REUTERS
"French told to stay indoors as storm Ciaran nears"
Reuters
November 1, 2023
BOULOGNE-SUR-MER, France, Nov 1 (Reuters) - France's weather service put some northern and western regions, including Brittany, under high alert and authorities urged people to stay indoors, saying storm Ciaran was set to hit overnight with heavy rain and winds of up to 170 kph.
"To all those concerned, be careful ... and avoid moving around overnight," Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin said.
Reporting by Pascal Rossignol; Writing by Ingrid Melander; Editing by Andrew Heavens
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/fr ... 023-11-01/
THE ENVIRONMENT
Re: THE ENVIRONMENT
The Daily Caller
"Biden’s Climate Bill Boosted An Offshore Wind Giant, But His Economy Brought It To The Brink"
Story by Nick Pope
4 NOVEMBER 2023
* President Joe Biden’s climate agenda and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) appeared poised to help Orsted, a Danish offshore wind developer, become a leader in the burgeoning American industry, but the past several years’ mounting economic problems has forced the company to cancel two of its signature East Coast projects.
* Orsted has cited inflationary pressure, high interest rates and considerable logistical and supply chain challenges as key reasons behind the cancellations.
* “It’s now becoming clear to everyone that there have been unforeseen issues with these approaches,” Kevin Dayaratna, chief statistician and a senior research fellow for the Heritage Foundation, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
President Joe Biden’s sweeping climate agenda once pumped up a major offshore wind developer, but the state of his economy has forced the company to cancel two of its signature projects.
The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), the legislative cornerstone of the administration’s push to transition the American economy away from fossil fuels, included robust tax credit provisions to incentivize companies like Orsted, a Danish offshore wind developer with a North American subsidiary, to invest in and build major projects.
Analysts and investors had high hopes for the company when Biden first assumed office promising to pass a major green energy subsidy bill, which eventually manifested as the IRA in the summer of 2022, but the inflation, rising interest rates and supply chain backups that have largely defined the Biden economy have forced the company to walk away from two of its key East Coast projects.
“Macroeconomic factors have changed dramatically over a short period of time, with high inflation, rising interest rates, and supply chain bottlenecks impacting our long-term capital investments,” David Hardy, the CEO of Orsted North America, said when the company announced the cancellations.
The state of the economy left the company “no choice” but to pull the plug, he said.
The IRA included numerous provisions designed to incentivize offshore wind investment, including a 30% tax credit for companies that comply with prevailing wage requirements and meet certain domestic sourcing criteria, according to the Congressional Research Service.
With the help of these IRA tax credits, it was thought that offshore wind developers like Orsted could offset the higher costs of building out and providing wind energy and still be profitable enough to appeal to investors.
The Biden administration has established a goal for the industry to provide enough power to provide electricity for 10 million American homes by 2030, but the financial problems that are hurting Orsted and other developers are jeopardizing that goal.
The two canceled projects would have accounted for more than 6% of the overall 2030 generation target.
“It’s now becoming clear to everyone that there have been unforeseen issues with these approaches,” Kevin Dayaratna, chief statistician and a senior research fellow for the Heritage Foundation, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
”Furthermore, it’s also becoming apparent that if the goal is to avert climate change, then these policies will have next to no impact in doing so.”
Orsted’s stock price reached a peak of about $75 per share in early January 2021, just prior to Biden’s inauguration, according to data available on Google Finance.
The company’s shares were trading at about $13 per share on Thursday, and they are down by about 60% over the course of 2023 alone.
Meanwhile, S&P has indicated that it is considering decreasing the company’s credit rating in light of the massive losses, according to the Financial Times.
Inflation has dogged the U.S. economy since Biden took office, which some analysts attribute in part to his robust spending on executive programs and legislative packages like the IRA and bipartisan infrastructure law.
Inflation, often referred to as a “hidden tax,” has driven prices up for almost everything across the U.S. economy, from energy to Halloween candy to the component parts needed to construct enormous wind turbines.
The company recognized that inflation threatened its projects by eating into profit margins that are based on agreed-upon rates set in contracts with utility companies, known as power purchase agreements (PPAs).
Orsted, along with other green energy developers, petitioned the New York Public Service Commission (NYPSC) for permission to renegotiate its PPA prices to account for the inflationary pressure, a move which would have resulted in significant increases for ratepayers covered by the agreement.
The NYPSC rejected the request, a decision which Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul suggested was motivated by concern for the ratepayers.
However, inflation was not the only macroeconomic trend to contribute to Orsted’s serious troubles.
Just after Biden took office in January 2021, the Federal Reserve’s interest rates were almost at 0%; as of Friday, the rate has soared above 5%.
The rate hikes are in response to the rampant inflation, intending to cool down an economy that is running too hot by making credit more expensive.
In Orsted’s case, the higher rates made refinancing its obligations too costly to be a sensible escape from its mounting financial difficulties.
On top of the monetary issues, the company also cited considerable supply chain and logistical issues as reasons for the cancellations.
Mads Nipper, CEO of Orsted, told financial analysts on Wednesday that a shortage of specialized vessels needed for the construction process would have imposed multiyear delays, especially to Ocean Wind 1.
“The most fundamental issue is that what the administration is trying to do is artificially get the wind industry going when it is not ready yet,” Dayaratna previously told the DCNF.
“When you try to do that, things cost more and keep getting even more expensive.”
Neither Orsted nor the White House responded immediately to requests for comment.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... fe8c&ei=21
"Biden’s Climate Bill Boosted An Offshore Wind Giant, But His Economy Brought It To The Brink"
Story by Nick Pope
4 NOVEMBER 2023
* President Joe Biden’s climate agenda and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) appeared poised to help Orsted, a Danish offshore wind developer, become a leader in the burgeoning American industry, but the past several years’ mounting economic problems has forced the company to cancel two of its signature East Coast projects.
* Orsted has cited inflationary pressure, high interest rates and considerable logistical and supply chain challenges as key reasons behind the cancellations.
* “It’s now becoming clear to everyone that there have been unforeseen issues with these approaches,” Kevin Dayaratna, chief statistician and a senior research fellow for the Heritage Foundation, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
President Joe Biden’s sweeping climate agenda once pumped up a major offshore wind developer, but the state of his economy has forced the company to cancel two of its signature projects.
The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), the legislative cornerstone of the administration’s push to transition the American economy away from fossil fuels, included robust tax credit provisions to incentivize companies like Orsted, a Danish offshore wind developer with a North American subsidiary, to invest in and build major projects.
Analysts and investors had high hopes for the company when Biden first assumed office promising to pass a major green energy subsidy bill, which eventually manifested as the IRA in the summer of 2022, but the inflation, rising interest rates and supply chain backups that have largely defined the Biden economy have forced the company to walk away from two of its key East Coast projects.
“Macroeconomic factors have changed dramatically over a short period of time, with high inflation, rising interest rates, and supply chain bottlenecks impacting our long-term capital investments,” David Hardy, the CEO of Orsted North America, said when the company announced the cancellations.
The state of the economy left the company “no choice” but to pull the plug, he said.
The IRA included numerous provisions designed to incentivize offshore wind investment, including a 30% tax credit for companies that comply with prevailing wage requirements and meet certain domestic sourcing criteria, according to the Congressional Research Service.
With the help of these IRA tax credits, it was thought that offshore wind developers like Orsted could offset the higher costs of building out and providing wind energy and still be profitable enough to appeal to investors.
The Biden administration has established a goal for the industry to provide enough power to provide electricity for 10 million American homes by 2030, but the financial problems that are hurting Orsted and other developers are jeopardizing that goal.
The two canceled projects would have accounted for more than 6% of the overall 2030 generation target.
“It’s now becoming clear to everyone that there have been unforeseen issues with these approaches,” Kevin Dayaratna, chief statistician and a senior research fellow for the Heritage Foundation, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
”Furthermore, it’s also becoming apparent that if the goal is to avert climate change, then these policies will have next to no impact in doing so.”
Orsted’s stock price reached a peak of about $75 per share in early January 2021, just prior to Biden’s inauguration, according to data available on Google Finance.
The company’s shares were trading at about $13 per share on Thursday, and they are down by about 60% over the course of 2023 alone.
Meanwhile, S&P has indicated that it is considering decreasing the company’s credit rating in light of the massive losses, according to the Financial Times.
Inflation has dogged the U.S. economy since Biden took office, which some analysts attribute in part to his robust spending on executive programs and legislative packages like the IRA and bipartisan infrastructure law.
Inflation, often referred to as a “hidden tax,” has driven prices up for almost everything across the U.S. economy, from energy to Halloween candy to the component parts needed to construct enormous wind turbines.
The company recognized that inflation threatened its projects by eating into profit margins that are based on agreed-upon rates set in contracts with utility companies, known as power purchase agreements (PPAs).
Orsted, along with other green energy developers, petitioned the New York Public Service Commission (NYPSC) for permission to renegotiate its PPA prices to account for the inflationary pressure, a move which would have resulted in significant increases for ratepayers covered by the agreement.
The NYPSC rejected the request, a decision which Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul suggested was motivated by concern for the ratepayers.
