« The Editors

Special Episode: Cleaner, Safer, Cheaper Energy [196]

2020-03-19 | 🔗

In today’s special edition of The Editors, Rich Lowry discusses the technology and innovations of the energy sector with ClearPath executive director Rich Powell.

The Editors is hosted by Rich Lowry and produced by Sarah Schutte.

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Is there such a thing as market waited solutions to climate change? If so, what are they will discuss? This on? A special sponsored edition of the editors are regularly scheduled programming. Will return very soon amber slurry and I'm joined today by rich POW executive director, clear path. The sponsor of this special episode, you'll think to enact review. Podcast Wilson, pot gas network, the com, or do I too? Have you little be easier view that for us, if he made us part of any string services out there from spot
I'd. Itunes, like what you hear, your plea gives a glowing five year review and I turned if you like, but you you're here forget. I said anything so rich thanks. So much for doing us today. Will it's like so much rather me happy to be here, So, let's stop start the very beginning. What is clear, was we re relatively new advocacy organization based in DC, we focused on conservative solutions to accelerate clean energy innovation in the pursuit of sobbing global climate change. So, let's, but but dwell now just a little bit before we get into some stops, On the in the world and some policy specifics, so
Is yours you're, going on in the world right now? The livelihoods of clean energy, innovation and the others have grown might have heard. So what is your your basic take on climate change at the basics Scientific consensus is sound and it said, Sir, problem with either grab what'd. I take it, although things all those things- and you know what a fine shows is that, if a better horse, the molecule, the atmosphere didn't care where about your co2 comes from So if it comes to me and said your comes from China, India, Indonesia, it doesn't really matter right, and so in rich countries, poor countries- everybody contributes to this problem. And, as we now look to the present and the future, the United States
smaller and smaller share of the global emissions ratchet without about fifteen percent. We used to be a lot more and you know- maybe that's, maybe that's all ere. I could ve done a lot of emissions in the past, but the road is. If you can solve this problem, you really have to focus on the whole world's emissions and so many of those are coming from rapidly developing Asia and soon will be coming from rapid. Developing Africa, South EAST Asia, and what we ve got a solution to all those emissions emissions to come and all the cope with just been built in China in the past decade or too, when I can have a solution to this problem in our minds that in the end, it is fundamentally a technology problem right it. So how do we find something that we can supply the just developed world?
rapidly developing world to help them get ahold of their emissions. And of course we should. We should lower. U S mission as well, we heavenly U s emissions, but it will meet with the? U s the highest, the best use of the? U S is a test bed for all these things, so that we get them scaled up here and then we can see from abroad, and the desk idea is rather than relying on some global Regime of controls and restrictions that increases costs than is amicable and it is unlikely ever to be adopted for us. Perhaps, for those two reasons, You you get cost effective technological innovation at that people want to adopt their own there. That would be. That would be good right. I mean you know you like. Look. We support things like the Paris agreement right. We think international cooperation on climate change is good,
But in the end that that was just a voluntary agreement right every country, it wasn't bound to do anything else, found hearing to do things and unless they actually had the cost effective compliance measures to do even the think, a bit all appeared to do it unlikely, but they never, you know submitted at him. Forget any kind of you, no concrete, mandatory international agreements with us. You know so yeah that the technology is really the thing in the only other thing is your technology, the genie that you can't put back in the bottom right? What's out there and adapt
your people to do it right so in a political will for climate solutions, they may come and go right. We ve seen that rise and fall in different countries. I am concerned there actually that no give him a likely recession. You know coming up what will actually see a general decline in them in relation to do stuff on climate change, but you don't worry if people have the right technology that they can use its low emitting in lower costs and better performing you do that, regardless of whether there really concerned about greater rights for two more things on on this just started that General Foundation for their Ezra conversation. So what what are the downside of climate change and how would they be likely to
