Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

As crews chainsaw Joshua trees, Mojave Desert community protests solar energy project

News Feed
Friday, September 6, 2024

When Roy Richards spotted workers cutting down and shredding Joshua trees for a sprawling solar energy project near his Mojave Desert home last week, he started taking photos. “Once the trees go through the shredders, they vanish,” he said, showing a reporter an image of a small pile of brown dust left by the crews. The developer of the Aratina Solar Center has government approval to fell all of the thousands of trees on the site. The solar energy farm won a controversial exemption from rules protecting Joshua trees four years ago after closed-door meetings between industry executives and state wildlife officials. On Saturday, residents of nearby Boron and Desert Lake, as well as other opponents of the project, will rally to demand a halt to the project. Dozens of Joshua trees once stood on this Mojave Desert landscape. They were cleared recently to make way for a large solar energy project. (Roy Richards) A 2020 survey counted 4,700 trees on the project site. Since then, however, the size of the project has been reduced. Hundreds of Joshua trees appeared to have been destroyed in the last week, but on some portions of the site the trees still stand, residents said. Neither the company nor government agencies would say how many trees have been cut down. Avantus, the developer, said fewer trees will be destroyed than the government approved.Heavy equipment has not yet started leveling the land where the trees were felled to prepare for the solar panel installation.Residents fear the earth-moving work will increase the threat of valley fever — a fungal respiratory infection that is transmitted in dust. A local group found the fungus that causes valley fever in samples of topsoil from the five parcels surrounding the towns where the solar panels will be built.“I don’t want another town to go through this,” Richards said.Executives at Avantus say the company is following development rules set by the state and Kern County as they construct the 2,300-acre project, which is planned to produce 530 megawatts of renewable energy. They said they would keep the dust down by minimizing the grading of the land. “Aratina will produce clean, affordable, and reliable energy for hundreds of thousands of Californians, contributing to California’s renewable energy goals,” the company said in a statement. “And as a changing climate forces Californians to endure more frequent and intense heat waves like the one we’re experiencing right now, projects like Aratina will help stabilize the grid and keep the lights on.”Boron, where the poverty rate is twice the state average, will not get access to that green energy. Instead it will be sent hundreds of miles away to wealthier Central Coast and Silicon Valley communities, according to contracts signed earlier by the company. A Joshua tree believed to be 150 to 200 years old rises from the desert near Boron. (Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times) The controversy over the Mojave Desert project is an example of the many trade-offs being made as California pushes for a rapid transition from planet-warming fossil fuels to renewable energy. Solar and wind fields are expected to help mitigate climate change — which is one of several factors pushing Joshua trees toward extinction — but they are also tearing up undeveloped land, harming threatened plants and wildlife and causing concern in rural communities. “We need sustainable energy solutions that do not come at the cost of irreplaceable natural treasures,” says a petition that is trying to stop the project. The petition has been signed by more than 51,000 people.Joshua trees create habitat for other species, and Avantus has had to work to relocate the wildlife that lives there.The company said that biologists will be onsite throughout construction to ensure rules set by state wildlife officials are followed. Workers have been trained to notify a supervisor whenever they see wildlife.The site is habitat for desert tortoises and Mohave ground squirrels, which are both listed as threatened under the state’s Endangered Species Act. Avantus said that so far they have found one Mohave ground squirrel and no tortoises.In all, 44 animal species have been found on the project site. One of those is the desert kit fox, a cat-sized canine with long delicate ears and fur on the soles of its feet to protect them from the hot sand of the Mojave.In a 2020 survey of the site, biologists found more than 150 dens used by desert kit foxes.According to the Center for Biological Diversity, kit fox dens are being increasingly destroyed by large-scale industrial energy development. “Even smart, climate-saving clean-energy development like solar projects are often badly sited and destroy important kit fox habitat,” the center says. Kit foxes are among the many species of wildlife that inhabit the area where a massive solar farm is being constructed near Boron. (Roy Richards) Kern County documents say that Avantus must “passively relocate” the kit foxes by blocking their dens with soil, sticks and debris. The dens are then destroyed to prevent the kit foxes from using them again as the panels are erected, according to the documents.Avantus explained in a statement to The Times that the tactics encouraged the kit foxes to move only “temporarily” from the construction site. The company said the perimeter fence has an opening at the bottom so wildlife can return after construction.“Solar panels can provide shade and predator protection, and we have found that kit foxes and other wildlife sometimes do migrate back to an area after construction is complete,” the company said. Fence posts are installed around the Aratina Solar Center recently. (Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times) The Aratina project was one of 15 solar projects that Gov. Gavin Newsom’s Fish and Game Commission voted to exempt from rules protecting Joshua trees in September 2020 using a controversial “emergency” regulation. At that time, solar executives argued that the 15 projects had already been through extensive environmental reviews and were so close to construction they were “shovel ready.”Executives representing the 15 projects told the state repeatedly they were ready to construct and that it would be unfair to make them follow new planned Joshua tree restrictions.In reality, executives working on Aratina had just begun the review process of the project at the Kern County planning board, according to documents. Construction did not begin until this summer — nearly four years after the county Board of Supervisors voted to approve the project.“Clearly they were not shovel ready,” said Casey Kiernan, a photographer who lives in the town of Joshua Tree. Kiernan created the petition seeking to stop construction. A stand of Joshua Trees form a unique silhouette against the colors of sunset in Joshua Tree National Park in April 2019. (Mark Boster / For the Times) Melanie Richardson, a nurse whose sons attend schools in Boron, said it was “hard to even watch” as the crews began cutting down the trees.She was part of a team that found the fungus that causes valley fever in soil samples taken across the site.Richardson said she has been working on signs for Saturday’s rally, including one that says, “Why is solar more important than health.”“Nobody wants this to happen,” she said.

Mojave town protests solar energy project as crews chainsaw hundreds of protected Joshua trees

When Roy Richards spotted workers cutting down and shredding Joshua trees for a sprawling solar energy project near his Mojave Desert home last week, he started taking photos.

“Once the trees go through the shredders, they vanish,” he said, showing a reporter an image of a small pile of brown dust left by the crews.

The developer of the Aratina Solar Center has government approval to fell all of the thousands of trees on the site. The solar energy farm won a controversial exemption from rules protecting Joshua trees four years ago after closed-door meetings between industry executives and state wildlife officials.

