR HELP, FIND COLLABORATORS -------
I'd like to share https://www.greenneighborchallenge.org/ which is a free digital toolkit designed to help any resident in the US find and sign up for the various energy programs and incentives across local, state, and federal levels. Building it has been a labor of love of by over 50 volunteers over the last five years. From Green Pricing Programs, to Energy Efficiency Incentives, to Rooftop/Community Solar, to Energy/Weatherization assistance... we keep building or creating datasets to make it easy for (mostly) regular people to navigate their options. I'd love to connect with any organizations/journalists/etc that are interested in getting the word out their membership/audiences (Andrew@GreenNeighborChallenge.org).
Andrew! Four MN utilities are rolling out window rebates for high-performance windows next year. I will email you. The rebates will not offset the full cost of high-performance windows (HPW), but will help pay the cost differential for folks looking at HPW. This is a bid deal as there were ZERO utilities with windows rebates in 2023!
hi all, if anyone is interested in collaborating on climate video projects, i have a youtube channel https://youtube.com/zentouro and i'm always looking to elevate climate work and advocacy folks are doing. feel free to reach out via the contact email in my channel's about section.
I just started a newsletter focused on how we'll respond to climate change impacts on food and ag. It's essentially a live blog of the PhD I'm doing on this. If you're interested, you can read more here! https://toughgrowing.substack.com/
Just signed up. Reach out when you want to explore some development related to your research in a video webcast. That's what Sustain What is all about. Lots of ag segments. e.g.: https://revkin.substack.com/p/to-improve-climate-and-food-futures-22-05-26
Thanks. I've gotten some great nuggets of wisdom from the webcasts, and have vivid memories of listening to the early ones while many of us were stuck at home trying to make sense of the pandemic. I'll reach out when I have more to share!
A friend and I have a new geeky blog about Alaska energy issues. https://www.alaskaenergy.org/ Alaska is an ignored US grid (and a lot of even more ignored microgrids), far behind on the energy transition, with expensive power, nearly all run by vertically integrated coops, staring down a near-term natural gas supply crisis.
Wicked, I'm a lawyer in based in Seattle but I've done a bunch of work before the RCA. Thanks for sharing; I love your posts so far.
Alaska specific: Capitol Glass/Northerm windows sells high-performance windows (U-factor of 0.22 or less) specifically in AK. There are non energy benefits that are notable in cold climates (comfort, sound, condensation, etc.), as well as the energy benefits and right-sizing of HVAC based on a better building envelope, or not needing as much exterior insulation to hit the same building envelope performance (cost savings). I'd be happy to discuss details if it's of interest! (I'm not affiliated with them, but work in a window-adjacent nonprofit role)
OK, who here is starting a business based on something they heard on a Volts podcast? :-)
Listening to Volts inspired us to buy a decommissioned paper mill in Maine for redevelopment. We don’t have expertise in energy but we chose Rumford for its location with hydro, an active mill, transmission capacity on the grid and potential to become a green energy hub. So many episodes hit on concepts that could work in our region and we are developing our mill to become an asset for the energy transition.
Hope I'm in the right place! My work is to develop technical solutions that I hope can make a big difference, quickly. My company just launched a super cheap floating wind turbine (but just the 1:16 model, we have some growing to do!). But my big wish is to get help or collaboration on something not related to my company: that is to spread the word about green ammonia. This seemingly offers a way to decarbonize the whole world by 2050, cost effectively and rapidly. A few countries and large companies are pursuing it [the idea is to use remote desert sun, remote ocean wind, wilderness geothermal or hydropower etc. for cheapest clean energy, and ship it out as a liquid that can power the electric grid, transportation, heating etc.]. The technology exists, the costs look super attractive, there are small-entity opportunities (small villages or single farmers) and it bypasses terrible permitting and political barriers. We can get to net zero by 2050! But virtually nobody in the US is touting that vision. I know that there are imperfections and issues with ammonia, but they look eminently solvable, so what gives? Legislators and agencies and thought leaders seem oblivious. HELP NEEDED!
I've seen a bit of chatter about green ammonia but you're right, mostly EU skewed (like the recent Fortescue investment)
Hello Jim, this sounds interesting - do you have specific thoughts on how to spread the word about green ammonia? I agree would be nice to hear more about it here in western Canada (there are some projects out in Atlantic Canada)
(apologies only got to this post holidays haha - also happy to chat on LinkedIn if that’s easier!)
Yes, linkedin please. I am at https://www.linkedin.com/in/jim-papadopoulos-07488213/
How does everyone keep track of all their data points/research articles? I feel like I have 100 statistics from 50 different sources and its semi-difficult to keep both track of what is what and be able to easily reference them.
I use Evernote but nothing is perfect.
In grad school, when writing writing papers where I had to track all my citations, I used Zotero, which has a chrome plugin, which makes tracking references alot easier.