Does here one and then two went when we say accepting that the general scientific consensus. What is that? Because it that that not you know credit tune? Bird saint world can end in fifteen. Here's what what is worth a damn it? I could amphibians back the Tec, although it It might feel that way right rightness particular moment, modern promoters in right, yeah right yeah. What what? What is it? What how would you expressed at the general scientific consensus? I too there, what were the downside and what they wish to cooperate with the consensus. First, there was talk about what the downsides repeat to the: U S, shoes at one, and I see the consensus view you know when I look at something like the intergovernmental panel on climate change right in those two points that they put out every couple years, that attempt to sum up there. You know now basque literature on his chest,
and now I think in some they say there is a problem no were were putting all of these greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and every additional molecule we put up you know incrementally adds to the risk of a bad outcome. There's a lot of uncertainty right so well that you know historical models and predictions of actually then pretty good answer. The tracking an increase in co2 and other greenhouse gases would lead to a rise in global average. Heaven There's a lot of uncertainty going forward about whether we end up at the lower end of the ranger at the high into the range. I think we have you know, he's pretty much put to bed some of the worst part of that in the brain like gum in Armenia. If China had just tapped, building coal like it was in that in that in the first decade of the century,
I'm a little water which we could have ended up behind that range, but they have. You did not stop at a significantly slowed down, and so you folks talk about this scenario, sometimes called the eight point, five scenario and that now seems increasingly unlikely. But you know there is still a lot of negative impacts and risks that could happen in in the lower scenario so to anything higher than the sort of the two degree global increased threshold and just the important thing for us remember when we talk about these global things that masks a lot of very local realities right, so some parts of the world and in how good you are North Dakota, you might prefer world right that you had gone through. Significant warming led adjust his need more pleasant places. Bed wetter. Ah you know your farmer, you, agricultural productivity action. I go up right. You have deprived of Russian really cared about my shame, but there are a lot of other parts of the world that you are going to see,
some in a pretty sure, no going back to the one or seen I'm in a most dramatically- is that you know that the early impact of sea level rise well already seen in our in Miami were seen in a sunny day. Flooding and just causes are for me There is now a flood, and you know a lot of a lot of things like that. You're part of that point about minute's silence, because the significant role of sea level rise there and for all of this development, and we ve done one coast, that's probably grounds. Well, you know if you care about retorted the international picture, which I do very motivated by here, you look at places like Bangladesh. You know that
their whole population, just quite worn, lives right about if you are at liberty to fill up one. So if you think about them trying to do this at the same time the training about the populations of all the other you now am I an economic from video ethical. That's, that's! That's! What's now what area concerning the minute? What would the knock on effects visa right of sea level rise? I'm gonna talk about that. That's that's all! I think it is a time of uncertainty right and so, in our view, the no regrets thing to do. One is a ton of uncertainty. Is you know, get a better talk? It saw the problem right and then, if things become less uncertain overtime, and you know, we decide that we do need. You know at some future date a crash programme to deploy all kinds of things around the world, but it will have a better to get when we decide on that prospect,
oh wait with obviously alluded to it in indirectly captains butter lauded turmoil Anna national life in and around the world right now, including in energy markets where you have the sir, the saudi Russia Price war that sir, that and I'm just economic conditions crashing the price, price of oil which can have also or to fix your, including for producers. So what what is it general tat, about what was going on and and how it affects energy market. Our energy pastures and and various technologies.
It's interesting about on one hand right. You have four tragic reasons. This is gonna, be a you know, a good years, just in absolute terms for planting rights and a global emissions will be down this year. As a result, you know all of these cancelled flights and discovered an economic upturn in other EU countries, so the emissions will be down your again for tragically, since I would not have wanted to see it in this way. On the other to come that bird and the income inequality debate as well on the way to really get a handle on quickly to have like a depression are major war, yeah, yeah yeah, probably already. I wish Now it s not about a sustainable path. To follow that we want to watch. We wanted.