On Saturday, residents of nearby Boron and Desert Lake, as well as other opponents of the project, will rally to demand a halt to the project.

A desert landscape devoid of Joshua trees.

Dozens of Joshua trees once stood on this Mojave Desert landscape. They were cleared recently to make way for a large solar energy project.

(Roy Richards)

A 2020 survey counted 4,700 trees on the project site. Since then, however, the size of the project has been reduced.

Hundreds of Joshua trees appeared to have been destroyed in the last week, but on some portions of the site the trees still stand, residents said. Neither the company nor government agencies would say how many trees have been cut down. Avantus, the developer, said fewer trees will be destroyed than the government approved.

Heavy equipment has not yet started leveling the land where the trees were felled to prepare for the solar panel installation.

Residents fear the earth-moving work will increase the threat of valley fever — a fungal respiratory infection that is transmitted in dust. A local group found the fungus that causes valley fever in samples of topsoil from the five parcels surrounding the towns where the solar panels will be built.

“I don’t want another town to go through this,” Richards said.

Executives at Avantus say the company is following development rules set by the state and Kern County as they construct the 2,300-acre project, which is planned to produce 530 megawatts of renewable energy. They said they would keep the dust down by minimizing the grading of the land.

“Aratina will produce clean, affordable, and reliable energy for hundreds of thousands of Californians, contributing to California’s renewable energy goals,” the company said in a statement. “And as a changing climate forces Californians to endure more frequent and intense heat waves like the one we’re experiencing right now, projects like Aratina will help stabilize the grid and keep the lights on.”

Boron, where the poverty rate is twice the state average, will not get access to that green energy. Instead it will be sent hundreds of miles away to wealthier Central Coast and Silicon Valley communities, according to contracts signed earlier by the company.

A twisted Joshua tree rises above the desert.

A Joshua tree believed to be 150 to 200 years old rises from the desert near Boron.

(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)

The controversy over the Mojave Desert project is an example of the many trade-offs being made as California pushes for a rapid transition from planet-warming fossil fuels to renewable energy. Solar and wind fields are expected to help mitigate climate change — which is one of several factors pushing Joshua trees toward extinction — but they are also tearing up undeveloped land, harming threatened plants and wildlife and causing concern in rural communities.

“We need sustainable energy solutions that do not come at the cost of irreplaceable natural treasures,” says a petition that is trying to stop the project. The petition has been signed by more than 51,000 people.

Joshua trees create habitat for other species, and Avantus has had to work to relocate the wildlife that lives there.

The company said that biologists will be onsite throughout construction to ensure rules set by state wildlife officials are followed. Workers have been trained to notify a supervisor whenever they see wildlife.

The site is habitat for desert tortoises and Mohave ground squirrels, which are both listed as threatened under the state’s Endangered Species Act.

Avantus said that so far they have found one Mohave ground squirrel and no tortoises.

In all, 44 animal species have been found on the project site. One of those is the desert kit fox, a cat-sized canine with long delicate ears and fur on the soles of its feet to protect them from the hot sand of the Mojave.

In a 2020 survey of the site, biologists found more than 150 dens used by desert kit foxes.

According to the Center for Biological Diversity, kit fox dens are being increasingly destroyed by large-scale industrial energy development. “Even smart, climate-saving clean-energy development like solar projects are often badly sited and destroy important kit fox habitat,” the center says.

Two kit foxes are seen in the desert.

Kit foxes are among the many species of wildlife that inhabit the area where a massive solar farm is being constructed near Boron.

(Roy Richards)

Kern County documents say that Avantus must “passively relocate” the kit foxes by blocking their dens with soil, sticks and debris. The dens are then destroyed to prevent the kit foxes from using them again as the panels are erected, according to the documents.

Avantus explained in a statement to The Times that the tactics encouraged the kit foxes to move only “temporarily” from the construction site. The company said the perimeter fence has an opening at the bottom so wildlife can return after construction.

“Solar panels can provide shade and predator protection, and we have found that kit foxes and other wildlife sometimes do migrate back to an area after construction is complete,” the company said.

Fence posts are installed in the desert.

Fence posts are installed around the Aratina Solar Center recently.

(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)

The Aratina project was one of 15 solar projects that Gov. Gavin Newsom’s Fish and Game Commission voted to exempt from rules protecting Joshua trees in September 2020 using a controversial “emergency” regulation. At that time, solar executives argued that the 15 projects had already been through extensive environmental reviews and were so close to construction they were “shovel ready.”

Executives representing the 15 projects told the state repeatedly they were ready to construct and that it would be unfair to make them follow new planned Joshua tree restrictions.

In reality, executives working on Aratina had just begun the review process of the project at the Kern County planning board, according to documents. Construction did not begin until this summer — nearly four years after the county Board of Supervisors voted to approve the project.

“Clearly they were not shovel ready,” said Casey Kiernan, a photographer who lives in the town of Joshua Tree. Kiernan created the petition seeking to stop construction.

A stand of Joshua Trees form a unique silhouette against the colors of sunset

A stand of Joshua Trees form a unique silhouette against the colors of sunset in Joshua Tree National Park in April 2019.

(Mark Boster / For the Times)

Melanie Richardson, a nurse whose sons attend schools in Boron, said it was “hard to even watch” as the crews began cutting down the trees.

She was part of a team that found the fungus that causes valley fever in soil samples taken across the site.

Richardson said she has been working on signs for Saturday’s rally, including one that says, “Why is solar more important than health.”

“Nobody wants this to happen,” she said.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Data center emissions likely 662% higher than big tech claims. Can it keep up the ruse?

Emissions from in-house data centers of Google, Microsoft, Meta and Apple may be 7.62 times higher than official tallyBig tech has made some big claims about greenhouse gas emissions in recent years. But as the rise of artificial intelligence creates ever bigger energy demands, it’s getting hard for the industry to hide the true costs of the data centers powering the tech revolution.According to a Guardian analysis, from 2020 to 2022 the real emissions from the “in-house” or company-owned data centers of Google, Microsoft, Meta and Apple are likely about 662% – or 7.62 times – higher than officially reported. Continue reading...