However, inflation was not the only macroeconomic trend to contribute to Orsted’s serious troubles.
Just after Biden took office in January 2021, the Federal Reserve’s interest rates were almost at 0%; as of Friday, the rate has soared above 5%.
The rate hikes are in response to the rampant inflation, intending to cool down an economy that is running too hot by making credit more expensive.
In Orsted’s case, the higher rates made refinancing its obligations too costly to be a sensible escape from its mounting financial difficulties.
On top of the monetary issues, the company also cited considerable supply chain and logistical issues as reasons for the cancellations.
Mads Nipper, CEO of Orsted, told financial analysts on Wednesday that a shortage of specialized vessels needed for the construction process would have imposed multiyear delays, especially to Ocean Wind 1.
“The most fundamental issue is that what the administration is trying to do is artificially get the wind industry going when it is not ready yet,” Dayaratna previously told the DCNF.
“When you try to do that, things cost more and keep getting even more expensive.”
Neither Orsted nor the White House responded immediately to requests for comment.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... fe8c&ei=21
Re: THE ENVIRONMENT
"Could new hydrogen discovery provide cheaper form of 'green' hydrogen? - French scientists found that underground hydrogen is more plentiful than previously expected, although extracting it could be a different story"
Larry Rulison, Albany, New York Times Union
Nov. 5, 2023
COLONIE — Both the Biden and Hochul administrations are making huge investments into the production of “green” hydrogen — a manmade form of hydrogen that is made from water using renewable energy.
And Plug Power, the Latham fuel cell maker, has also made huge bets on seeking to become one of the world’s largest manufacturers and suppliers of green hydrogen — considered by some to be a nearly perfect emissions-free energy source to replace fossil fuels in transportation, power plants, houses and businesses.
Hydrogen is a complicated element and its relationship with climate activists is also complicated.
Hydrogen hasn’t been widely adopted as a fuel yet.
Its most popular use is in heavy industrial processes like refining petroleum and producing fertilizer.
The gas is considered a near emissions-free fuel when used in fuel cells, which uses a chemical reaction to process the hydrogen and emit water vapor.
Hydrogen can also be burned in hydrogen engines, although that combustion does emit a small amount of carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas, as well as nitrogen oxide, which also can contribute to climate change.
But hydrogen is mostly a man-made element when used commercially.
That’s because hydrogen isn’t normally found in nature in large amounts.
In fact, most hydrogen is made at large processing centers from methane, or natural gas, through an extraction process known as steam reformation.
The process of steam reformation of methane makes commercial-grade hydrogen cheaply — but it also releases a lot of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, contributing to climate change.
Hydrogen like that is what’s known as gray hydrogen, due to its “dirty” greenhouse gas emissions.
But there is an alternative hydrogen manufacturing process that makes hydrogen from water using a process called electrolysis.
When using renewable, non-emissions electricity sources like wind or solar power, electrolysis produces what’s known as green hydrogen.
That’s the business that Plug Power is in.
The company has been building green hydrogen plants all across the United States and also internationally as governments across the globe seek to reduce and eventually eliminate the use of fossil fuels.
The company’s efforts, which have been supported by both the state and federal government with tax breaks and other financial assistance, have led it to become the world’s largest producer of green hydrogen, although the market is very small compared to the overall hydrogen market.
But what if there was suddenly a much cheaper way to produce climate-friendly hydrogen?
Recent findings by two French scientists are creating hope that there could be.
The scientists, from the National Centre of Scientific Research in Paris, accidentally discovered that hydrogen can be found — potentially in large amounts — very deep underground.
And they found what amounts to a huge hydrogen deposit in France that is estimated to have between 6 million and 250 million metric tons of hydrogen.
Such naturally made hydrogen is called geologic, or white, hydrogen because it is considered clean from a climate perspective, at least in the energy industry.
There are about 90 million metric tons of hydrogen consumed worldwide annually, so that one deposit in France could only supply the world for a couple of years maximum.
But if there are deposits that large across the world, that would be another story.
“Using a conservative range of input values, the model predicts a mean volume of hydrogen that could supply the projected global hydrogen demand for thousands of years,” Gregory Ellis, a research geologist with the U.S. Geological Survey, was quoted in a story posted on the USGS’s website earlier this year.
Ellis said it’s likely that much of that hydrogen, using current technologies, wouldn’t be accessible.
But it could be a good source of hydrogen for hundreds of years.
White hydrogen also is much cheaper to produce than green hydrogen.
That sounds bad for Plug Power, right?
For a couple of reasons, that’s not the case, said Kevin Kopczynski, vice president of strategy and mergers and acquisitions at Plug Power.
Kopczynski said it’s well known in the industry that there are large amounts of hydrogen underground, and Plug Power is keeping a close eye on the new developments.
“The question is if it can be commercially extracted with long and predictable reserve life like oil and gas,” Kopczynski said.
“No one knows the answer to that question yet."
"The biggest limiting factor on the clean hydrogen market today is the cost and availability of clean hydrogen.”
Still, Plug Power also believes that any good news about hydrogen and the availability of clean hydrogen will also benefit Plug Power, which is forecasting that it will be able to produce 500 tons of green hydrogen daily by 2025.
“This would be an overall positive driving applications and growth of the sector,” Kopczynski said.
“Plug will have significant opportunities to grow if white hydrogen proves a viable natural resource to be harnessed.”
Environmentalists aren’t all in agreement though that hydrogen is a good thing for climate change.
And that includes the potential drilling for white hydrogen.
Some within the environmental lobby point out that drilling for white hydrogen would have to use renewable electricity to power the drilling machines in order to be viewed as climate-friendly as green hydrogen.
And by doing so, white hydrogen will use up a large amount of renewable energy that is going to be needed to power the electrical grid, which in the future in places like New York and California will no longer use fossil fuels in traditional power plants.
And because of that transition to wind and solar farms — and hydropower dams — renewable energy will be needed for the grid itself.
“We do have a lot of concerns,” said Conor Bambrick, director of policy at Environmental Advocates NY.
https://www.timesunion.com/business/art ... nderground.
Larry Rulison, Albany, New York Times Union
Nov. 5, 2023
COLONIE — Both the Biden and Hochul administrations are making huge investments into the production of “green” hydrogen — a manmade form of hydrogen that is made from water using renewable energy.
And Plug Power, the Latham fuel cell maker, has also made huge bets on seeking to become one of the world’s largest manufacturers and suppliers of green hydrogen — considered by some to be a nearly perfect emissions-free energy source to replace fossil fuels in transportation, power plants, houses and businesses.
Hydrogen is a complicated element and its relationship with climate activists is also complicated.
Hydrogen hasn’t been widely adopted as a fuel yet.
Its most popular use is in heavy industrial processes like refining petroleum and producing fertilizer.
The gas is considered a near emissions-free fuel when used in fuel cells, which uses a chemical reaction to process the hydrogen and emit water vapor.
Hydrogen can also be burned in hydrogen engines, although that combustion does emit a small amount of carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas, as well as nitrogen oxide, which also can contribute to climate change.
But hydrogen is mostly a man-made element when used commercially.
That’s because hydrogen isn’t normally found in nature in large amounts.
In fact, most hydrogen is made at large processing centers from methane, or natural gas, through an extraction process known as steam reformation.
The process of steam reformation of methane makes commercial-grade hydrogen cheaply — but it also releases a lot of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, contributing to climate change.
Hydrogen like that is what’s known as gray hydrogen, due to its “dirty” greenhouse gas emissions.
But there is an alternative hydrogen manufacturing process that makes hydrogen from water using a process called electrolysis.
When using renewable, non-emissions electricity sources like wind or solar power, electrolysis produces what’s known as green hydrogen.
That’s the business that Plug Power is in.
The company has been building green hydrogen plants all across the United States and also internationally as governments across the globe seek to reduce and eventually eliminate the use of fossil fuels.
The company’s efforts, which have been supported by both the state and federal government with tax breaks and other financial assistance, have led it to become the world’s largest producer of green hydrogen, although the market is very small compared to the overall hydrogen market.
But what if there was suddenly a much cheaper way to produce climate-friendly hydrogen?
Recent findings by two French scientists are creating hope that there could be.
The scientists, from the National Centre of Scientific Research in Paris, accidentally discovered that hydrogen can be found — potentially in large amounts — very deep underground.
And they found what amounts to a huge hydrogen deposit in France that is estimated to have between 6 million and 250 million metric tons of hydrogen.
Such naturally made hydrogen is called geologic, or white, hydrogen because it is considered clean from a climate perspective, at least in the energy industry.
There are about 90 million metric tons of hydrogen consumed worldwide annually, so that one deposit in France could only supply the world for a couple of years maximum.
But if there are deposits that large across the world, that would be another story.
“Using a conservative range of input values, the model predicts a mean volume of hydrogen that could supply the projected global hydrogen demand for thousands of years,” Gregory Ellis, a research geologist with the U.S. Geological Survey, was quoted in a story posted on the USGS’s website earlier this year.
Ellis said it’s likely that much of that hydrogen, using current technologies, wouldn’t be accessible.
But it could be a good source of hydrogen for hundreds of years.