They too have really robust economic growth. The major debate was life better, while at the same time reducing the risks, which are also going to fill the negative consequences that younger and at this time, the restaurant from climate change. So you know, I think said so. What has now happened right, which is that we need a quick back way down, invest significantly lower than you know. Fossil price regime is gonna, be a Copperfield. I'm on one hand the thing really driven the decline in? U S, emissions has been the? U S power sector and that's been hugely driven by cheap natural gas right, and so these really cheap natural gas fired power plants. Better performing than a lot of euro to compliance with the legislation displacing, and they happened to have happy emissions right
and a mirror other cheaper to one aspect with love below gas costs, and so now the gases had come. Even cheaper. Right, like in some parts of the country, will be free or negative. We fight like people will pay you to take me. Gotta wait right now in west status in order to use a gas pipeline whenever I should think that there might be and that, within the near term, some benefits for your continuing climate emissions in the EU s power sector, others, it's challenging. The nuclear power plants are measured neurons, so Look it could have could have negative effects, their church of that kind of an upside of of ultra cheap gas. You know in India and well, but the downside is that you, don't you major players in this transition going forward. Rather what are gonna be the oil and gas and super major threat Jim and, if you think about the scale,
this challenge and the level of capital that will be required to be deployed aid engineering, expertise that will be required to be deployed if a really serious about bringing down global She is really only a gigantic oil gas companies, on the other hand, for the balance sheets and expertise, and all that to do that and reach and so you are there now in an even more challenge situation, then than they had previously, which we should remember writes a week. We have cut in half were more the price of a barrel of crude right, but that that was already actually quite a low regime historically follow these companies and many of them were already struggling night, and so I'm not gonna be cheaper right now, a lot of them had just announced right like BP and shall have not been very aggressive moves to harmonise their systems put in place huge investments in doing
Look I'm like capturing the brown answered. The accidental was building a business model around this in this new regime. That's that's just get a lot more challenging took these companies have won him. Infrastructure, they built a virtually, never been left. Now you all today right, so you don't change from a better transitioning went from some of it. You know it's never been less about cost. I just walk away from part. The incentives are doing a lot of stuff. You do it! Why don't you stop giving Jack just about its revenues, that they are or will the knocker outside in our current epidemic situation, got how happy I am that the birch let limbs were very often acts of about being able to get you
given all the everyone working remotely and from the technological problems here, we had some exertions making this happen say you ended up outside your front yard oh that there's been a visa or turn among Republicans on flying that's who had kept Mccarthy, putting together a package that unites fairly minimal measures, A major one is planning trees, which would seem quite Jackson will, I think, to most people, but what? What did you? What did that? Sir? Pretend politically in in your mind, in an wasn't me, for
Republicans, maybe headed on this- and what do you think of the substantive provisions? Yeah? What? But let me just start CAFE. I think that this this kind of repositioning started last year, and so there was this series of hearings at the House of Representatives on climate change can be driven by the Democrats, and I think I am as a group. The republican leadership of all the other committees actually decided. You know we actually had done propounded, have done some terrific stuff and clean energy innovation back and twenty eighteen. They passed the something called the forty five EU tax credit, which is excellent historically strong incentive for capturing your carbon dioxide emissions and put them on the ground or doing something with them. They did historic levels of clean energy are indeed spending in twenty eighteen at the national labs a number of other really important bills to improve the state of all these technologies. So I think you know, come twenty nineteen one I'll be hearing started
Republican virtually looked around us? I don't know why we why we running from this issue. We actually have increasingly good record if we were just call it climate policy and we can point to this global emissions. Challenge and this innovation challenge. I believe in that part of your jacket and sort brilliant, and so, if you saw this, a wave of hearing last year you dont energy and commerce. And the way it means committee and all these places where a republic of China came out. I had the misfortune of testifying five of those last year as well The witness- and you know it was a wizard. You don't really care, you know just how we treat Praecordia constructive conversations with one of the pivotal solutions on the type of wishes jobs, and so I think what led him a party is not doing it. Sort of collecting all that energy is gonna, come out from a whole caucus across all those, and