Big tech has made some big claims about greenhouse gas emissions in recent years. But as the rise of artificial intelligence creates ever bigger energy demands, it’s getting hard for the industry to hide the true costs of the data centers powering the tech revolution.According to a Guardian analysis, from 2020 to 2022 the real emissions from the “in-house” or company-owned data centers of Google, Microsoft, Meta and Apple are likely about 662% – or 7.62 times – higher than officially reported.Amazon is the largest emitter of the big five tech companies by a mile – the emissions of the second-largest emitter, Apple, were less than half of Amazon’s in 2022. However, Amazon has been kept out of the calculation above because its differing business model makes it difficult to isolate data center-specific emissions figures for the company.As energy demands for these data centers grow, many are worried that carbon emissions will, too. The International Energy Agency stated that data centers already accounted for 1% to 1.5% of global electricity consumption in 2022 – and that was before the AI boom began with ChatGPT’s launch at the end of that year.AI is far more energy-intensive on data centers than typical cloud-based applications. According to Goldman Sachs, a ChatGPT query needs nearly 10 times as much electricity to process as a Google search, and data center power demand will grow 160% by 2030. Goldman competitor Morgan Stanley’s research has made similar findings, projecting data center emissions globally to accumulate to 2.5bn metric tons of CO2 equivalent by 2030.In the meantime, all five tech companies have claimed carbon neutrality, though Google dropped the label last year as it stepped up its carbon accounting standards. Amazon is the most recent company to do so, claiming in July that it met its goal seven years early, and that it had implemented a gross emissions cut of 3%.“It’s down to creative accounting,” explained a representative from Amazon Employees for Climate Justice, an advocacy group composed of current Amazon employees who are dissatisfied with their employer’s action on climate. “Amazon – despite all the PR and propaganda that you’re seeing about their solar farms, about their electric vans – is expanding its fossil fuel use, whether it’s in data centers or whether it’s in diesel trucks.”A misguided metricThe most important tools in this “creative accounting” when it comes to data centers are renewable energy certificates, or Recs. These are certificates that a company purchases to show it is buying renewable energy-generated electricity to match a portion of its electricity consumption – the catch, though, is that the renewable energy in question doesn’t need to be consumed by a company’s facilities. Rather, the site of production can be anywhere from one town over to an ocean away.Recs are used to calculate “market-based” emissions, or the official emissions figures used by the firms. When Recs and offsets are left out of the equation, we get “location-based emissions” – the actual emissions generated from the area where the data is being processed.The trend in those emissions is worrying. If these five companies were one country, the sum of their “location-based” emissions in 2022 would rank them as the 33rd highest-emitting country, behind the Philippines and above Algeria.Many data center industry experts also recognize that location-based metrics are more honest than the official, market-based numbers reported.“Location-based [accounting] gives an accurate picture of the emissions associated with the energy that’s actually being consumed to run the data center. And Uptime’s view is that it’s the right metric,” said Jay Dietrich, the research director of sustainability at Uptime Institute, a leading data center advisory and research organization.Nevertheless, Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Protocol, a carbon accounting oversight body, allows Recs to be used in official reporting, though the extent to which they should be allowed remains controversial between tech companies and has led to a lobbying battle over GHG Protocol’s rule-making process between two factions.On one side there is the Emissions First Partnership, spearheaded by Amazon and Meta. It aims to keep Recs in the accounting process regardless of their geographic origins. In practice, this is only a slightly looser interpretation of what GHG Protocol already permits.The opposing faction, headed by Google and Microsoft, argues that there needs to be time-based and location-based matching of renewable production and energy consumption for data centers. Google calls this its 24/7 goal, or its goal to have all of its facilities run on renewable energy 24 hours a day, seven days a week by 2030. Microsoft calls it its 100/100/0 goal, or its goal to have all its facilities running on 100% carbon-free energy 100% of the time, making zero carbon-based energy purchases by 2030.Google has already phased out its Rec use and Microsoft aims to do the same with low-quality “unbundled” (non location-specific) Recs by 2030.Academics and carbon management industry leaders alike are also against the GHG Protocol’s permissiveness on Recs. In an open letter from 2015, more than 50 such individuals argued that “it should be a bedrock principle of GHG accounting that no company be allowed to report a reduction in its GHG footprint for an action that results in no change in overall GHG emissions. Yet this is precisely what can happen under the guidance given the contractual/Rec-based reporting method.”To GHG Protocol’s credit, the organization does ask companies to report location-based figures alongside their Rec-based figures. Despite that, no company includes both location-based and market-based metrics for all three subcategories of emissions in the bodies of their annual environmental reports.In fact, location-based numbers are only directly reported (that is, not hidden in third-party assurance statements or in footnotes) by two companies – Google and Meta. And those two firms only include those figures for one subtype of emissions: scope 2, or the indirect emissions companies cause by purchasing energy from utilities and large-scale generators.In-house data centersScope 2 is the category that includes the majority of the emissions that come from in-house data center operations, as it concerns the emissions associated with purchased energy – mainly, electricity.Data centers should also make up a majority of overall scope 2 emissions for each company except Amazon, given that the other sources of scope 2 emissions for these companies stem from the electricity consumed by firms’ offices and