Honestly great idea! I used Zotero for the same reason but it didn't cross my mind to use it for a non academic purpose
Hey Nik - I really like Obsidian for keeping track of ideas and notes. It might take some time to get used to if you’ve never used Markdown, but it’s quick and simple. Maybe try it along with zotero
Thanks Jadon, I'll give it a go for a few weeks so I can adjust
I have the perfect book recommendation for your problems. Helped me a lot on storing notes thoughts etc
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/34507927
I use a markdown notes app called Bear.
How to take smart notes
Link seems broken. What's the title of the book?
Help! I live in Seattle and bought a ~75 year old house last year and would like to investigate converting from natural gas hvac + water heater to electric. Oven / stove are already electric. I am a complete know nothing about home improvement. What sort of research resources and tradesperson / consultant do I start with?
Also, you can see my post requesting similar help, in Volts Community Thread #03, here: https://open.substack.com/pub/davidroberts/p/volts-community-thread-03?r=1x1weu&utm_campaign=comment-list-share-cta&utm_medium=web&comments=true&commentId=49402780
The replies to me there have been very helpful!
Thank you!
Hi. I am on this journey, also, with my 68 year old house, in Ohio.
I suggest you start out with Rewiring America's Go Electric guide to begin your planning.
It is free.
It includes:
- Good basic info on electrifying a household
- Sample case studies
- The case studies include the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) - how much you can expect from these programs for each thing you electrify
Link: https://www.rewiringamerica.org/IRAguide
Who's out there working on tricky carbon-specific transactional legal issues? I've been steadily getting more work in this super interesting and challenging area, but it's either under-lawyered or I just haven't found the right network yet.
I live in NM. I installed a dual-fuel packaged (rooftop) HVAC system from Trane five years ago. No inverter-driven packaged systems were available at the time. Bosch introduced one several years ago. I see it is catching on in places like Phoenix and Las Vegas but am not aware of installations in colder climates.
There are plenty of inverter-driven split systems and mini-split systems out there. For people with packaged systems on the roof these are expensive options when wanting to go all electric for heat and cooling.
It seems to me there is market here for both new and replacement systems that is being ignored/overlooked by both Bosch and other manufacturers. I have made inquiries with manufacturers to try and understand why there is so little interest in this area and get little or no response.
I would love to have someone with more cache/clout try to get an answer.
------- CLIMATE JOBS & OPPORTUNITIES -------
If you live in Colorado, this is a great job working as litigation staff at the Public Utilities Commission. This position gets to provide recommendations to the Commission regarding rate design, cost allocation, programs to promote EV adoption and building electrification, and all kinds of other interesting issues. It's an exciting time to work at the Commission! Applications due December 26.
https://www.governmentjobs.com/careers/colorado/jobs/4151518/senior-economist-rate-financial-analyst-iv-dora-puc
If you're a Python engineer in Western Europe, we're actively hiring for multiple roles at Granular Energy: https://jobs.ashbyhq.com/granular-energy.com/90b284da-1bb9-4018-b0b2-228841584e8a
We're one of a small number of organisations working in the 24/7 clean energy space, which David's written about multiple times: https://www.volts.wtf/p/an-introduction-to-energys-hottest#details
Feel free to apply directly or get in touch via LinkedIn if you'd like to hear more about the role: https://www.linkedin.com/in/benedictshegog/
Bloomberg NEF, Bloomberg's energy transition and commodities research group, is hiring for several analyst and intern positions across the US, Latin America, and Asia! Topics run the gamut from sector-specific topics like grids and utilities to broad national overviews of energy transition policy, investments, and overall readiness. Positions open with office location, then follow with title, link. and any relevant notes. More experienced applicants may be able to enter at higher levels (e.g. "Associate"); discuss with HR after applying.
FULL TIME
-New York - US Energy Storage Analyst https://careers.bloomberg.com/job/detail/122079 (BNEF also has smaller US hubs in San Francisco; Washington, DC; and to a lesser extent Seattle and Boston - but alternate work locations cannot be guaranteed)
-New York - US Grids and Utilities Analyst https://careers.bloomberg.com/job/detail/121941 (BNEF also has smaller US hubs in San Francisco; Washington, DC; and to a lesser extent Seattle and Boston - but alternate work locations cannot be guaranteed)
-Mumbai - India Analyst https://careers.bloomberg.com/job/detail/120549 (other India analysts are based in Delhi; however the Delhi office is small and I cannot promise that the Mumbai location is negotiable)
-Singapore - Southeast Asia Analyst (Thai Speaker) https://careers.bloomberg.com/job/detail/121116 (we also have a Hong Kong office although I can't promise that location is negotiable)
INTERNSHIPS
-Sao Paulo - National Energy Transitions Intern https://careers.bloomberg.com/job/detail/121452 (see here for the product you'd be working on https://www.global-climatescope.org/)
-Sao Paulo - Latin America Research Intern
https://careers.bloomberg.com/job/detail/121442
Is David still dismissive of Congress passing an escalating carbon tax at the point of first entry into the economy coupled with a net pro rata "dividend" to all citizens, as proposed by Citizens' Climate Lobby? https://citizensclimatelobby.org/price-on-carbon/
Thanks for your question -- next time try to reply under one of the categories above, more people will see it!