when you put together a package, and so you know the one leg is out: there's gonna be three altogether. He said I want to play a before. There is about whether this was a year will see what happens to be the first one was around carbon carbon management carbon capture until it did have this sort of endorsement of the treaty in trees concept, which is something that a number of global conservation organizations and the World Economic forum had been promoting and and if it was done globally, whether we actually waiting trade through that it would be really be applied the trees and retain the trade dimension. I work up sequester other the carbon ass other they're supposed to over time, and you gotta stop. Other deforestation can happen to have a copy of the letter. She would be quite a big labour, you know, could the mob sequestered dig it up the programme around the world over the next couple of decades. But this is a challenge that
train trees, alot sound like a lot I guess you I had a look up. I feel I have to look to stop soap, so the best estimates currently are that there are today three trillion trees. So this would be increasing the global stock of trees, biased empire there are some estimates that the lock that's a lot and again. This is this: is global rights out through the leader doors, any idea like the: U S doing its part, and then eventually, I think helping other countries do the same to do more and there's a high and estimate that, and if you actually planted a trillion trees, do replacement tree lock us up that it could effectively pull out of the the sphere as much as three quarters of everything we ve already put up right, and so that's that's a tonic calculate it matter. What yeah right, which is pretty putting credible right now again, that's a high under the estimate right
a million things would have to go right to do that, much that's only the stuff we ve already put up not overstep were about to put up right. So it is not a replacement, also reducing emissions right, but it could be something that could help. A lot is one part of the solution. And there was something in all the conservation organizations have enthusiastically endorse- has been a little weird to see. A lot of work to the very left wing of the environmental movement serve coming out, opposed to it, because it s actually a pretty well I wish that we should be doing with Canada and the Abbot outside Serbia has totally accessories yelled. In outer space. To do this, or will we plant trees at the you know, at the sides very high, where we were coming to your house, we. About half finished, I wouldn't so so I guess I guess.
One. Is that actually, you know the United States. We start way more for that. We currently do right. So you know everything was cut down and east of the Mississippi. Everything was cut them, for example, that the gigantic that was the eastern of Mississippi. A lot of that was cleared. Got a new England. It's mostly grown by upright, as agriculture has shifted away from England, but in the MID west there's a ton of land out there. That is actually not currently being used for agriculture, but wasn't one point where you could leave so that there is definitely a lot of space for the United States. It is a telling spaceport run the western world and of course it does. It raises the the profiles. While I give her back. The best tree is that when you're about to places like betray the Amazon
it shouldn't be cut down. Right now is that we should also do what they like. Reducing deforestation right, everything, one and the cheapest, the Jupiter, and so should the trillion trees. Part of what the leader put out got on a press. I should think it with. It was much less important than something else which didn't press was that there should be closed. Making the forty five key tax incentive, which I talk about really are which is the incentive to capture your carbon emissions. If Europe, your planet, petrochemical plant or power plant to capture emission from underground or do something else with them like fundamental greenhouse or turn them into a product or building materials happen. They propose making that permanent.
So to say you know there should be a permanent incentive to reduce emissions from a meeting accuracy and existing plants and actually a pretty enormous and powerful signal to the market. But this is a worthwhile thing to do and actually get slightly increased and that not only do they proposed to make a permanent, but that we increase its mechanical things that would take this year to rather there, and so that would be like up your computer, air capture units and it Sir, it could be something small like on your roof, but such a right out of the air with already somebody's that have been built rather well. It could be an enormous day, like I tell, but drawing is playing the building in West Texas to take millions of tonnes, of co2 out two out of here out of the air every year and the just them some underground and in their case it would help
You are more, will recover acres, it sort of like all gone into old, Wellesley pressurizing them, but it would be a pretty enormous incentive, actually really change change the realities for a lot of hoax him in the meeting industries that was put by scientific, actually much bigger than limit than the truth about what just happened. So let us dig in honor a couple policy: areas together, particularly focused on his nuclear and again, he saw this replied the green new deal, but whenever the left talked about their various climate change, preferences and policies, must have nuclear is worked out and they weren't clear. I wonder what it that is. The correct, correct reaction. It is the correct reaction. Yeah I meet anyone whose leaving you know is proposing.
