~THERE WILL BE BLOOD~ Netflix watchalong begins in 30 minutes -- push play and join us at the Historians at the Movies theater, run by the capable @HerbertHistory ! Hashtag: #HATM
Kicking us off: this is a movie about oil (and much more). Here are some oil facts:
DYK: Oil still provides more of the world's commercial* primary energy resources than any other fuel.
*Commercial meaning: I'm not counting the fact that the sun grows plants, heats our homes, lights our days, etc. unless it's turned into a saleable product first
Thrilled to be joining #HATM as this week's guest host! Looking forward to the chatter. :D
Who am I? I'm a civil/env engineering prof at Georgia Tech who studies energy! Born in Bakersfield; 4th gen oil family; grandparents emigrated (basically) to Oil City PA, then got out.
Drinking tonight: a flaming oil-looking Boulevardier in honor of TWBB
Also fitting (we didn't plan this): oil and gas are different, but one of the US' erstwhile biggest gas producers, and a huge participant in the shale eruption, filed for bankruptcy today. Lotta milkshakes got drank.
Another fun fact for our 3 minute warning: the US used to burn oil for electricity. We almost entirely stopped in response to the oil crisis in the 1970s -- Power Plant and Industrial Fuel Use Act said every new plant had to run coal -- but it's most of our transpo. #HATM
You can see the impact (bunches of coal plants! no more oil & new gas plants during the 1978-1987 period of the law!) here: emilygrubert.org/wp-content/upl…
Ok I’m going to live my dream: a living thread of Google reviews of power plants. These are hilarious to me because they are completely unsolicited and often rule. Will post as the spirit moves me…kicking off with —
On the occasion of the @IPCC_CH Synthesis Report (coincidentally!) -- if you'd like to spend 8 minutes with me on a journey about fossil phaseout & why we need to plan it carefully & righteously (#midtransition), have I ever got a TED talk for you.
Fossil fuels support ~80% of commercial energy consumption, which means we have an enormous amount of stuff to retire over the next couple of decades, while simultaneously building a replacement system /and/ dealing with worsening climate change effects.
🚨new paper🚨 on the water consumption of electrolytic hydrogen 🫧 that I have literally been working on since before modern hydraulic fracturing was a thing
Under deep decarb electrolytic H2 could consume ~15% of today's water for energy
Big headlines: 1) a lot of processes we think we might need for deep decarb (sustainable aviation fuels, various kinds of CDR, hydrogen) might use a LOT of water
(and electrolytic hydrogen is probably on the low end for water intensity of proposed ways to make hydrogen)
2) decarbonization also dewaters the grid (see doi.org/10.1016/j.jhyd…) so we should think about both what the water needs are /now/ and what they would be for a mature industry
this new piece uses NZA and ZCAP scenarios for both H2 production & grid mix projections
As many of you know I'm obsessed with physical infrastructure & want to invite you on this journey re: fossil fuel supply chains in a decarb'd future with me.
Basically: examine claims of future small fossil use critically. A lot of these systems have minimum viable scale.
The ("the") neat thing about flow renewables like wind & solar is that they do fuel harvesting & conversion at the same place, with the same equipment.
Not so for fueled systems (e.g., fossil). You need multiple industries, mostly private in the US, to keep operating.
If I have one wind turbine I can just run it or not (ofc there are construction supply chains -- but I'm talking once it's built). If I have one gas plant I need a gas well, a processing plant, pipelines, safety inspectors, reservoir engineers, educational infrastructure...
Re: CCS in the IRA 1) emissions cuts model suggests ~1b tons of CO2 sequestered 2024-2031 due to IRA 2) Senate finance committee suggests ~0.04b tons of CO2 claiming 45Q credit 2022-2031 (0.05b if it's all tied to EOR, or 0.3b if EOR & no multiplier)
These cannot both be true.
Plus, the lack of requirement to capture on an entire plant (it's unit only) means the CCS part could effectively subsidize the uncontrolled units if the math works, which it might--particularly if the capture is coupled to $90/bbl EOR.
🔥🏭 NEW from your methane attribution dream team, Diana Burns & me🏭🔥
How much do CH4 emissions contribute to GHG footprint of US natural gas-fired power, CCS, and DAC?
*Unit, utility, BA, & NERC region-level #s for power
*AR6 GWPs. Doc drop-->pub'd in 40 hours ain't bad!
HEADLINES: methane matters, a lot, and emissions are spatially variable. We used our state-level consumer-attributed emissions estimates (iopscience.iop.org/article/10.108…) + the usual EIA & EPA data suspects to see what's up. What's up is CO2e: +13-48% of CO2 ems for utility gas fleets.
The top 10 utilities with highest methane burden are largely out West, and the lowest methane burdens are heavily associated with the low-leakage Marcellus. (Btw: if people claim a low CH4 emitting supply, ask: are you blessed with Marcellus gas, or did you do something?)