White hydrogen also is much cheaper to produce than green hydrogen.
That sounds bad for Plug Power, right?
For a couple of reasons, that’s not the case, said Kevin Kopczynski, vice president of strategy and mergers and acquisitions at Plug Power.
Kopczynski said it’s well known in the industry that there are large amounts of hydrogen underground, and Plug Power is keeping a close eye on the new developments.
“The question is if it can be commercially extracted with long and predictable reserve life like oil and gas,” Kopczynski said.
“No one knows the answer to that question yet."
"The biggest limiting factor on the clean hydrogen market today is the cost and availability of clean hydrogen.”
Still, Plug Power also believes that any good news about hydrogen and the availability of clean hydrogen will also benefit Plug Power, which is forecasting that it will be able to produce 500 tons of green hydrogen daily by 2025.
“This would be an overall positive driving applications and growth of the sector,” Kopczynski said.
“Plug will have significant opportunities to grow if white hydrogen proves a viable natural resource to be harnessed.”
Environmentalists aren’t all in agreement though that hydrogen is a good thing for climate change.
And that includes the potential drilling for white hydrogen.
Some within the environmental lobby point out that drilling for white hydrogen would have to use renewable electricity to power the drilling machines in order to be viewed as climate-friendly as green hydrogen.
And by doing so, white hydrogen will use up a large amount of renewable energy that is going to be needed to power the electrical grid, which in the future in places like New York and California will no longer use fossil fuels in traditional power plants.
And because of that transition to wind and solar farms — and hydropower dams — renewable energy will be needed for the grid itself.
“We do have a lot of concerns,” said Conor Bambrick, director of policy at Environmental Advocates NY.
https://www.timesunion.com/business/art ... nderground.
Re: THE ENVIRONMENT
Intellinews
"Cleaner air is accelerating global warming"
Story by IntelliNews
8 NOVEMBER 2023
New research indicates that global warming is advancing at an even faster pace than previously anticipated, with a surprising contributor: cleaner air.
The reduction in atmospheric pollution, often associated with burning coal, oil, and fossil fuels, has led to clearer skies and that means more sunshine.
Paradoxically, this seemingly cleaner environment from burning less fossil fuels is actually exacerbating global warming, not preventing it.
The phenomenon hinges on the presence of aerosols, minute particles resulting from the pollution of the atmosphere.
While burning coal and other fossil fuels release carbon dioxide (CO2), a potent greenhouse gas (GHG) that contributes to global warming, the accompanying smog contains aerosols that reflect sunlight back into space, which has a significant cooling effect on the planet.
This counter-intuitive cooling effect has been disrupted as pollution levels have decreased.
Much of the effort in reducing emissions has focused on cutting the emissions from cars, but it turns out shipping plays just as important a role, if not more so.
New regulations for smoke purification from ships emissions, introduced by the United Nations' shipping authority, the International Maritime OrganiZation (IMO) in 2020, have led to a massive reduction in pollution.
Experts have since observed that larger expanses of the Pacific and Atlantic oceans now receive more sunlight than in the past, accelerating global warming beyond previous expectations.
Sulphur particles emitted from ship fuel have a notable role in cloud formation, and the reduction in pollution post-2020 has led to increased sunshine and energy reaching vast oceanic regions.
This research backs up parallel research into the Earth Energy Imbalance (EEI) that shows changes in the climate and atmosphere, paradoxically linked to successes in reducing the use of emissions emitting fuels, means the earth is absorbing more of the sun's energy and accelerating the climate crisis.
The researchers now foresee an accelerated pace of global warming in the future, surpassing previous estimates provided by organisations such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
As with nearly all the big research papers released this year, the researchers behind this report are calling for the urgent transformation of society and action to combat these alarming trends.
If ignored, the research warns of a substantial sea-level rise resulting from the melting of the Greenland ice sheet and the potential collapse of significant Antarctic glaciers later this century.
Additionally, they argue that the IPCC underestimates the risk of disruptions to the thermohaline circulation, a critical oceanic process.
This research aligns with recent Danish findings that have similarly surprised the global scientific community.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topst ... 7828&ei=29
"Cleaner air is accelerating global warming"
Story by IntelliNews
8 NOVEMBER 2023
New research indicates that global warming is advancing at an even faster pace than previously anticipated, with a surprising contributor: cleaner air.
The reduction in atmospheric pollution, often associated with burning coal, oil, and fossil fuels, has led to clearer skies and that means more sunshine.
Paradoxically, this seemingly cleaner environment from burning less fossil fuels is actually exacerbating global warming, not preventing it.
The phenomenon hinges on the presence of aerosols, minute particles resulting from the pollution of the atmosphere.
While burning coal and other fossil fuels release carbon dioxide (CO2), a potent greenhouse gas (GHG) that contributes to global warming, the accompanying smog contains aerosols that reflect sunlight back into space, which has a significant cooling effect on the planet.
This counter-intuitive cooling effect has been disrupted as pollution levels have decreased.
Much of the effort in reducing emissions has focused on cutting the emissions from cars, but it turns out shipping plays just as important a role, if not more so.
New regulations for smoke purification from ships emissions, introduced by the United Nations' shipping authority, the International Maritime OrganiZation (IMO) in 2020, have led to a massive reduction in pollution.
Experts have since observed that larger expanses of the Pacific and Atlantic oceans now receive more sunlight than in the past, accelerating global warming beyond previous expectations.
Sulphur particles emitted from ship fuel have a notable role in cloud formation, and the reduction in pollution post-2020 has led to increased sunshine and energy reaching vast oceanic regions.
This research backs up parallel research into the Earth Energy Imbalance (EEI) that shows changes in the climate and atmosphere, paradoxically linked to successes in reducing the use of emissions emitting fuels, means the earth is absorbing more of the sun's energy and accelerating the climate crisis.
The researchers now foresee an accelerated pace of global warming in the future, surpassing previous estimates provided by organisations such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
As with nearly all the big research papers released this year, the researchers behind this report are calling for the urgent transformation of society and action to combat these alarming trends.
If ignored, the research warns of a substantial sea-level rise resulting from the melting of the Greenland ice sheet and the potential collapse of significant Antarctic glaciers later this century.
Additionally, they argue that the IPCC underestimates the risk of disruptions to the thermohaline circulation, a critical oceanic process.
This research aligns with recent Danish findings that have similarly surprised the global scientific community.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topst ... 7828&ei=29
Re: THE ENVIRONMENT
REUTERS
"Climate tech company Heirloom opens US commercial carbon capture plant"
By Peter Henderson
November 9, 2023
Nov 9 (Reuters) - California climate technology company Heirloom on Thursday unveiled what is says is the first U.S. commercial plant to suck planet-warming carbon dioxide from the air, a milestone in the effort to scale up nascent carbon removal technologies and hit global climate goals.
Scientists expect the world will need to remove billions of tonnes of carbon-dioxide from the air annually.
Direct Air Capture such as that used by Heirloom can secure the CO2, but it is not yet clear whether it can do so at a price that makes the technology practical.
The new facility, which uses crushed limestone to capture 1,000 tonnes a year, is part of a ramp up that Heirloom says will cut costs.
Current industry prices for carbon removal by direct air capture are around $600-$1,000 a tonne, one person familiar with the situation said.
Some of Heirloom's first sales for capture and storage, in 2021, were more than $2,000 per tonne, and the U.S. government is aiming eventually for $100 a tonne.
The new plant, about an hour and a half from San Francisco Bay in Tracy, California, has tall stacks of trays holding limestone open to the air.
The rock naturally absorbs CO2 and Heirloom has treated it to do so in a few days.
Rock that has captured CO2 is heated with renewable energy to release the gas, and then reused.
Heirloom works with startup CarbonCure to store the gas from the new plant in concrete.
U.S. Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm, who was due to visit the site on Thursday, in a statement called the plant a blueprint for beating climate change.
The Department of Energy is spending billions in grants to build Direct Air Capture demonstration hubs.
Heirloom is one of the winners of the largest tier grant.
Occidental Petroleum, another hub grant winner, aims to marry acquired DAC technology with its own expertise managing resources underground, where most of the carbon dioxide is expected to be stored.
BlackRock Inc, the world's biggest money manager, on Tuesday said it will invest $550 million in Occidental's West Texas plant.
Reporting By Peter Henderson; Editing by Marguerita Choy
https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/ ... 023-11-09/
"Climate tech company Heirloom opens US commercial carbon capture plant"
By Peter Henderson
November 9, 2023
Nov 9 (Reuters) - California climate technology company Heirloom on Thursday unveiled what is says is the first U.S. commercial plant to suck planet-warming carbon dioxide from the air, a milestone in the effort to scale up nascent carbon removal technologies and hit global climate goals.
Scientists expect the world will need to remove billions of tonnes of carbon-dioxide from the air annually.
Direct Air Capture such as that used by Heirloom can secure the CO2, but it is not yet clear whether it can do so at a price that makes the technology practical.
The new facility, which uses crushed limestone to capture 1,000 tonnes a year, is part of a ramp up that Heirloom says will cut costs.
Current industry prices for carbon removal by direct air capture are around $600-$1,000 a tonne, one person familiar with the situation said.
