replace

An electric reactor for industry

September 17, 2024 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

The industrial sector accounts for nearly a third of greenhouse gas emissions in the US, which is more than the annual emissions from cars, trucks, and airplanes combined. These emissions primarily come from burning fossil fuels to produce goods from raw materials as well as from the chemical reactions associated with production. Many industrial processes require very high temperatures that are not easily achieved other than by burning fossil fuels.

Researchers at Stanford University have developed and demonstrated a new kind of thermochemical reactor that can generate the huge amounts of heat required for many industrial processes that runs on electricity rather than the burning of fossil fuels. The researchers claim that the design is also smaller, cheaper, and more efficient than the fossil fuel technology it would replace.

Standard industrial thermochemical reactors burn fossil fuel to heat a fluid that is piped into the reactor, much like the way home radiators work, albeit at far higher temperatures. The new reactor uses magnetic induction, similar to the way that induction cooktops work. Heat is transferred by inducing a current into materials that heat up as the current flows.

A proof-of-concept demonstration powered a chemical reaction called the reverse water gas shift reaction and resulted in more than 85% efficiency. The reaction in question converts carbon dioxide into a valuable gas that can be used to create sustainable fuels.

The Stanford researchers are working to scale up their new reactor technology and expand its potential applications. They are working on designs for reactors for capturing carbon dioxide and for manufacturing cement.

**********

Web Links

Electric reactor could cut industrial emissions

Photo, posted October 30, 2022, courtesy of Helmut via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio

Fake Meat And Climate | Earth Wise

March 10, 2023 By EarthWise 1 Comment

Investors have poured billions of dollars into efforts to replace animal proteins with plant-based substitutes or even laboratory-grown animal cells. Replacing meats with these products is certainly a favorable development for the climate, but it is not likely to offset livestock agriculture’s climate and land use impacts anytime soon.

According to research at Stanford University, even optimistic estimates are that only something like 5% of dietary protein will come from these technologies by 2030. That just isn’t fast enough to put a real dent in the food-related emissions problem.

Stanford environmental scientist David Lobell suggests that there should be much more focus on reducing emissions of animal-based systems. There really hasn’t been much effort in this area because it is only recently that the climate impact of animal agriculture has been a topic of public concern. One problem is that it is difficult for investors to monetize investments in approaches for lowering animal agriculture emissions. These might include alternative feeds or supplements or vaccinations that inhibit methane-producing microorganisms in animals’ digestive systems.

Another approach to the problem is changing the mix of animal proteins in people’s diets. Chicken and pork are half as bad as dairy per pound of protein, and about one-tenth as bad as beef, in terms of emissions.

Dairy is a major issue. There has been quite a lot of progress in increasing the use of dairy-free milk, but over the past 40 years, Americans have cut their consumption of milk in half but doubled their consumption of cheese. Progress in dairy-free cheese has not been anywhere near as successful as that of dairy-free milk. But new products are entering the marketplace all the time.

**********

Web Links

Is fake meat a real solution? Stanford expert explains

Photo, posted June 17, 2019, courtesy of Christolph Scholz via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio

The Enormous Cost Of Steel Corrosion | Earth Wise

February 28, 2023 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

Global steel production has been rising for decades. Because steel corrodes over time, part of the demand for more steel comes from the need to replace the steel used in construction materials – in everything from bridges to cars – that has become corroded over time. Studies have estimated that the economic cost of corrosion is an astonishing 3 to 4% of a nation’s gross domestic product. Globally, this means that steel corrosion costs the world trillions – yes, trillions with a T – of dollars each year.

On top of the staggering economic impact of corrosion, there is the fact that steel production is one of the largest greenhouse gas emitters of any industry, accounting for more than 25% of all manufacturing sector carbon emissions. In fact, steel manufacturing causes over 10% of total global carbon emissions.

As a result of regulations placed on the steel industry, technological advances in the steelmaking process have resulted in a 61% reduction in the industry’s energy consumption over the last 50 years. There are continuing efforts to reduce the energy consumption of steel making and to move away from the use of fossil fuels to produce the needed energy. But without significant improvements, just the emissions associated with replacing corroded steel could make the goals set by the Paris Climate Agreement unfeasible.

It’s hard to believe that something costing the world trillions of dollars and has a major negative impact on the climate is largely invisible. Steel corrosion is an enormous societal challenge that has gone under the radar for decades and therefore has not received anything like the attention it deserves.

**********

Web Links

Reducing steel corrosion vital to combating climate change

Photo, posted July 24, 2008, courtesy of Phil Whitehouse via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio

Not All Trees Cool The Planet | Earth Wise

March 24, 2021 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

A new study from Clark University has found that deforestation does not always contribute to planetary warming, as is generally assumed. The researchers have found that there can be places where removing trees actually cools the planet.

Forests soak up carbon dioxide from the air and store it in the trees themselves and in the soil. This process is important for slowing the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

The new research focuses on a different effect that forests have on climate. They are darker than other surfaces, which causes them to absorb more sunlight and retain heat. This is known as the albedo effect.

In most places, the absorption of carbon outweighs the albedo effect and forests help cool the planet. But there are some locations, including the Intermountain and Rocky Mountain West, where more forest actually leads to a hotter planet when both processes are taken into account. State-of-the-art satellite remote sensing allowed the researchers to quantify the effects of forest loss in the United States.

The upshot of this research is that large-scale tree-planting initiatives, such as Canada’s 2Billion Trees Initiative and the Nature Conservancy’s Plant a Billion Trees campaign need to make sure to put the right trees in the right places.

Every year, about a million acres of forest are being converted to non-forest across the lower 48 states as a result of suburban and exurban expansion and development. It is important to take into account the albedo effect in trying to replace the climate-cooling capabilities of these disappearing forests by planting more trees.

**********

Web Links

Clark geographer Christopher Williams: More trees do not always create a cooler planet

Photo, posted June 5, 2017, courtesy of Todd Petrie via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.