retail spaces – operations that are relatively small and not carbon-intensive. Amazon has one other carbon-intensive business vertical to account for in its scope 2 emissions: its warehouses and e-commerce logistics.For the firms that give data center-specific data – Meta and Microsoft – this holds true: data centers made up 100% of Meta’s market-based (official) scope 2 emissions and 97.4% of its location-based emissions. For Microsoft, those numbers were 97.4% and 95.6%, respectively.The massive differences in location-based and official scope 2 emissions numbers showcase just how carbon intensive data centers really are, and how deceptive firms’ official emissions numbers can be. Meta, for example, reports its official scope 2 emissions for 2022 as 273 metric tons CO2 equivalent – all of that attributable to data centers. Under the location-based accounting system, that number jumps to more than 3.8m metric tons of CO2 equivalent for data centers alone – a more than 19,000 times increase.A similar result can be seen with Microsoft. The firm reported its official data center-related emissions for 2022 as 280,782 metric tons CO2 equivalent. Under a location-based accounting method, that number jumps to 6.1m metric tons CO2 equivalent. That’s a nearly 22 times increase.While Meta’s reporting gap is more egregious, both firms’ location-based emissions are higher because they undercount their data center emissions specifically, with 97.4% of the gap between Meta’s location-based and official scope 2 number in 2022 being unreported data center-related emissions, and 95.55% of Microsoft’s.Specific data center-related emissions numbers aren’t available for the rest of the firms. However, given that Google and Apple have similar scope 2 business models to Meta and Microsoft, it is likely that the multiple on how much higher their location-based data center emissions are would be similar to the multiple on how much higher their overall location-based scope 2 emissions are.In total, the sum of location-based emissions in this category between 2020 and 2022 was at least 275% higher (or 3.75 times) than the sum of their official figures. Amazon did not provide the Guardian with location-based scope 2 figures for 2020 and 2021, so its official (and likely much lower) numbers were used for this calculation for those years.Third-party data centersBig tech companies also rent a large portion of their data center capacity from third-party data center operators (or “colocation” data centers). According to the Synergy Research Group, large tech companies (or “hyperscalers”) represented 37% of worldwide data center capacity in 2022, with half of that capacity coming through third-party contracts. While this group includes companies other than Google, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft and Apple, it gives an idea of the extent of these firms’ activities with third-party data centers.Those emissions should theoretically fall under scope 3, all emissions a firm is responsible for that can’t be attributed to the fuel or electricity it consumes.When it comes to a big tech firm’s operations, this would encapsulate everything from the manufacturing processes of the hardware it sells (like the iPhone or Kindle) to the emissions from employees’ cars during their commutes to the office.When it comes to data centers, scope 3 emissions include the carbon emitted from the construction of in-house data centers, as well as the carbon emitted during the manufacturing process of the equipment used inside those in-house data centers. It may also include those emissions as well as the electricity-related emissions of third-party data centers that are partnered with.However, whether or not these emissions are fully included in reports is almost impossible to prove. “Scope 3 emissions are hugely uncertain,” said Dietrich. “This area is a mess just in terms of accounting.”According to Dietrich, some third-party data center operators put their energy-related emissions in their own scope 2 reporting, so those who rent from them can put those emissions into their scope 3. Other third-party data center operators put energy-related emissions into their scope 3 emissions, expecting their tenants to report those emissions in their own scope 2 reporting.Additionally, all firms use market-based metrics for these scope 3 numbers, which means third-party data center emissions are also undercounted in official figures.Of the firms that report their location-based scope 3 emissions in the footnotes, only Apple has a large gap between its official scope 3 figure and its location-based scope 3 figure, starting in 2022.This gap can largely be attributed to data center emissions accounting. The only change to Apple’s scope 3 methodology in 2022 was to include “work from home, third-party cloud services, electricity transmission and distribution losses, and upstream impacts from scope 1 fuels”. Since the firm listed third-party cloud services as having zero emissions under its official scope 3 reporting, that means all emissions associated with those third-party services would only show up in location-based scope 3 emissions from 2022 onwards.2025 and beyondEven though big tech hides these emissions, they are due to keep rising. Data centers’ electricity demand is projected to double by 2030 due to the additional load that artificial intelligence poses, according to the Electric Power Research Institute.Google and Microsoft both blamed AI for their recent upticks in market-based emissions.“The relative contribution of AI computing loads to Google’s data centers, as I understood it when I left [in 2022], was relatively modest,” said Chris Taylor, current CEO of utility storage firm Gridstor and former site lead for Google’s data center energy strategy unit. “Two years ago, [AI] was not the main thing that we were worried about, at least on the energy team.”Taylor explained that most of the growth that he saw in data centers while at Google was attributable to growth in Google Cloud, as most enterprises were moving their IT tasks to the firm’s cloud servers.Whether today’s power grids can withstand the growing energy demands of AI is uncertain. One industry leader – Marc Ganzi, the CEO of DigitalBridge, a private equity firm that owns two of the world’s largest third-party data center operators – has gone as far as to say that the data center sector may run out of power within the next two years.And as grid interconnection backlogs continue to pile up worldwide, it may be nearly impossible for even the most well intentioned of companies to get new renewable energy production capacity online in time to meet that demand.