In other words, the finish your metaphor, fighting with one eye behind about alone, harping on about it today, just a level that it is by far the most important source of clean energy and urge nature. The fifty five percent of all our clean energy production to the United States. That's coming from only one hundred nuclear reactors at like sixty sites around the country. There are seven thousand power plants in the country and one percent of them produce twenty percent of all the power and fifty five percent about three things are they're like battleship right when you build one of these things it can last for eighty years and can run twenty four slash, seven, three hundred and sixty five
Just pumping out an enormous amount of clean emissions, free energy to take that off the table is just damn. It really unfortunate that governments are caught up in this. I'm in this debate that there are all kinds of reasons to like nuclear doesn't take up a lot of land, the thing last for so long that they can be a nice. Sort of consistent part of the power grid, especially when you also have a lot of really variable power from familiar solar, and there you just from a U s compared on this point, it's sort of our technology right like we, then today we have the largest nuclear industry on the and we ve gotten us expertise. We ve got the most to gain from on the industry are continuing to go not just here but around the world, and I used to living Charlotte North Carolina, which, like the use of nuclear, the two hundred thousand
You know brilliant engineers and and and other folks know there- that file all over the account. In the end all over the world maintaining these things, and there are inaccurate If you really get into the nitty gritty- and you really look at my watch- the source of power that produces the least greenhouse gas emissions, and you have to take into account not just the power plant but all the stuff. It went into my father, Yola, the railroads you mind at all than others to nuclear actually has the lowest we'd have gas with enveloping. After just such a dense, clean power, I could go on. I will stop there, but yes, nuclear yeah. No, I expert on us at all, but term in the past. Had conversations with some of my Oh libertarian energy, expert friends, they'll say well. The problem with
clear, is you know you conservative, sad to say our milk subsidies, but remove the regulatory burdens by actually economically, doesn't make sense without subsidies to the guy subsidize at an end to their voice, Didn't do that that would make it that one argument what's so the problem with nuclear is its cost effective to one wanted spilt, but today's nuclear plant, his answer extremely expensive, to build in the first place wretched. The capital expanse, is very high. The operating expenses relatively low, and so the with tee. When we think about nuclear, we think that the biggest priorities, nuclear innovation- and so it's him. Not one of the new designs that we could come up with? Where that up front capital expense would be allowed lower it, both in like absolute,
well. If you told him what I mean by that is actually make the plant smaller so that, even if, in relative terms, are still the same cost in absolute terms, its just like a less gigantic trunks were any individual accompanied the bite off built one of these things and then, in relative terms, it would be terrific if we can also bring down like that. The unit costs of the cap acts to put these things up in the first place, There are all kinds of ways that you can do that. I'm on both fronts serviceable a bunch of yours companies working on what they call these efforts are small modular reactor showed the same thing. Basic technologies at the old of your. On that? I, like water technology, there just a lot smaller, and so you know in absolute terms a lot less expensive to build, and then there are a lot of other companies working on bringing down unit costs, as well as the relative cost of the plants. Are there probably both gonna be smaller.