Some of Heirloom's first sales for capture and storage, in 2021, were more than $2,000 per tonne, and the U.S. government is aiming eventually for $100 a tonne.
The new plant, about an hour and a half from San Francisco Bay in Tracy, California, has tall stacks of trays holding limestone open to the air.
The rock naturally absorbs CO2 and Heirloom has treated it to do so in a few days.
Rock that has captured CO2 is heated with renewable energy to release the gas, and then reused.
Heirloom works with startup CarbonCure to store the gas from the new plant in concrete.
U.S. Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm, who was due to visit the site on Thursday, in a statement called the plant a blueprint for beating climate change.
The Department of Energy is spending billions in grants to build Direct Air Capture demonstration hubs.
Heirloom is one of the winners of the largest tier grant.
Occidental Petroleum, another hub grant winner, aims to marry acquired DAC technology with its own expertise managing resources underground, where most of the carbon dioxide is expected to be stored.
BlackRock Inc, the world's biggest money manager, on Tuesday said it will invest $550 million in Occidental's West Texas plant.
Reporting By Peter Henderson; Editing by Marguerita Choy
https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/ ... 023-11-09/
Re: THE ENVIRONMENT
The Associated Press
"First-of-a-kind nuclear project is terminated in a blow to Biden's clean energy agenda"
Story by JENNIFER McDERMOTT and MATTHEW DALY
10 NOVEMBER 2023
WASHINGTON (AP) — A project to build a first-of-a-kind small modular nuclear reactor power plant was terminated Wednesday, another blow to the Biden administration's clean energy agenda following cancellations last week of two major offshore wind projects.
Oregon-based NuScale Power has the only small modular nuclear reactor design certified for use in the United States.
For its first project, the company was working with a group of Utah utilities to demonstrate a six-reactor plant at the Idaho National Laboratory, generating enough electricity to power more than 300,000 homes.
The project was to come online starting in 2029 and was supposed to replace electricity from coal plants that are closing.
When combined with wind and solar, the advanced nuclear technology was intended to help municipalities and public power utilities in several western states eliminate planet-warming greenhouse gas emission from the power sector.
Instead, NuScale and the Utah utilities announced Wednesday they're terminating the project after a decade of working on it.
The cancellation comes as two large offshore wind projects in New Jersey were canceled amid supply chain problems, high interest rates and a failure to obtain the desired tax credits.
The announcement by Danish energy giant Orsted was the latest in a series of setbacks for the nascent U.S. offshore wind industry and a blow to President Joe Biden's goal to have 30 gigawatts of offshore wind power by 2030, enough to power 10 million homes.
A spokeswoman for the Energy Department called the cancellation "unfortunate news,'' but said first-of-a-kind deployments are often difficult.
Officials believe the work accomplished to date on the project will be valuable for future nuclear energy projects.
“We absolutely need advanced nuclear energy technology to meet (the Biden administration’s) ambitious clean energy goals,'' spokeswoman Charisma Troiano said.
“While not every project is guaranteed to succeed, DOE remains committed to doing everything we can to deploy these technologies to combat the climate crisis and increase access to clean energy.″
Timothy Fox, vice president at ClearView Energy Partners, a Washington-based research firm, called NuScale's announcement “a substantial setback” for small nuclear power, but said there is still “a lot of interest out there” in developing the technology at other sites.
It was not yet clear whether other projects under development face similar obstacles, he said.
"This was the frontrunner, and the frontrunner has now faltered,'' Fox said.
The Energy Department under three presidents has provided more than $600 million since 2014 to support the design, licensing and siting of a small modular reactor power plant near Idaho Falls, Idaho at the Energy Department's Idaho National Laboratory.
In 2020, the Trump administration approved up to $1.4 billion for the project, known as the Carbon Free Power Project.
The agreement serves as a funding vehicle and is subject to future appropriations by Congress.
The cancellation of the Idaho project reminded some critics of the earlier failure of Solyndra, the California solar company that went bankrupt soon after receiving a federal loan from the Obama administration more than a decade ago, costing taxpayers more than $500 million.
NuScale and the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems said it was unlikely the project will have enough subscriptions from local power providers to continue.
The power system serves 50 members, mostly municipalities and public power utilities in Utah and other Western states.
Most prospective subscribers were unwilling to take on the risks associated with developing a first-of-a-kind nuclear project, the Utah group said.
Costs have increased more than 50% in the last two years to $89 per megawatt hour, the company said.
Small reactors are seen as an alternative to more costly, traditional nuclear power that includes large reactors and cost billions of dollars and takes decades to complete.
NuScale President and Chief Executive Officer John Hopkins said the company will continue working with domestic and international customers to bring its technology to the market.
The design that was certified by federal regulators is for a 50-megawatt, advanced light-water small modular nuclear reactor.
The company is currently seeking certification for an upgraded 77-megawatt design.
NuScale said it can use power plant design plans and the regulatory progress from the cancelled project for other customers and is working to transfer materials with long lead times to other projects.
The Utah power system said it will focus on non-nuclear resources in the near term, and will need additional renewables, primarily solar and wind, as well as new natural gas.
The Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry’s trade association, called the cancellation "very disappointing,'' but said it was understandable because of the difficulties inherent in developing new technologies.
NuScale has a design that will deploy and bring clean and reliable energy in the future as the demand for clean energy grows globally, the institute said in a statement.
Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization that opposes nuclear power, said the Energy Department under three successive administrations has wasted more than half a billion dollars in taxpayer money.
“It’s about time the plug was pulled on this small modular reactor disaster,” Cook said in a statement.
“What a colossal waste of hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars, which could have been spent on existing, safe and renewable sources of energy like solar and wind.”
While no other small modular reactor or advanced design has been submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for certification, the agency said Thursday that other companies are close to applying and there's a great deal of activity within the industry.
___
McDermott reported from Providence, Rhode Island.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/first ... 4b03&ei=19
"First-of-a-kind nuclear project is terminated in a blow to Biden's clean energy agenda"
Story by JENNIFER McDERMOTT and MATTHEW DALY
10 NOVEMBER 2023
WASHINGTON (AP) — A project to build a first-of-a-kind small modular nuclear reactor power plant was terminated Wednesday, another blow to the Biden administration's clean energy agenda following cancellations last week of two major offshore wind projects.
Oregon-based NuScale Power has the only small modular nuclear reactor design certified for use in the United States.
For its first project, the company was working with a group of Utah utilities to demonstrate a six-reactor plant at the Idaho National Laboratory, generating enough electricity to power more than 300,000 homes.
The project was to come online starting in 2029 and was supposed to replace electricity from coal plants that are closing.
When combined with wind and solar, the advanced nuclear technology was intended to help municipalities and public power utilities in several western states eliminate planet-warming greenhouse gas emission from the power sector.
Instead, NuScale and the Utah utilities announced Wednesday they're terminating the project after a decade of working on it.
The cancellation comes as two large offshore wind projects in New Jersey were canceled amid supply chain problems, high interest rates and a failure to obtain the desired tax credits.
The announcement by Danish energy giant Orsted was the latest in a series of setbacks for the nascent U.S. offshore wind industry and a blow to President Joe Biden's goal to have 30 gigawatts of offshore wind power by 2030, enough to power 10 million homes.
A spokeswoman for the Energy Department called the cancellation "unfortunate news,'' but said first-of-a-kind deployments are often difficult.
Officials believe the work accomplished to date on the project will be valuable for future nuclear energy projects.
“We absolutely need advanced nuclear energy technology to meet (the Biden administration’s) ambitious clean energy goals,'' spokeswoman Charisma Troiano said.
“While not every project is guaranteed to succeed, DOE remains committed to doing everything we can to deploy these technologies to combat the climate crisis and increase access to clean energy.″
Timothy Fox, vice president at ClearView Energy Partners, a Washington-based research firm, called NuScale's announcement “a substantial setback” for small nuclear power, but said there is still “a lot of interest out there” in developing the technology at other sites.
It was not yet clear whether other projects under development face similar obstacles, he said.
"This was the frontrunner, and the frontrunner has now faltered,'' Fox said.
The Energy Department under three presidents has provided more than $600 million since 2014 to support the design, licensing and siting of a small modular reactor power plant near Idaho Falls, Idaho at the Energy Department's Idaho National Laboratory.
In 2020, the Trump administration approved up to $1.4 billion for the project, known as the Carbon Free Power Project.
The agreement serves as a funding vehicle and is subject to future appropriations by Congress.
The cancellation of the Idaho project reminded some critics of the earlier failure of Solyndra, the California solar company that went bankrupt soon after receiving a federal loan from the Obama administration more than a decade ago, costing taxpayers more than $500 million.
NuScale and the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems said it was unlikely the project will have enough subscriptions from local power providers to continue.
The power system serves 50 members, mostly municipalities and public power utilities in Utah and other Western states.
Most prospective subscribers were unwilling to take on the risks associated with developing a first-of-a-kind nuclear project, the Utah group said.
Costs have increased more than 50% in the last two years to $89 per megawatt hour, the company said.
Small reactors are seen as an alternative to more costly, traditional nuclear power that includes large reactors and cost billions of dollars and takes decades to complete.