In coal-rich Kentucky, a new green aluminum plant could bring jobs and clean energy

Labor and state leaders wants to land the first new U.S. smelter in 45 years. But the deal won’t happen unless Kentucky can furnish lots of clean energy.

When John Holbrook first started working as a pipefitter in the early 1990s, jobs were easy to come by in his corner of northeastern Kentucky. A giant iron and steel mill routinely needed maintenance and repair work, as did the coal “coking” ovens next to it. There was also a hulking coal-fired power plant and a bustling petroleum refinery nearby. Fossil fuels extracted from beneath the region’s rugged Appalachian terrain supplied these industrial sites, which sprung up during the 19th and 20th centuries along the yawning Ohio River and its tributary, Big Sandy. “Work was so plentiful,” Holbrook recalled on a scorching August morning in Ashland, a quiet riverfront city of some 21,000 people. Ashland retains its motto as the place ​“Where Coal Meets Iron,” and railcars still rumble by. But after years of downsizing production, the steel mill’s owner demolished the complex in 2022. A decade ago, the coal plant switched to burning natural gas to generate electricity, which requires less hands-on maintenance. Meanwhile, thousands of jobs vanished from surrounding coalfields as mining became more mechanized, market forces shifted, and clean air policies took hold. Many families have since moved away. The tradespeople who’ve stayed often drive for hours to work on the new construction projects sprouting up in other places, like the massive factories for making and recycling electric-car batteries in western Kentucky and the electricity-powered steel furnace in neighboring West Virginia. If America is undergoing a manufacturing boom, it hasn’t yet reached this hard-hit stretch of the Bluegrass State. But that could soon change. In March, Century Aluminum, the nation’s biggest producer of primary, or virgin, aluminum, announced that it plans to build an enormous plant in the United States — the nation’s first new smelter in 45 years. Jesse Gary, the company’s president and CEO, has pointed to northeastern Kentucky as the project’s preferred location, though he said there were still a ​“myriad of steps” before the company reaches a final decision. The Chicago-based manufacturer is slated to receive up to $500 million in funding from the U.S. Department of Energy to build the facility, which could emit 75 percent less carbon dioxide than traditional smelters, thanks to its use of carbon-free energy and energy-efficient designs. The award is part of a $6.3 billion federal program — funded by the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law — that aims to sharply reduce greenhouse gas emissions from heavy-industry sectors. The Ohio River seen from Ashland, Kentucky, right. John Holbrook at his office in Ashland. Aluminum demand is set to soar globally by up to 80 percent by 2050 as the world produces more solar panels and other clean energy technologies. The makers of the essential material are now under mounting pressure from policymakers and consumers to clean up their operations. In North America alone, aluminum producers will need to cut carbon emissions by 92 percent from 2021 levels to meet net-zero climate goals. Century already owns two aging smelters in western Kentucky. The new ​“green smelter” is expected to create over 5,500 construction jobs and more than 1,000 full-time union jobs. If built in eastern Kentucky, the $5 billion project would mark the region’s largest investment on record. “We just need a crumb or two, just a little giant smelter,” Holbrook said with a laugh when we met at his office near Ashland’s historic main street. A short walk away, stones used in the city’s original iron-making furnaces stand as monuments overlooking the Ohio River. Today, Holbrook heads the Tri-State Building and Construction Trades Council, which represents unions in a cluster of adjoining counties in Kentucky, Ohio, and West Virginia. He’s part of a broad coalition of labor organizers, local officials, environmentalists, and clean energy advocates who are urging Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear, a Democrat, to work with Century to secure the smelter and hammer out a long-term deal to provide clean energy for it. “It’d be a godsend for that area,” said Chad Mills, a pipefitter and the director of the Kentucky State Building and Construction Trades Council. The region ​“needs it more than you can imagine.” The impact of Century’s new smelter would ripple far beyond this rural stretch of verdant peaks and meandering creeks. The planned facility is set to nearly double the amount of primary aluminum that the United States produces — helping to revitalize a domestic industry that has been steadily shrinking for decades owing to spiking power prices and increased competition from China. In 2000, U.S. companies operated 23 aluminum smelters. Today, only four plants are operating, while another two have been indefinitely curtailed. That includes Century’s 55-year-old plant in Hawesville, Kentucky, which has been idle since June 2022. The decline in U.S. production has complicated the country’s efforts to both make and procure lower-carbon aluminum for its supply chains, experts say. Globally, the aluminum sector contributes around 2 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions every year. Nearly 70 percent of those emissions come from generating high volumes of electricity — often derived from fossil fuels — to power smelters almost around the clock. As U.S. primary production dwindles, the country is importing more aluminum made in overseas smelters that are powered by dirtier, less efficient electrical grids. Ironically, an increasing share of that aluminum is being used to make solar panels, electric cars, heat pumps, power cables, and many other clean energy components. The metal is lightweight and inexpensive, and it’s a key ingredient in global efforts to electrify and decarbonize the wider economy. But aluminum is also mind-bogglingly ubiquitous outside the energy sector. The versatile material is found in everything from pots and pans, deodorant, and smartphones to car doors, bridges, and skyscrapers. It’s the second-most-used metal in the world after steel.  Last year, the U.S. produced around 750,000 metric tons of primary aluminum while importing 4.8 million metric tons of it, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.  Meanwhile, the country produced 3.3 million metric tons of ​“secondary” aluminum in 2023. Boosting recycling rates is seen as a necessary step for addressing aluminum’s emissions problem, because the recycling process requires about 95 percent less energy than making aluminum from scratch. But even secondary producers need primary aluminum to ​“sweeten” their batches and achieve the right strength and durability, said Annie Sartor, the aluminum campaign director for Industrious Labs, an advocacy organization. “Primary aluminum is essential, and we have a primary industry that’s been in decline, is very polluting, and is very high-emitting,” Sartor said. Century’s proposed new smelter ​“could be a turning point for this industry,” she added. ​“We all would like to see it get built and thrive.” An employee walks by Century Aluminum’s smelter in Hawesville, Kentucky, in a 2017 photo. The smelter has been idle since 2022. Luke Sharrett for The Washington Post via Getty Images A new green smelter wouldn’t just boost supplies of primary aluminum for making clean energy technologies. The facility, with its voracious electricity appetite, is also expected to accelerate the region’s buildout of clean energy capacity, which has lagged behind that of many other states.  