NL use more advanced technologies so that a lot of things you might not need the same kind of gigantic containment systems to those less pressure. That's gonna build up in the system in the first place, the one about fodder, which is more efficient, so you feel more efficiently all that stuff, and so, in our view that the innovative new, you're could really help solve this. This cost challenge could again if we go back to the global problem right, so we could subsidize nuclear em in the United States, but unless we ve got something, it's a really cost effective thing that we can tell to Pakistan. Nigeria. They unlikely to build it and again, you know we get back to the global nature of crimes, so another energy source that doesn't get totter about a lot in this debate, is really clean. Sources of energy is hydro, so
what are we taking over in that area, yet headers also extremely important, That's actually one word through. The libertarian argument is probably better, probably with the data so hydro and in most cases that the extremely cost effective, both alma ATA capital expenditure and the operating expenses- and it's really the place where we ve just let this kind of gigantic body of regulation does. But that really slow down setting up a new priority? One is just to keep the hydro power. We currently have an that's like eight per cent of national power in total firms with a lot of people opposed to that of young deal. Yes exactly as it is
the things we gotta relations it every couple of engaged and set a relation things really challenging and a regulatory process, and sometimes takes odours decades to do, and we also have a lot of existing dams that we could add turbines do so with the power of manpower, dance, but that's a regulatory issue. You can use them a giant batteries right here. A pumped storage facilities like we got two different makes it different attitudes and pump the water up from the lower one. When you got you know she power and drive it back down hill and collected energy in the turbines, and we need the power that sometimes take decades, and still we spend a lot of time thinking about the regulatory reform options there to make it. You know cheaper easier, two relations, existing power, not empowered, and then the other huge opportunity is Canada right, so cut back. Has gigantic hydropower potential far more than their currently using an urban numerous attempts, just
to get that down, especially in the New England, where you know, NIMBY, isn't stops basically right. Nobody likes anything with developing New England and so Africa, but just trying to run power lines down from Quebec. It's it's cheap, its emissions, free power. Of course you got, you know all kinds of. Maybe you know stuff, then stop ngos paralyzes what so you're fighting somewhere to get beyond that? Just stopping everything is is really so it and in a green new deal, debate and cannot fall. The details closely exert another expert, but my friends who are energy experts. It said one enormous problem with going in a basically to wines. Solar as major sources. Is there an intermediate sources? energy and I need a way to store it. So
when you know when is imply, Sun is shining you're, not having interruptions, and we don't have that capacity for storage on that level at the moment. Is that's true and is, is developing better sources. Better ways of storing things is that a huge part of this as well? It absolutely on all fronts, Whitman your great great. So these are there. They are increasingly cost effective by some estimates you know. New build wind in the MID west. Is the cheapest new form of power in? U S eat, perhaps even without the subsidies that they receive difficult you. I will continue, because those mills are very expensive, but Martin Weir about guns to this is like the beauty of modulating right is in a week. A bunch of companies have just gotten really good at building those turbines. Right and they roll off, you know factory floor assembly lines.
And companies have got really good at throwing up the other posted at relatively low costs and gotten really dig so they're pretty efficient. I gotta be easy. I'm not going to yourself so a winding and in many of the same dynamics, are also taking place in those parts of coming out as well. But the problem is that there are two parts of used to be a nurse making some. So let me just like you have got really basic care, but a business doesn't just try to reduce costs, right press to make a profit, and so you gotta have something that both can make the money and have low cost right, and if the difference between a restless and costs that give you your profit and so he then supporting these things with subsidies, which are basically your shoring up the revenue side, even at the cost of come down? But the problem is more and more you put onto the grid it all it
a lot of. It ends up going out of the ground at the same time, which often tanks value right tanks, the revenue that, but you make, and so the either you gotta make this stuff so cheap that you can put up a ton of it and you don't care if it's not making money for the vast majority of the year and an unreal sceptical that weaken that we can get there.