Hey, David, I would love to hear you do a fresh interview with our mutual friend Nathanael Johnson on his journey from Grist sustainability journalist to electrician. I talked to him shortly after he started working as an apprentice under a master electrician but guarantee his learning journey since then "electrifying everything" around the Bay Area would make a great Volts show. Here's that early Sustain What chat - From Journalism to Junction Boxes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlKcdjaMp0I
Thanks for sharing -- next time try to reply under one of the categories above, more people will see it!
Thanks. Not used to Substack threads despite writing here almost a year now. I do see Nathanael's experiences as directly on the climate/energy jobs front, though.
Hey David, have you seen a buzz about decarbonizing steel making? Sounds a lot like the electrolysis for cement outlook. I happen to see this on mining.com https://www.mining.com/bhp-partners-with-hbis-group-on-decarbonization-trials-in-steelmaking/
A podcast topic idea: Viking Link HVDC electricity interconnector just came online. It's a 1.4GW connection between the UK and Denmark that helps both countries balance their electricity production. I'm not sure how often David has discussed HVDC long distance electrical connections. It seems to me this is something that would greatly help with transmission issues but isn't often discussed.
I feel as if this recent podcast "buried the lede" - if Kobold or others do manage to figure out how to find critical minerals cheaply then great... But like most who don't understand mining I assumed that once it was clear we really do need much more of these critical minerals investment would flood in and mines would be built sufficient to meet supply. That the main barrier has simply been a lack of evident long-term Market demand. The first half of this podcast really frightens me because it suggests without fundamental change in the way prospecting works, the cost of providing these minerals could skyrocket instead of reducing as demand increases. I am sure I have heard other voices on this podcast suggesting we can substitute for certain minerals and in general that we will be fine but it is harder to understand how we can avoid a shortage of more basic stuff like copper. Could you dig into this seeming contradiction a little deeper in a future episode? Http://www.volts.wtf/p/getting-better-at-mining-the-minerals
Hi,
I follow the retirements on the PJM RTO, but is there a good way to follow the new generation coming online anywhere on their site? I can't seem to find a very clean way to find this information, unlike this:
https://www.pjm.com/planning/service-requests/gen-deactivations
Hi David, I have a remark about your trip to Iceland. I was on a similar press trip to Iceland in 2022, and I uncovered some interesting issues.
While Iceland produces almost 100% electricity from renewables, the Icelandic power companies sell green electricity certificates to EU countries for most of that electricity. At the same time, within Iceland they advertise that they supply their customers with renewable electricity, and the customers claim that electricity as well. My reporting has led to a temporary ban on these certificate exports, but that did not last long.
I hope it's okay I post a link to my reporting here, my latest article: https://industrydecarbonization.com/news/the-trouble-with-european-green-electricity-certificates.html
About a year ago, France adopted national legislation mandating solar canopies on ALL EXISTING parking lots with 80 or more spaces within 5 years & within 3 years on very large parking lots. This is probably because French farmers are extremely unlikely to accept widespread solar “farms” on existing agricultural land, among other factors. It would be illuminating to see how this strategy is playing out. Does it seem to be working or not & why?
The logic behind this mandate is clear: Build widely distributed commercial scale solar capacity +battery storage behind the meter, right in neighborhoods where most energy is being consumed. No new utility transmission, land acquisition or other site improvement spending required. Shade hot asphalt heat islands, flip large commercial & multi-family residential properties to NetZero, accelerate widely distributed V2G charging infrastructure & reliable neighborhood micro grids......all together.
Two questions, both about ideas floated about a decade ago (I think both on NPR, but not sure about the first) and I've never heard about since:
1) Someone in the Pacific Northwest had invented a "solar" panel that was solar but also converted raindrops into energy. Anyone ever heard about that?
2) Heard this at least 10 years ago, maybe more: An Israeli was planning on starting his project in Israel and then expanding it to the US - a nationwide network of service stations where you would pull in, swap out your battery for your EV and then be on your way. That, of course, would require that all batteries were interchangeable, which makes sense and doesn't look like will happen, but so much better than sitting around waiting for your battery to charge. Any clue as to whether this ever made it past the planning stage?
On #2, you're thinking of Better Place. They declared bankruptcy in 2012, and ultimately liquidated in 2013. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Place_(company). I don't know what happened to the assets / technology but I don't think I've heard about anyone seriously attempting batter swapping since then, though I'm not especially focused on EVs.
Yes that is Better Place! They had received huge sums of capital and had major partnerships with auto OEMS like Renault, but they spent a lot of money prematurely scaling before they had any real adoption or product-market fit. I believe there has been some traction with battery swapping with EVs in China.
I’d like some futurism, specifically: what could happen to the clean energy landscape if Republicans take over in 2024 or in 2028? I’m sure David could think of someone fun to invite on the pod to theorize about that
Thanks for your question -- next time try to reply under one of the categories above, more people will see it!