Century expects its planned smelter to produce about 600,000 metric tons of aluminum a year. That means it could need at least a gigawatt’s worth of power to operate annually at full tilt, equal to the yearly demand of roughly 750,000 U.S. homes. By way of comparison, Louisville, Kentucky’s largest city, is home to some 625,000 people. But Kentucky has very little carbon-free capacity available today.  About 0.2 percent of the state’s electricity generation came from solar in 2022, while 6 percent was supplied by hydroelectric dams, mainly in the western part of the state. Coal and gas plants produced most of the rest. Still, after decades of clinging tightly to its coal-rich history, Kentucky is seeing a raft of new utility-scale solar installations under development, including atop former coal mines.  And manufacturers in Kentucky can access the renewable energy being generated in neighboring states as well as regional grid networks like PJM. Swaths of eastern Kentucky are covered by a robust array of high-voltage, long-distance transmission lines operated by Kentucky Power, a subsidiary of the utility giant American Electric Power. Lane Boldman, executive director of the Kentucky Conservation Committee, said that investing in clean energy and upgrading grid infrastructure would offer a chance to employ more of Kentucky’s skilled workers. “It’s exciting, because it actually modernizes our industry and leverages a local workforce that has a great expertise with energy already,” she said when we met in Lexington, near the rolling green hills and long white fences of the area’s horse farms. ​“There are ways you can create economic development that are not so extractive, that just leave the community bare.” Lane Boldman says she became an environmental advocate years ago after seeing how coal strip mining was harming Appalachian communities. Maria Gallucci/Canary Media Northeastern Kentucky isn’t the only location that Century is considering for the smelter. The company is also evaluating sites in the Ohio and Mississippi river basins. The final decision will depend on where there’s a steady supply of affordable power, a Century executive told The Wall Street Journal in early July. (A spokesperson didn’t respond to Canary’s repeated requests for comment.) Century is aiming to secure a power-supply deal to meet a decade’s worth of electricity demand from the new smelter, according to the Journal. The goal is to finalize plans in the next two years and then begin construction, which could take around three years. In the meantime, the U.S. will continue to see a rapid buildout of solar, wind, and other carbon-free power supplies connecting to the grid. Governor Beshear has participated in discussions about the smelter’s power supply, in the hopes of landing Century’s megaproject and all of its ​“good-paying jobs.” His administration ​“continues to work with multiple experts to determine a location in northeastern Kentucky that includes a river port and can support workforce training as well as provide the cleanest, most reliable electric service capacity needed,” Crystal Staley, a spokesperson for the governor’s office, said by email.  Environmental advocates say the aluminum plant represents a chance to reimagine what a major industrial facility can look like: powered by clean energy, equipped with modern pollution controls, and built with local community input from the beginning. Starting sometime this fall, the Sierra Club is planning to host public meetings and distribute flyers in northeastern Kentucky to let residents know about the giant smelter that could potentially be built in their backyards. “It’s an opportunity for us to engage people who might shy away from other aspects of being an environmental activist and say, ​‘Hey, this is something that we can embrace, because it’s going to help us create jobs so that people can stay in their region,’” said Julia Finch, the director of Sierra Club’s Kentucky chapter. ​“This is a chance for us to lead on what a green transition looks like for industry.” Aluminum is the most abundant metal in Earth’s crust. But turning it into a sturdy, usable material is a laborious and dirty process — one that begins with scraping topsoil to extract bauxite, a reddish clay rock that is rich in alumina (also called aluminum oxide). The trickiest part comes next: removing oxygen and other molecules to transform that alumina into aluminum. Until the late 19th century, the methods for accomplishing this were so costly that the tinfoil we now buy at the grocery store was considered a precious metal, like gold, silver, and platinum. Then in 1886, Charles Martin Hall figured out an inexpensive way to smelt aluminum through electrolysis, a technique that uses electrical energy to drive a chemical reaction. Not long after, he helped launch the Pittsburgh Reduction Company, which went on to become the U.S. aluminum behemoth presently known as Alcoa. Around the same time that Hall was tinkering in his woodshed in Oberlin, Ohio, a French inventor named Paul Louis Touissant Héroult was making a similar discovery in Paris. Modern aluminum smelters now use what’s called the Hall-Héroult process — an effective but also energy-intensive and carbon-intensive way of making primary aluminum metal.  Smelting involves dissolving alumina in a molten salt called cryolite, which is heated to over 1,700 degrees Fahrenheit. Large carbon blocks, or ​“anodes,” are lowered down into the highly corrosive bath, and electrical currents run through the entire structure. Aluminum then deposits at the bottom as oxygen combines with carbon in the blocks, creating carbon dioxide as a byproduct.  Today, this electrochemical process contributes about 17 percent of the total CO2 emissions from global aluminum production. It also causes the release of perfluorochemicals (PFCs) — potent and long-lasting greenhouse gases — as well as sulfur dioxide pollution, which can harm people’s respiratory systems and damage trees and crops. In 2021, PFCs accounted for more than half the emissions from Century’s Hawesville smelter and a third of the emissions from its Sebree smelter in Robards, Kentucky, according to the Sierra Club. Newer smelters can dramatically reduce their PFC emissions by using automated control systems, which Century deploys at its smelter in Grundartangi, Iceland. Researchers are also working to slash CO2 by developing carbon-free blocks. The technology involves using chemically inactive, or ​“inert,” metallic alloys in the anodes through which the electrical currents flow. Elysis, a joint venture of Alcoa and the mining giant Rio Tinto, says it is making progress toward the large-scale implementation of its inert anodes and has plans for a demonstration plant in Quebec. The alternative anodes may not be ready in time for a project like Century’s planned green U.S. smelter. Previously, large-scale buyers of aluminum, such as automakers and construction companies, had anticipated that inert anodes would help slash CO2 emissions in the aluminum supply chain in time for companies to meet their 2030 climate goals. But now that’s looking less likely. “There’s a feeling now that it’s just taking longer to develop that technology,” said Lachlan Wright, a manager of the climate intelligence program at RMI, a clean energy think tank. One challenge might simply be the limited production capacity for the new anodes, which can’t yet meet the demands of a large aluminum user. Beyond that, ​“It’s not exactly clear what some of the barriers are there,” Wright added. Still, when it comes to tackling aluminum’s biggest CO2 culprit — all the electricity it takes to run a smelter — the solutions already exist, in the form of renewable energy and other carbon-free sources. “We don’t need a new or emerging technology,” Sartor said. ​“We need huge amounts of existing technology, and it needs to be available in places that work for the industry.” Deep in the heart of Kentucky’s coal country, the scarred and treeless lands of former surface mines are increasingly being repurposed to supply that clean energy.  