NuScale President and Chief Executive Officer John Hopkins said the company will continue working with domestic and international customers to bring its technology to the market.
The design that was certified by federal regulators is for a 50-megawatt, advanced light-water small modular nuclear reactor.
The company is currently seeking certification for an upgraded 77-megawatt design.
NuScale said it can use power plant design plans and the regulatory progress from the cancelled project for other customers and is working to transfer materials with long lead times to other projects.
The Utah power system said it will focus on non-nuclear resources in the near term, and will need additional renewables, primarily solar and wind, as well as new natural gas.
The Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry’s trade association, called the cancellation "very disappointing,'' but said it was understandable because of the difficulties inherent in developing new technologies.
NuScale has a design that will deploy and bring clean and reliable energy in the future as the demand for clean energy grows globally, the institute said in a statement.
Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization that opposes nuclear power, said the Energy Department under three successive administrations has wasted more than half a billion dollars in taxpayer money.
“It’s about time the plug was pulled on this small modular reactor disaster,” Cook said in a statement.
“What a colossal waste of hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars, which could have been spent on existing, safe and renewable sources of energy like solar and wind.”
While no other small modular reactor or advanced design has been submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for certification, the agency said Thursday that other companies are close to applying and there's a great deal of activity within the industry.
___
McDermott reported from Providence, Rhode Island.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/first ... 4b03&ei=19
Re: THE ENVIRONMENT
The Telegraph
"The great green scandals have only just begun"
Story by Matthew Lynn
11 NOVEMBER 2023
A prime minister has been forced out of office over a scandal centering on a crucial raw material for the transition to renewable energy.
One of the largest sellers of carbon offsetting credits – the virtue-signalling tokens pushed by high-end restaurants and business class airlines – finds itself ensnared in a controversy over exaggerated claims.
And the founder of an electric truck maker, committed to reducing carbon emissions, has been jailed for misleading investors.
We have, recently, started to witness a succession of what might be termed “green scandals”.
But, could these be just the tip of the iceberg?
Governments around the world are throwing hundreds of billions of dollars, euros, pounds at hitting their net zero targets.
And history teaches us one very simple lesson.
Where there is “free” money available in such huge quantities, fraud and massive waste often follow – and this may be becoming evident now.
It has been a bad few weeks for anyone who thought all the money poured into our low carbon transition would be well spent.
This week, Portugal’s long-serving prime minister, António Costa, resigned after police raided his official residence as part of a corruption probe into his administration’s handling of lithium mining, one of the crucial materials for electric cars, and a green hydrogen project.
The results of the investigation, of course, remain to be seen, but one has to wonder how likely it is that the Socialist Party politician will ever return to power.
Meanwhile, South Pole, the Swiss-based leader in carbon offsetting, is fighting off allegations that it inflated the impact of the climate products it sold.
It has reportedly cut ties with a huge forest protection project in Zimbabwe, and laid off staff to cope with the fall-out.
And it is not that long since Trevor Milton, the founder of the electric truck maker Nikola was found guilty of fraud for misleading investors, precipitating a collapse in the share price of a company which, at one point, was worth more than Ford.
Taken together, a picture is beginning to emerge of some political leaders, projects and companies finding themselves the subject of controversy, scandal and, at worst, fraud.
Meanwhile, in a separate development, Shell is suing Greenpeace for $2m for disruption, a welcome sign that major companies are starting to defend their right to go about their business so long as they are within the law.
In a desperate scramble to meet targets that were set with seemingly little thought to how they might be met, governments are spending extraordinary amounts on green industrial policies.
In the US, Joe Biden, the president, is spending an estimated $720bn on the energy transition; with open ended tax credits the final bill is likely to break through the $1 trillion barrier.
The EU has committed to parting with $270bn for its “Green New Deal” by the end of the decade, with more money being made available if it is needed.
Mark Carney, the former Governor of the Bank of England, has grandly pledged that his climate finance action group will mobilise $130trillion in net zero investment over the next few years.
The list goes on and on.
The trouble is, these sorts of commitments, and the very real concern that success will be judged not on outcomes but rather on how much money is “invested”, throw up countless opportunities for sharp practice.
When a new factory is being subsidised with millions of dollars, it is not that hard to overspend on consulting or management fees.
When so much money is being committed to carbon offsetting, it is not hard to see how the figures might end up being inflated.
There is a very real concern that adequate checks and balances are not being placed on some of these investments.
When there is a wide government safety net, where is the incentive to ensure green projects are being delivered on time for the lowest cost possible?
Even in the private sector, one has to wonder whether new start-ups promising to revolutionise electric vehicles, or tidal power, or fusion energy, are really worth the valuations they are being given.
The point is this: some “green projects” don’t have to meet normal commercial criteria, and even when they are subjected to the same kind of scrutiny that a regular investment would be, red flags can be missed by woke capitalists eager to back businesses that could, they hope, change the world.
Few would disagree that we need to transition to a carbon neutral economy of course.
It is a major project, and one that will require lots of investment.
But right now we are going about it in the worst way possible.
We are pursuing old-fashioned central planning, expecting politicians to pick winners rather than allowing the market discovery process to steer us towards the most cost-effective solutions.
Far better to tax emissions, letting the market decide how to reduce them and which technologies to use.
This might not hand political leaders the opportunity to boast about how much they are “investing”.
But industrial policy always leads to waste – and that doesn’t change because there is a green label attached.
Of the hundreds of billions that are being spent, much of it will simply disappear into thin air, and much of the 2030s could be spent investigating and prosecuting hundreds if not thousands of frauds.
Money that was desperately needed elsewhere will have been frittered away.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/th ... a7f2&ei=43
"The great green scandals have only just begun"
Story by Matthew Lynn
11 NOVEMBER 2023
A prime minister has been forced out of office over a scandal centering on a crucial raw material for the transition to renewable energy.
One of the largest sellers of carbon offsetting credits – the virtue-signalling tokens pushed by high-end restaurants and business class airlines – finds itself ensnared in a controversy over exaggerated claims.
And the founder of an electric truck maker, committed to reducing carbon emissions, has been jailed for misleading investors.
We have, recently, started to witness a succession of what might be termed “green scandals”.
But, could these be just the tip of the iceberg?
Governments around the world are throwing hundreds of billions of dollars, euros, pounds at hitting their net zero targets.
And history teaches us one very simple lesson.
Where there is “free” money available in such huge quantities, fraud and massive waste often follow – and this may be becoming evident now.
It has been a bad few weeks for anyone who thought all the money poured into our low carbon transition would be well spent.
This week, Portugal’s long-serving prime minister, António Costa, resigned after police raided his official residence as part of a corruption probe into his administration’s handling of lithium mining, one of the crucial materials for electric cars, and a green hydrogen project.
The results of the investigation, of course, remain to be seen, but one has to wonder how likely it is that the Socialist Party politician will ever return to power.
Meanwhile, South Pole, the Swiss-based leader in carbon offsetting, is fighting off allegations that it inflated the impact of the climate products it sold.
It has reportedly cut ties with a huge forest protection project in Zimbabwe, and laid off staff to cope with the fall-out.
And it is not that long since Trevor Milton, the founder of the electric truck maker Nikola was found guilty of fraud for misleading investors, precipitating a collapse in the share price of a company which, at one point, was worth more than Ford.
Taken together, a picture is beginning to emerge of some political leaders, projects and companies finding themselves the subject of controversy, scandal and, at worst, fraud.
Meanwhile, in a separate development, Shell is suing Greenpeace for $2m for disruption, a welcome sign that major companies are starting to defend their right to go about their business so long as they are within the law.
In a desperate scramble to meet targets that were set with seemingly little thought to how they might be met, governments are spending extraordinary amounts on green industrial policies.
In the US, Joe Biden, the president, is spending an estimated $720bn on the energy transition; with open ended tax credits the final bill is likely to break through the $1 trillion barrier.
The EU has committed to parting with $270bn for its “Green New Deal” by the end of the decade, with more money being made available if it is needed.
Mark Carney, the former Governor of the Bank of England, has grandly pledged that his climate finance action group will mobilise $130trillion in net zero investment over the next few years.
The list goes on and on.
The trouble is, these sorts of commitments, and the very real concern that success will be judged not on outcomes but rather on how much money is “invested”, throw up countless opportunities for sharp practice.
When a new factory is being subsidised with millions of dollars, it is not that hard to overspend on consulting or management fees.
When so much money is being committed to carbon offsetting, it is not hard to see how the figures might end up being inflated.
There is a very real concern that adequate checks and balances are not being placed on some of these investments.
When there is a wide government safety net, where is the incentive to ensure green projects are being delivered on time for the lowest cost possible?
Even in the private sector, one has to wonder whether new start-ups promising to revolutionise electric vehicles, or tidal power, or fusion energy, are really worth the valuations they are being given.
The point is this: some “green projects” don’t have to meet normal commercial criteria, and even when they are subjected to the same kind of scrutiny that a regular investment would be, red flags can be missed by woke capitalists eager to back businesses that could, they hope, change the world.
Few would disagree that we need to transition to a carbon neutral economy of course.