Africa that we're gonna have to land and turn the public social acceptance did about much of it. All. You ve got to find some way to store the energy that their producing at the at the time of the year. We don't need it and deploy it at the time of year that we do need it, but that we don't have the linen dwindling contract, and so the problems with that are that the storage is it's not just a date tonight problem which we often think up for solar, and it's not just a week to week. Problem like we ve all, probably knows about com weeks up there with the windows blow that much in weak. The problem is that there are actually who sees when it had less windy and less money than other parts of the year and in some parts of this country like in New England, those can be a difference of like one to six like a six eggs difference, and so you would need to be different energy, staunchest, so things that are so cheap. You don't care if you're only gonna build at once, and it only use it once a year
twenty or thirty years? And it is gonna, be disruptive we cheap to fit that that kind of a need, and so we we definitely work on that kind of storage, and there are a couple of longshot technologies that are out there trying to make something like that work and I hope they do, but as yet another reason it in a way the port falling on. That's right, like one of those things doesn't pan out, wouldn't need something else like like an advance nuclear reactor, for example, that is their supplying the carbon free power when there was not one I'm not running, and then finally carbon capture, you, U lunatic cabbage capture when we were talking about. The republican bill and what that their tax credit card they met tracks tat? Could it might create instead of four but
where we on carbon capture again, I am not an expert by understand the rap on it is just too expensive the moment right. Yeah was everything starts to expensive right, that's the best one. I know you don't two decades ago we were said you know, wind solar. This stuff is totally crazy way too. Expensive can never that can never got down, and so were actually now in the moment where we're starting to give a new path that in in carbon capture and certain images there for folks are familiar with. The fundamental idea is, if you gotta widget right of some kind that you put on the smokestack of a power plant that burns coal or gasser asteroids All you ve got something that you can put over the whole operation. It like steel mill, were cement factories somethin, like that, all these other things that would produce co2 emissions, and then you do something with that here too, that you you separated out you purifier, and then you put him into a pipeline
Now we actually have a big network of sheer to pipelines from a country with much which spokes arise over five thousand miles of existing co2 pipeline. We actually can a somewhat perversely drill for this in a cholera only the inner and repair to West Texas, we're gonna be used for enhanced or recovery, and so there is a market that the first thing recognise that here too, there is a market for sheer too as a commodity. It is a useful thing if you can have a cure and if you can have a pressurized and in a pipeline right, there's a market people pay and in some parts of the country, the pay, twenty or thirty bucks, a ton for that stuff delivered on site, and so the real key with carbon capture is to bring the cost capture and transportation down to the point where there is a market for that fear too, as a commodity and are actually number of technologies that now appear to be within shooting destined for getting down to that that point, and so the forty five to tax incentive is aiming to help these things too
boy and get up off the ground and develop a technology enough that the costs could be brought down enough where they can get to that point, were then, you could sell this year too for some of their valuable used and so right now we, u dont previously folks, would say what doesn't work at it definitely works. We ve got a ton of facilities coal plants. Soon, a gas planet, England, you know at the AL, oil refineries and facilities. Every year we sequester forty million tonnes of co2 in the ground from all these facilities and capture in its so definitely works and the costs have been coming down every time. Folks do another one of disappointments: it's just a question of whether we can keep doing enough of them to bring their costs down a closet so to two more questions before we we go where are you on? I know this is part of Europe. Official policy,
portfolio or anything that papers is working out. But where are you on the possibilities down the line of GEO Engineering? And he knows it thinks it talked about. That you trees. I guess our form of GEO Engineering and carbon capture, the former GEO Engineering, but really sort of things that the technology, That might be a little bit beyond our imagining. Now, what would they eventually be part of a solution? Because- one school thought on all this, like was not worry about it now, climate change, you know if it really creates major. In this area is awake, and God knows eighty years now. What, but now it is we we might have, that would would be able to alter the the global climate and in ways that that would find more favourable yup. Also united
who different conversation, their answer, the first, when you imagine all these things, take her back out of the atmosphere we gotta do. Those include that does work I'm at so. This is called kind of carbon dioxide removal, this is stuff like learning more trees. Are these units that you know kind of mechanically the air, and, if you think you get bad ethically, you know we will see the need to do this at large scale around the world through our kind of means, through your natural means and chemical means, and so definitely worth investing in and spending time and having incentives to to scale that stuff up today and worry. Citizen really promise developments across the board for for those technologies and worked out about this, and then on the other side. There is the you know what people traditionally think of his during the hearings cover solar radiation management. So, basically, having you know
I yeah so tomorrow The group have worked on. A personal level is something I think we should be looked into in researching. At the very least, I mean look it regardless of what you say, about it and whether it somethin you know we are doing and the other moral hazard questions you have to it. So if it gets bad somebody's gonna, do it right like if you re, let's see what you're? A small island developing state Bangladesh and the sea level rise thing that's really bad. You know: you're, not North Dakota. This actually looks like an existential problem for your country. You, look in there. You know from something up into the atmosphere that reduces the mission and everybody.