On another sun-blasted day in early August, I met with Mike Smith in Hazard, a city of some 5,300 people that’s enveloped by the Appalachian Mountains and built along the winding curves of the North Fork Kentucky River. We hopped in his white pickup truck and headed toward his family’s 800-acre property. For years, they leased the land to Pine Branch Mining, which dynamited the mountaintop to reach coal seams buried beneath the surface. ​“I can’t say that I was for it,” Smith told me as we drove past modest homes tucked into creekside hollers and up a bumpy gravel road. Today, he said, ​“the only coal that’s left here is under the river.” After the mine closed a decade ago, the land was reclaimed: smoothed out, packed down, and covered with vegetation to prevent erosion. Now, the property is about to undergo its latest transformation, as the home of the 80-megawatt Bright Mountain Solar facility. Landowner Mike Smith and Louise Sizemore of Edelen Renewables surveyed the former mining site that will soon become the Bright Mountain Solar farm during a visit on August 7. Maria Gallucci/Canary Media Avangrid, the lead developer, plans to begin installing solar panels here next year, according to Edelen Renewables, the project’s local development partner. Edelen is also helping to advance other ​“coal-to-solar” projects in the region, including the 200 MW Martin County Solar Project under construction as well as BrightNight​’s 800 MW Starfire installation. Rivian, the electric-truck maker, has signed on as the anchor customer for the $1 billion Starfire project, which is in the early stages of development.  Building on old mining sites can be more expensive and logistically trickier than, say, putting panels on flat, solid farmland. For one, hauling equipment to the former mines requires driving big, heavy vehicles up narrow mountain roads. Smith’s site is divided into uneven tiers of unpaved land. On our visit, he expertly accelerated his truck up a steep dirt path. When we reached the top, I audibly exhaled with relief. Smith gently laughed. Despite the challenges, there’s an obvious poetry to building clean energy in a place that once yielded fossil fuels. Ideally, it can also bring justice to communities that are still hurting economically and spiritually from the coal industry’s inexorable decline. Bright Mountain and other coal-to-solar developments are projected to generate millions of dollars in local tax revenue over their lifetimes, using land that was left unsuitable for anything other than cattle grazing. “You’ve got to reinvent yourself,” Smith told me as we gazed at the empty expanse of land where the solar project will eventually stand. Dragonflies darted by, and a quail called from somewhere on the property. ​“That’s the only way we can survive.” The next day, I met Adam Edelen, the founder and CEO of Edelen Renewables, at his office in downtown Lexington. Sitting in a wicker rocking chair and sipping a pint glass of sweet tea, Edelen lamented the years of ​“outright hostility” to renewable energy development in the state. However, some Kentucky policymakers are starting to recognize the need to clean up the state’s electricity sector — if not explicitly to tackle climate change, then at least to attract manufacturers like Century Aluminum that want to power their operations with carbon-free energy sources. The Martin County Solar Project spans 900 acres on the old Martiki mine site in Pilgrim, Kentucky. Edelen Renewables “Now, we’re in this headlong rush to make sure we’ve got a diversified energy portfolio to meet the needs of the private sector,” Edelen said. For Century in particular, he added, ​“The issue is that they need cheap power and they need green energy, neither of which Kentucky has a lot of.”  Electricity accounts for about 40 percent of a smelter’s total operating expenses. To remain cost competitive, aluminum producers need to hit a ​“magic benchmark” of around $40 per megawatt-hour, said Wright of RMI. Currently, power-purchase agreements for U.S. renewable energy projects are in the range of $50 to $60 per megawatt-hour — a significant difference for facilities that can consume 1 megawatt-hour of electricity just to produce a single metric ton of aluminum. Provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act could help to narrow that price gap for Century and other primary aluminum makers. The 45X production tax credit is a keystone of the IRA, which President Joe Biden signed into law two years ago. The incentive allows producers of critical materials, solar panels, batteries, and other types of ​“advanced manufacturing” products to receive a federal tax credit for up to 10 percent of their production costs, including electricity. The IRA also set aside another $10 billion for the 48C investment tax credit, an Obama-era program that’s now available to help manufacturers install equipment that reduces emissions by 20 percent. Aluminum producers could use the tax credit to cover the cost of technology that improves their operating efficiency while also slashing CO2 pollution. Edelen Renewables says the 48C tax credit will apply to all the coal-to-solar projects, which the company hopes can supply some of the electricity needed for Century’s green smelter. Under the expanded program, renewable energy projects built in ​“energy communities,” including former coal mine sites, can receive tax credits worth up to 40 percent of project costs, significantly lowering the final cost of electricity associated with the installations. Eastern Kentucky ​“has played such a vital role in powering the country’s economy for the last 100 years,” Edelen said. Coal communities ​“deserve a place in the newer economy, and they’re hungry for that.” Construction on the Martin County Solar Project began in 2023 and is slated to be completed later this year. Edelen Renewables Over in Ashland, John Holbrook said he’s anxiously watching to see if northeastern Kentucky will find its place in the nation’s green industrial transition. If Century selects the region to host its new aluminum smelter, the area’s trade councils and union apprenticeship programs will be more than ready to start training and recruiting workers, he said. But Holbrook and other local labor leaders aren’t holding their breath. Several people I spoke to recalled the elation they felt in 2018 when the company Braidy Industries broke ground near Ashland on a $1.5 billion aluminum rolling mill — and the heartbreak that followed years later when Braidy backtracked on the plant and its promise of hundreds of jobs. Braidy’s former CEO was later accused of misleading the company’s board members, state officials, and journalists about the project’s true financial status. While the Braidy scandal was a unique affair, the fallout still lingers in discussions about Century’s green smelter. ​“I think they’d have to start moving trailers in before we’d feel confident to start saying, ​‘Yeah, this is really happening,’” Holbrook said from behind his wide wooden desk.  Still, he remains ​“cautiously optimistic” about the prospect of Century building its aluminum plant here. ​“It would be region-changing,” he said. ​“And life-changing.”  This story was originally published by Grist with the headline In coal-rich Kentucky, a new green aluminum plant could bring jobs and clean energy on Sep 15, 2024.