It is a major project, and one that will require lots of investment.
But right now we are going about it in the worst way possible.
We are pursuing old-fashioned central planning, expecting politicians to pick winners rather than allowing the market discovery process to steer us towards the most cost-effective solutions.
Far better to tax emissions, letting the market decide how to reduce them and which technologies to use.
This might not hand political leaders the opportunity to boast about how much they are “investing”.
But industrial policy always leads to waste – and that doesn’t change because there is a green label attached.
Of the hundreds of billions that are being spent, much of it will simply disappear into thin air, and much of the 2030s could be spent investigating and prosecuting hundreds if not thousands of frauds.
Money that was desperately needed elsewhere will have been frittered away.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/th ... a7f2&ei=43
Re: THE ENVIRONMENT
TheStreet
"Plug Power collapses after 'going concern' warning from hydrogen developer"
Story by Martin Baccardax
11 NOVEMBER 2023
Plug Power shares plunged lower Friday after the hydrogen-fuel-cell developer warned that it may not be able to continue operations amid supply chain disruptions and a severe cash burn rate.
Plug Power, which provides fuel cells for electrified industrial vehicles used by Amazon and Walmart, also posted weaker-than-expected third quarter sales of $199 million last night, thanks in part to what it described as "unprecedented hydrogen supply challenges" in the north American hydrogen market.
In a later filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, however, Plug Power also added that given its current cash position and expected capital spending, there is "substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern."
The group is seeking a $1.5 billion loan from the Department of Energy, as part of its green hydrogen network financing, but funds are unlikely to being flowing into the Latham, New York-based group until early next year.
"To alleviate the conditions and events that raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern, management is currently evaluating several different options to enhance the Company’s liquidity position, including the sale of securities, incurrence of debt or other financing alternative," Plug Power said.
"The Company’s plan includes various financing solutions from third parties with a particular focus on corporate level debt solutions, investment tax credit related project financings and loan guarantee programs, and/or large scale hydrogen generation infrastructure project financing," Plug Power added in the 10-Q filing.
Plug Power shares were marked 28.8% lower in pre-market trading to indicate an opening bell price of $4.22 each.
KeyBanc Capital Markets analyst Sangita Jain, who carries a 'sector weight' rating on Plug Power stock, said the lack of a detailed financial plan amid the 'going concern' warning is troubling.
"Management reiterated the myriad options being considered including project finance, ABLs, advances against restricted cash and inventory draw down," she said.
"But nothing has been decided despite elevated cash burn and the unrestricted cash & available for sale securities balance declining from $2 billion at the end of last year to around $500 million at the end of the third quarter."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/topstoc ... 54e3&ei=29
"Plug Power collapses after 'going concern' warning from hydrogen developer"
Story by Martin Baccardax
11 NOVEMBER 2023
Plug Power shares plunged lower Friday after the hydrogen-fuel-cell developer warned that it may not be able to continue operations amid supply chain disruptions and a severe cash burn rate.
Plug Power, which provides fuel cells for electrified industrial vehicles used by Amazon and Walmart, also posted weaker-than-expected third quarter sales of $199 million last night, thanks in part to what it described as "unprecedented hydrogen supply challenges" in the north American hydrogen market.
In a later filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, however, Plug Power also added that given its current cash position and expected capital spending, there is "substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern."
The group is seeking a $1.5 billion loan from the Department of Energy, as part of its green hydrogen network financing, but funds are unlikely to being flowing into the Latham, New York-based group until early next year.
"To alleviate the conditions and events that raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern, management is currently evaluating several different options to enhance the Company’s liquidity position, including the sale of securities, incurrence of debt or other financing alternative," Plug Power said.
"The Company’s plan includes various financing solutions from third parties with a particular focus on corporate level debt solutions, investment tax credit related project financings and loan guarantee programs, and/or large scale hydrogen generation infrastructure project financing," Plug Power added in the 10-Q filing.
Plug Power shares were marked 28.8% lower in pre-market trading to indicate an opening bell price of $4.22 each.
KeyBanc Capital Markets analyst Sangita Jain, who carries a 'sector weight' rating on Plug Power stock, said the lack of a detailed financial plan amid the 'going concern' warning is troubling.
"Management reiterated the myriad options being considered including project finance, ABLs, advances against restricted cash and inventory draw down," she said.
"But nothing has been decided despite elevated cash burn and the unrestricted cash & available for sale securities balance declining from $2 billion at the end of last year to around $500 million at the end of the third quarter."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/topstoc ... 54e3&ei=29
Re: THE ENVIRONMENT
The New York Post
"NYers face skyrocketing costs to switch to electric heat under new ‘green’ policies: study"
Story by Carl Campanile
13 NOVEMBER 2023
New York residents could face skyrocketing heating bills under the state’s new “green” policies — which may not even have a significant impact on greenhouse-gas emissions, a new study warns.
A review by the Empire Center for Public Policy says the state’s new rules will push homeowners to buy expensive electrified heat pumps while being forced to phase out their natural gas, oil and propane systems.
But even then, the new electrification policy could only have a negligible impact on greenhouse emissions while burning up homeowners’ wallets, according to the analysis, “In Cold Reality: The Cost and Challenge of Compulsory Home Electrification in New York.”
“New York’s plan to steer homeowners and landlords toward electric heat could backfire due to high costs and practical concerns,” the authors say.
“The costs of heat pump installation and building shell weatherization are high and will place a substantial economic burden on many homeowners, even with state and federal subsidies.
“The cost of installing a heat pump and weatherizing a home: $14,600 to $46,200,” says the study, prepared by Empire Center fellow James Hanley.
Even with the extensive state and federal subsidies, the upfront price tag of heat pumps and weatherization will likely push many homeowners to instead buy low-cost but energy-hungry electric furnaces, the report says.
The electric furnaces put considerably greater stress on the state’s grid, defeating the purpose of using cleaner, non-fossil burning energy, the report claims.
The green push from the state comes along with Gov. Kathy Hochul’s plan to ban gas stoves in newly constructed homes by 2025.
New York’s 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act calls for reducing statewide greenhouse gas emissions by 85 percent by 2050.
The state’s Climate Action Council proposed meeting that goal in large part by electrifying 85 percent of the state’s buildings.
But it also has recommended a prohibition on the replacement of fuel-burning furnaces as of 2030, which would push the mandate closer to 100 percent, the report said.
Only 13 percent of all New York residential units are currently heated with either electricity or solar energy.
In Staten Island, only 5% of homes have electric heat — the lowest of any county in the state.
Heating oil is used in one in five or 1.4 million New York homes — including in the coldest parts of the state such as the Adirondacks, as well as Long Island.
Hanley of the Empire Center said the impact of this electrification would be felt most acutely in upstate rural New York, where the median household income of owner-occupied homes is the lowest in the state.
“The low rate of electric heating in many of the state’s more rural and lower-income counties means much of the choice will fall on homeowners who can least afford it,” the report said.
“And those who have unexpected equipment failures in midwinter may not be able to arrange contractors for their necessary shell upgrades in time to ensure comfort for the remainder of the season.”
The report said the state could instead curb emissions by setting clean fuel standards that encourage the use of biofuels.
Whether homeowners choose heat pumps or electric furnaces, mandatory electrification will lead to the elimination of propane and oil furnaces by the late 2040s and early 2050s, and no later than the early 2060s.
The home heating oil delivery industry will likely go out of business.
“By choosing a single model for all homeowners to follow, the state’s Climate Action Council closed the door on the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through the use of clean fuel standards using fuels supplied by an existing distribution system,” Hanley said.
“In doing so, it acted without regard for consumer preference, homeowner cost, or whether there were more cost-effective means of achieving reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
“This is the fundamental problem at the heart of New York’s command-and-control attempt to restructure its economy to make what amounts to barely detectable reductions in global emissions."
"Albany can ban things, but it can’t control how people replace them.”
Hochul’s office rebutted the findings.
“Under the status quo, New York consumers are stuck with dramatic fluctuations on utility bills and sky-high costs after extreme weather events,” a rep for the governor said.
“Governor Hochul is making sure the clean energy revolution is affordable for New Yorkers, which is why she’s invested nearly $1.6 billion on energy affordability initiatives.”
The current state budget includes $200 million to shave high electric bills for 800,000 households whose family income is under $75,000, Hochul’s office said.
The budget also created a separate $200 million fund that helps 20,000 low-income families upgrade their homes by adding insulation or buying new energy-efficient appliances.
The governor insists that participating families will pay no more than 6% of their incomes on electricity.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... 9cb2&ei=41
"NYers face skyrocketing costs to switch to electric heat under new ‘green’ policies: study"
Story by Carl Campanile
13 NOVEMBER 2023
New York residents could face skyrocketing heating bills under the state’s new “green” policies — which may not even have a significant impact on greenhouse-gas emissions, a new study warns.
A review by the Empire Center for Public Policy says the state’s new rules will push homeowners to buy expensive electrified heat pumps while being forced to phase out their natural gas, oil and propane systems.