To throw up into the atmosphere, there's no controls on it right, so you should be entitled to do to write and so at an end, the channel and with that is it doesn't seem what these many the proposal's don't seem like. They would be that expensive to do crudely right, so you know Bangladesh probably could find a way to throw a bunch of stuff and the upper atmosphere and so to create a you no artificial volcano. If you will write like every time we ve seen, a volcanic eruption is a little bit cool and right that, basically, what they re doing in the end, the problem, because there could be all kinds of unintended consequences assembly due in his crudely right and today I mean frankly, it could be happy like down, we might just not know it.
Because we don't have the right satellite instrumentation up two detectives somebody's. If somebody is doing it and that's Gary to me right, so I think, first and foremost, we should be developing a capable is to understand who is doing what you don't wear where an with chemicals going up the atmosphere and getting a much better sense of what would happen. If we didn't What about my understanding, as well as a result, can become a small experiments that you could do to see if we can actually deal with with sort of fine control right and if we can do it that way, they don't have unintended consequences. So I think we search and up, vision on this stuff is kind of a no brainer and you know it would be good. If we had some of the solutions in place like either that high atmosphere, people talk about the more people talk about a cloud brightening.
Is an approach would effectively. China and India are already doing right, cuz it's right by the air assault from a lot of power plants that don't have good scrubbers on them and that brightens the tops of their clouds, you can do that without nasty pollutants right. You know, I didn't you ever that with seawater You know that sir, that's probably a good to have a man in the took it and then. Finally, how optimistic are are you about dealing, with climate change, which I would I want toward him out, but you you I've, seen you here at least moderately alarmed about tat I'm I'm alarmed about it. I'm who I think the first. The first thing to note is that you know dealing with climate change is not like a binary nothing we deal with or without it's not like. If we don't solve it
twelve years. The world is end up, as some folks of kind of Perry incorrectly stated about the science writes everything we do which changes our trajectory and reduces since now or in the future. Improves our risks right lowers are risks of this being a really bad problem and so the way I think about, it is much more a kind of incremental right. So are we able to develop some new great technology and the power sector that we could solve that you know cell globally? that would owe, by the way, also reduce rubbing air pollution and make a lot of people's lives better. That that seemed like You know something that allow the world would take up and and I'm I'm really encouraged by what happened in the? U S with the shale gas revolution right. So you know. A decade ago when we were weapon, but that
Caught about unaware right at it, didn't really come out of nowhere right, so there were decades of you. No basic and applied are indeed The department of energy. There was a targeted tax incentive, the internal production credit which scaled up shale gas movement. You know we may breakthroughs in August knowledge is like cause drilling and had wrought, fracturing diamond a drill beds and treaties as imaging and all this cool stuff, and and suddenly we had a technology that was was a better mousetrap. It was cleaner and cheaper and better performing and the market just took it up like crazy and- and and suddenly what everybody a decade ago, when we're talking about like a national cap and trade scheme, you have, that would be impossible right debris mission that power sector down this quickly? Suddenly the markets just done it myself right without taboos,
mandate without any more incentives for gas? And so we ve seen in? U S an example where the market will just take the stuff up very quickly. We sought in France decades ago, with nuclear right and fifteen years they built a nuclear fleet that, like completely changed their power We have now got the cleanest and some of the cheapest power and all of Europe. So these things can happen very quickly when people just get a better option, and I think that that that's where we should be putting you know more of our time and attention just developing better at great risk, thanks? So much for joining us thanks conversation and take her in the black thanks so much? Well, that's it for us. This podcast has been reduced by the incomparable sir shitty, who makes us out better than we deserve. They get clear path and thanks specially
All of you for listening will return soon to our regularly scheduled programming where the editors and stay safe, everyone-
Transcript generated on 2020-05-18.