But even then, the new electrification policy could only have a negligible impact on greenhouse emissions while burning up homeowners’ wallets, according to the analysis, “In Cold Reality: The Cost and Challenge of Compulsory Home Electrification in New York.”
“New York’s plan to steer homeowners and landlords toward electric heat could backfire due to high costs and practical concerns,” the authors say.
“The costs of heat pump installation and building shell weatherization are high and will place a substantial economic burden on many homeowners, even with state and federal subsidies.
“The cost of installing a heat pump and weatherizing a home: $14,600 to $46,200,” says the study, prepared by Empire Center fellow James Hanley.
Even with the extensive state and federal subsidies, the upfront price tag of heat pumps and weatherization will likely push many homeowners to instead buy low-cost but energy-hungry electric furnaces, the report says.
The electric furnaces put considerably greater stress on the state’s grid, defeating the purpose of using cleaner, non-fossil burning energy, the report claims.
The green push from the state comes along with Gov. Kathy Hochul’s plan to ban gas stoves in newly constructed homes by 2025.
New York’s 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act calls for reducing statewide greenhouse gas emissions by 85 percent by 2050.
The state’s Climate Action Council proposed meeting that goal in large part by electrifying 85 percent of the state’s buildings.
But it also has recommended a prohibition on the replacement of fuel-burning furnaces as of 2030, which would push the mandate closer to 100 percent, the report said.
Only 13 percent of all New York residential units are currently heated with either electricity or solar energy.
In Staten Island, only 5% of homes have electric heat — the lowest of any county in the state.
Heating oil is used in one in five or 1.4 million New York homes — including in the coldest parts of the state such as the Adirondacks, as well as Long Island.
Hanley of the Empire Center said the impact of this electrification would be felt most acutely in upstate rural New York, where the median household income of owner-occupied homes is the lowest in the state.
“The low rate of electric heating in many of the state’s more rural and lower-income counties means much of the choice will fall on homeowners who can least afford it,” the report said.
“And those who have unexpected equipment failures in midwinter may not be able to arrange contractors for their necessary shell upgrades in time to ensure comfort for the remainder of the season.”
The report said the state could instead curb emissions by setting clean fuel standards that encourage the use of biofuels.
Whether homeowners choose heat pumps or electric furnaces, mandatory electrification will lead to the elimination of propane and oil furnaces by the late 2040s and early 2050s, and no later than the early 2060s.
The home heating oil delivery industry will likely go out of business.
“By choosing a single model for all homeowners to follow, the state’s Climate Action Council closed the door on the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through the use of clean fuel standards using fuels supplied by an existing distribution system,” Hanley said.
“In doing so, it acted without regard for consumer preference, homeowner cost, or whether there were more cost-effective means of achieving reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
“This is the fundamental problem at the heart of New York’s command-and-control attempt to restructure its economy to make what amounts to barely detectable reductions in global emissions."
"Albany can ban things, but it can’t control how people replace them.”
Hochul’s office rebutted the findings.
“Under the status quo, New York consumers are stuck with dramatic fluctuations on utility bills and sky-high costs after extreme weather events,” a rep for the governor said.
“Governor Hochul is making sure the clean energy revolution is affordable for New Yorkers, which is why she’s invested nearly $1.6 billion on energy affordability initiatives.”
The current state budget includes $200 million to shave high electric bills for 800,000 households whose family income is under $75,000, Hochul’s office said.
The budget also created a separate $200 million fund that helps 20,000 low-income families upgrade their homes by adding insulation or buying new energy-efficient appliances.
The governor insists that participating families will pay no more than 6% of their incomes on electricity.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... 9cb2&ei=41
Re: THE ENVIRONMENT
USA TODAY
"Who's to blame for climate change? Scientists don't hold back in new federal report."
Story by Dinah Voyles Pulver and Doyle Rice, USA TODAY
15 NOVEMBER 2023
Climate change is here and prompting unprecedented actions in every state to curb the greenhouse gas emissions fueling warming temperatures, but a new federal report out Tuesday says bigger, bolder steps are needed.
After several years of work by more than 500 authors from every state, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Guam, the White House released the massive Fifth National Climate Assessment.
In remarks Tuesday morning, President Joe Biden announced more than $6 billion to bolster the electric grid, update water infrastructure, reduce flooding, and advance environmental justice.
"This assessment shows us in clear scientific terms, that climate change is impacting all regions, all sectors of the United States," Biden said.
"We’ve come to the point where it’s foolish for anyone to deny the impacts of climate change anymore."
The assessment includes more evidence than ever before to demonstrate the cause and effects of the changing climate, said L. Ruby Leung, one of its authors.
It also breaks from previous reports by saying unequivocally that humans are responsible for changes to Earth's climate.
"It’s important for us to recognize that how much climate change we will be experiencing in the future depends on the choices that we make now," said Leung, a climate scientist at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and lead author on the earth sciences chapter.
All of the impacts people are feeling, like sea level rise and extreme weather events, she said "are tied to the global warming level, to how warm the earth becomes," Leung said.
"And that depends very much on the level of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere."
In other news, the United Nations released its latest analysis of national climate plans on Tuesday morning and found them “strikingly misaligned" with science.
"The chasm between need and action is more menacing than ever,” said Secretary-General António Guterres.
“It’s time for a climate ambition supernova in every country, city and sector.”
What is the 2023 National Climate Assessment?
The massive assessment describes the climate and economic impacts Americans will see if further action is not taken to address climate change.
The report, issued roughly every four years, was mandated by Congress in the late 1980s and is meant as a reference for the president, Congress, and the public.
"Too many people still think of climate change as an issue that's distanced from us in space or time or relevance," said Katharine Hayhoe, an author of the report and chief scientist at The Nature Conservancy.
The assessment “clearly explains how climate change is affecting us here in the places where we live, both now and in the future and across every sector of human and natural society,” Hayhoe said.
It also shows that "the risks matter and so do our choices."
Climate Nexus, a nonprofit communications organization, said the new report is "essential reading," because it highlights the seriousness of current impacts and shows the existing pace of adaptation isn't enough to keep pace with future climate changes.
"Without deeper cuts in global net greenhouse gas emissions and accelerated adaptation efforts, severe climate risks to the United States will continue to grow," the report states.
"Each additional increment of warming is expected to lead to more damage and greater economic losses."
However, greater reductions in carbon emissions could reduce the risks and impacts, and have immediate health and economic benefits, the report states.
What are the effects of climate change?
Millions are experiencing more extreme heat waves, with warmer temperatures and longer-lasting heat waves, the report states.
It adds climate changes are apparent in every region of the country.
Among the noted effects:
◾ The number of nights with minimum low temperatures at or above 70 degrees has increased compared to 1901-1960 in every corner of the country except the northern Great Plains and Alaska.
◾ Average annual precipitation is increasing in most regions, except the Northwest, Southwest, and Hawaii.
◾ Heavier precipitation events are increasing everywhere except Hawaii and the Caribbean.
◾ Relative sea levels are increasing along much of the coast, except for Oregon, Washington, and Alaska.
◾ In the 1980s, the country experienced on average a $1 billion disaster every four months but now experiences one every three weeks.
This year, the country has set a new record with 25 billion-dollar disasters.
Climate scientists around the world say 2023 is almost certain to be the globe's warmest year in recorded human history.
The global mean temperature through October was 1.4 Celsius (more than 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit) above the preindustrial average.
So far this year, the nation is experiencing its 11th warmest year on record through October, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
However, 12 states are experiencing their warmest or second warmest year on record.
Growing evidence that humans are changing the climate
This assessment is most notable for the certainty scientists have gained about warming and its impacts, said Leung, who served as the lead author for the report’s Earth Systems Processes chapter, which lays the scientific groundwork and is used to illustrate points throughout the report.
The chapter, a collaboration among more than a dozen authors, was intended to answer such questions as whether humans are causing global warming, whether warming is changing extreme weather and climate events and how much warming the planet might expect to see.
In prior reports, scientists often hedged their statements, for example saying they were 90% sure humans were responsible for the changes being seen," Leung said.
“In this NCA 5 report, we are now saying that we are totally sure."
Starting from the 1900s, the observed warming has been caused by human activities, she said.
"It’s definitive.”
Another key difference is scientists reduced by 50% the uncertainty in how much temperatures would warm if the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere doubles, she said.
In previous assessments that number had hovered around a range from 2.7 degrees to 8 degrees.
“It was a pretty big range,” she said.
“Our goal has always been to narrow this down.”
Thanks to the increase in instrumental observations, satellite data, the study of the paleoclimate, and higher resolution computer modeling, scientists now have amassed more evidence than ever before, giving them more certainty, she said.
“Now we can say that the global warming that is caused by a doubling of the CO2 in the atmosphere should be between 4.5 degrees Fahrenheit and 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit.”
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions
Efforts to adapt to climate change, reduce net greenhouse gas emissions, and be more energy efficient are underway in every U.S. region and have expanded since 2018, the report concludes.
Greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. fell 12% between 2005 and 2019, mostly driven by changes in the way electricity is produced, the assessment concluded.
The nation burns less coal, but more natural gas, which is cleaner.
Because of the electrical industry's 40% reduction in emissions, the transportation sector took the lead as the industry with the most emissions.
Growth in the capacity of wind, solar, and battery storage is supported by the falling costs of those technologies, and that ultimately means even more emissions reductions, the report states.
For example, wind and solar energy costs have dropped 70% and 90%, respectively.
While the options for cleaner technologies and lower energy use have expanded, the authors found they aren't happening fast enough for the nation to meet the goal of achieving a carbon-neutral energy system.
Without deeper cuts in global net greenhouse gas emissions and accelerated adaptation efforts, the scientists found severe climate risks to the United States will continue to grow.
Each additional increment of warming is expected to lead to more damage and greater economic losses compared to previous increments of warming, and the risks of catastrophic consequences also increase.
But the report also finds that reducing greenhouse gas emissions and removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere can limit future warming and associated increases in many risks, and bring immediate health and economic benefits.
What others are saying about the report:
The scientific assessment is "the latest in a series of alarm bells and illustrates that the changes we’re living through are unprecedented in human history," said Kristina Dahl, a principal climate scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists and a contributor to the report.
"The science is irrefutable: we must swiftly reduce heat-trapping emissions and enact transformational climate adaptation policies in every region of the country to limit the stampede of devastating events and the toll each one takes on our lives and the economy."
The report illustrates three things, said Arati Prabhakar, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.
◾ The events Americans have already experienced firsthand are "unfolding as predicted."
◾ Communities in every state and territory have taken action.
◾ People across the nation can use the assessment to take future actions.
For example, Prabhakar said the report could be used by a water utility manager in Chicago trying to understand extreme rainfall, an urban planner deciding where to locate cooling centers in Texas, or a manager of a Southeastern hospital trying to get ahead of the diseases ticks and mosquitoes are bringing into their region as a result of the changing climate.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topst ... dce6&ei=40
"Who's to blame for climate change? Scientists don't hold back in new federal report."
Story by Dinah Voyles Pulver and Doyle Rice, USA TODAY
15 NOVEMBER 2023
Climate change is here and prompting unprecedented actions in every state to curb the greenhouse gas emissions fueling warming temperatures, but a new federal report out Tuesday says bigger, bolder steps are needed.
After several years of work by more than 500 authors from every state, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Guam, the White House released the massive Fifth National Climate Assessment.
In remarks Tuesday morning, President Joe Biden announced more than $6 billion to bolster the electric grid, update water infrastructure, reduce flooding, and advance environmental justice.
"This assessment shows us in clear scientific terms, that climate change is impacting all regions, all sectors of the United States," Biden said.
"We’ve come to the point where it’s foolish for anyone to deny the impacts of climate change anymore."
The assessment includes more evidence than ever before to demonstrate the cause and effects of the changing climate, said L. Ruby Leung, one of its authors.
It also breaks from previous reports by saying unequivocally that humans are responsible for changes to Earth's climate.
"It’s important for us to recognize that how much climate change we will be experiencing in the future depends on the choices that we make now," said Leung, a climate scientist at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and lead author on the earth sciences chapter.
All of the impacts people are feeling, like sea level rise and extreme weather events, she said "are tied to the global warming level, to how warm the earth becomes," Leung said.
"And that depends very much on the level of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere."
In other news, the United Nations released its latest analysis of national climate plans on Tuesday morning and found them “strikingly misaligned" with science.
"The chasm between need and action is more menacing than ever,” said Secretary-General António Guterres.
“It’s time for a climate ambition supernova in every country, city and sector.”
What is the 2023 National Climate Assessment?
The massive assessment describes the climate and economic impacts Americans will see if further action is not taken to address climate change.
The report, issued roughly every four years, was mandated by Congress in the late 1980s and is meant as a reference for the president, Congress, and the public.
"Too many people still think of climate change as an issue that's distanced from us in space or time or relevance," said Katharine Hayhoe, an author of the report and chief scientist at The Nature Conservancy.
The assessment “clearly explains how climate change is affecting us here in the places where we live, both now and in the future and across every sector of human and natural society,” Hayhoe said.
It also shows that "the risks matter and so do our choices."
Climate Nexus, a nonprofit communications organization, said the new report is "essential reading," because it highlights the seriousness of current impacts and shows the existing pace of adaptation isn't enough to keep pace with future climate changes.
"Without deeper cuts in global net greenhouse gas emissions and accelerated adaptation efforts, severe climate risks to the United States will continue to grow," the report states.
"Each additional increment of warming is expected to lead to more damage and greater economic losses."
However, greater reductions in carbon emissions could reduce the risks and impacts, and have immediate health and economic benefits, the report states.
What are the effects of climate change?
Millions are experiencing more extreme heat waves, with warmer temperatures and longer-lasting heat waves, the report states.
It adds climate changes are apparent in every region of the country.
Among the noted effects:
◾ The number of nights with minimum low temperatures at or above 70 degrees has increased compared to 1901-1960 in every corner of the country except the northern Great Plains and Alaska.
◾ Average annual precipitation is increasing in most regions, except the Northwest, Southwest, and Hawaii.
◾ Heavier precipitation events are increasing everywhere except Hawaii and the Caribbean.
◾ Relative sea levels are increasing along much of the coast, except for Oregon, Washington, and Alaska.
◾ In the 1980s, the country experienced on average a $1 billion disaster every four months but now experiences one every three weeks.
This year, the country has set a new record with 25 billion-dollar disasters.
Climate scientists around the world say 2023 is almost certain to be the globe's warmest year in recorded human history.
The global mean temperature through October was 1.4 Celsius (more than 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit) above the preindustrial average.
So far this year, the nation is experiencing its 11th warmest year on record through October, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
However, 12 states are experiencing their warmest or second warmest year on record.
Growing evidence that humans are changing the climate
This assessment is most notable for the certainty scientists have gained about warming and its impacts, said Leung, who served as the lead author for the report’s Earth Systems Processes chapter, which lays the scientific groundwork and is used to illustrate points throughout the report.
The chapter, a collaboration among more than a dozen authors, was intended to answer such questions as whether humans are causing global warming, whether warming is changing extreme weather and climate events and how much warming the planet might expect to see.
In prior reports, scientists often hedged their statements, for example saying they were 90% sure humans were responsible for the changes being seen," Leung said.
“In this NCA 5 report, we are now saying that we are totally sure."
Starting from the 1900s, the observed warming has been caused by human activities, she said.
"It’s definitive.”
Another key difference is scientists reduced by 50% the uncertainty in how much temperatures would warm if the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere doubles, she said.
In previous assessments that number had hovered around a range from 2.7 degrees to 8 degrees.
“It was a pretty big range,” she said.
“Our goal has always been to narrow this down.”
Thanks to the increase in instrumental observations, satellite data, the study of the paleoclimate, and higher resolution computer modeling, scientists now have amassed more evidence than ever before, giving them more certainty, she said.
“Now we can say that the global warming that is caused by a doubling of the CO2 in the atmosphere should be between 4.5 degrees Fahrenheit and 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit.”
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions
Efforts to adapt to climate change, reduce net greenhouse gas emissions, and be more energy efficient are underway in every U.S. region and have expanded since 2018, the report concludes.
Greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. fell 12% between 2005 and 2019, mostly driven by changes in the way electricity is produced, the assessment concluded.
The nation burns less coal, but more natural gas, which is cleaner.
Because of the electrical industry's 40% reduction in emissions, the transportation sector took the lead as the industry with the most emissions.
Growth in the capacity of wind, solar, and battery storage is supported by the falling costs of those technologies, and that ultimately means even more emissions reductions, the report states.
For example, wind and solar energy costs have dropped 70% and 90%, respectively.
While the options for cleaner technologies and lower energy use have expanded, the authors found they aren't happening fast enough for the nation to meet the goal of achieving a carbon-neutral energy system.
Without deeper cuts in global net greenhouse gas emissions and accelerated adaptation efforts, the scientists found severe climate risks to the United States will continue to grow.
Each additional increment of warming is expected to lead to more damage and greater economic losses compared to previous increments of warming, and the risks of catastrophic consequences also increase.
But the report also finds that reducing greenhouse gas emissions and removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere can limit future warming and associated increases in many risks, and bring immediate health and economic benefits.
What others are saying about the report:
The scientific assessment is "the latest in a series of alarm bells and illustrates that the changes we’re living through are unprecedented in human history," said Kristina Dahl, a principal climate scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists and a contributor to the report.
"The science is irrefutable: we must swiftly reduce heat-trapping emissions and enact transformational climate adaptation policies in every region of the country to limit the stampede of devastating events and the toll each one takes on our lives and the economy."
The report illustrates three things, said Arati Prabhakar, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.
◾ The events Americans have already experienced firsthand are "unfolding as predicted."
◾ Communities in every state and territory have taken action.
◾ People across the nation can use the assessment to take future actions.
For example, Prabhakar said the report could be used by a water utility manager in Chicago trying to understand extreme rainfall, an urban planner deciding where to locate cooling centers in Texas, or a manager of a Southeastern hospital trying to get ahead of the diseases ticks and mosquitoes are bringing into their region as a result of the changing climate.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topst ... dce6&ei=40