Big Oil, clean energy chart future of geothermal energy

HOUSTON — The future of an emerging form of American clean energy could be built on an unexpected foundation: technology and experience from Big Oil. At least, that’s the hope of representatives of major oil companies, tech startups, scientists and climate groups who met in Houston this week to launch a $10 million series of...

HOUSTON — The future of an emerging form of American clean energy could be built on an unexpected foundation: technology and experience from Big Oil. At least, that’s the hope of representatives of major oil companies, tech startups, scientists and climate groups who met in Houston this week to launch a $10 million series of summits. Their goal: to use the technology of oil and gas — an industry whose products are the primary force driving the earth’s major natural systems toward collapse — to build a new stalwart of the American power sector. That emerging force is geothermal energy, which uses heat from deep underground to generate power.  The Energy Department has argued geothermal, which offers a way to produce on-demand, zero-carbon energy without major technological advancement, could power as many as 260 million homes by midcentury. In April, the agency projected that only $25 billion in public-private investment — less than the cost of a recent nuclear project — spent by decades’ end could begin a rolling snowball of innovation that makes that future a reality.   These advantages — and a wave of federally-funded research that has proven early-stage geothermal technology — have fueled the launch of a bustling Texas startup scene. On Tuesday, Houston-based startup Fervo announced that it had raised $100 million toward a project contracted to put 400 megawatts of geothermal energy on the Nevada grid by later this decade.  And last month, Sage Geosystems, which is also based in the city, signed one deal with Meta to provide underground energy storage to power company data centers and another to put electricity directly into the Texas grid — both efforts to use geothermal-adjacent technology to compete in Texas’s booming battery storage market. Geothermal resources lie beneath the surface in other areas of the country as well, waiting to be tapped: In June, Project InnerSpace, a leading geothermal advocacy group, released a widely-circulated map showing the vast potential for geothermal energy across the U.S. The current summits are particularly focused on next-generation geothermal — which uses fracking technology to excavate artificial reservoirs in the hot, dry rock thousands of feet underground. This is a method that offers significant — if still unproven — advantages in the current energy landscape. Next-generation geothermal can produce electricity when solar and wind are inaccessible, and it lacks the mineral supply chain problems of batteries, the river-reliance and seasonal instability of hydropower and the price swings and pollution of fossil fuels. It also offers the only current means, aside from nuclear power, of generating on-demand electricity on the specific spot where it’s needed without heating the climate. Even with its apparent potential, however, the industry also faces roadblocks and bottlenecks that are holding it back from fully taking off. The Geothermal Energy from Oil and Gas Demonstrated Engineering (GEODE) consortium, which launched this week, brings together representatives of the industry, policy and academic worlds to identify those challenges — and determine how to remove them. The consortium brought together “the best of the energy industry,” said Jamie Beard, founder and director of Project InnerSpace, which is co-running the Department of Energy-funded project. There were representatives of the first generation of geothermal startups: companies like Sage, Fervo and Bedrock Energy; scientists from national laboratories like Los Alamos and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory; labor leaders from groups like the Texas Climate Jobs Project and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. And there were also representatives of major oil companies like Oxy, BP, Devon or Chevron — where some executives see geothermal, with its heavy reliance on drilling, as the most obvious renewable for their companies to focus on as they look to expand their energy portfolios beyond fossil fuels. As things currently stand, the geothermal sector has struggled with the common problems of emerging industries: the difficulty of raising sufficient money for projects that, however promising, have yet to prove themselves. As GEODE working groups this week concluded, many of the industry’s handicaps relate to this lack of a proven track record, an obstacle that previously confronted wind power in the early 2000s and solar in the 2010s.  With the first commercial geothermal projects still in their infancy, there isn’t enough data to persuade financiers to invest in new projects that would help provide more data. And without a clear demand for geothermal jobs, workforce training programs aren’t turning out the skilled laborers that would allow the sector to expand — which could, in turn, create more jobs. Other potential problems relate to the sector’s current reliance on water — an issue in Texas and the West, where the nation’s best geothermal resources coincide with diminishing rivers and groundwater. And geothermal faces cultural and social issues, as well: concerns related to earthquakes and water pollution, popular distrust and dislike of oil and gas companies and fears that a new geothermal drilling revolution will replicate the environmental damage and injustices of the shale boom that began in the mid-2000s. That boom made the U.S. the world's leading oil and gas producer. But that outpouring of oil and gas relied on wells and pipelines that often went — and still go — into the ground without the consent of landowners, and at the cost of water pollution, cancer risk and social conflict. These are the kinds of problems that GEODE is intended to get ahead of. Over a year of meetings across the country, GEODE aims to build a clear sense of the technical, social and financial issues holding the industry back — and the ways that existing knowledge from oil and gas can help address those challenges. Then — if granted in future appropriations by Congress — the program would make up to $155 million in additional Energy Department-funded grants to companies and research institutions seeking to solve those problems.  Its ultimate goal is to create a series of new first-of-a-kind geothermal technology demonstrations by the end of the decade. This builds on a productive model of public-private collaboration that has helped get geothermal to a place where big commercial deals are even possible. Fervo’s recent deals, for example, have relied heavily on — and contributed to — research done in southern Utah by the Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) program.  Much of the rapid progress the industry has made in recent years has relied on the decades-old tradition of knowledge transfer between oil and gas and geothermal.  The diamond-cutter drill bits currently used to drill for oil and gas, for example, were originally developed by federal researchers in the 1980s for geothermal. In the present day, meanwhile,oil industry’s expertise that could be helpful to geothermal extends from the resolutely technical — methods of horizontal drilling, say — to the more organizational.  Oil and gas companies have learned over the course of decades how to get big, risky projects financed, and how to integrate diverse teams of geologists, engineers and surveyors to drill wells quickly — all of which geothermal developers would have to do to keep costs down and projects attractive to investors. In an interview with The Hill on Thursday, Fervo CEO Tim Latimer praised the GEODE effort, which his company is participating in. “There's a lot of technical resources in the oil and gas industry that can be systematically applied to the geothermal sector,” Latimer told The Hill. “And we're really excited there's a consortium there pushing it forward.” Despite a level of initial “distrust,” Chad Timken of the Society for Petroleum Engineers (SPE), which is co-running GEODE, told The Hill, “as the days have gone on, it’s been, ‘Okay, we’re more similar than not.’” In a potentially discordant note for the climate movement, Timken raised the possibility that the knowledge transfer could be two-way. “There are some reservoirs that are extremely hot that oil and gas hasn't messed with because we don't have the technology to drill that deep,” Timken added.  The summit “is for technology transfer from oil and gas to geothermal,” he said. “But at the same time, it's like, ‘What can oil and gas take away from geothermal that also helps that industry as well?’” Dana Otilio, a spokesperson for SPE, said that Timken, despite his coordinating role in GEODE, doesn’t speak for the organization as a whole, and his “in-the-moment, casual and personal” comments were “not based on any SPE position.” “I can assure you, as an SPE spokesperson, that SPE does not have an ulterior motivation nor any alternative plan for our involvement in GEODE” beyond the transfer of oil and gas knowledge into geothermal energy, Otillio added. In an interview on Thursday, Latimer of Fervo said he hoped the consortium looked beyond exploration and drilling — areas where recent advances have rapidly cut costs — and also focused on how to produce power from geothermal wells more efficiently and at lower cost. Fervo wants help in that domain because — as company leadership noted in a presentation last week — those "above ground" costs are now the biggest ones facing the company.  “We need more efficient cooling technologies that don’t involve water, more efficient real-time monitoring, production and injection pumps that are designed for geothermal,” he said. In addition to technical challenges, the group will have to confront political ones.  “It is a situation where you have two industries who maybe haven’t always gotten along — or two ideologies that don't seem to really mesh very well,” Timken of SPE said. Project Innerspace director Beard has argued that geothermal, which is currently the form of geothermal energy with by far the most bipartisan support, risks being torn apart by American political polarization if the sector isn’t proactive in addressing divisions between the renewable and oil and gas worlds. As such, some of that first $10 million GEODE participants put toward launching the summits went to hire a conflict management group with experience working in conflict zones from postwar Guatemala and Northern Ireland to post-apartheid South Africa. “We're coming from different cultures, different levels of trust, different levels of respect,” said Harvard psychologist Josh Greene in an address at the end of the second day.  “I think that if this is going to succeed, it's going to be because there has been a collaborative culture that embraces the entire group.”

Are Indonesia and Vietnam's Multibillion-Dollar Clean Energy Deals Stuck? Experts Say Not Yet

Indonesia and Vietnam signed multibillion-dollar energy transition deals in 2022 that were heralded as drastic shifts in financing that would enable the coal-dependent countries to pivot to cleaner energy

JAKARTA, Indonesia (AP) — Indonesia and Vietnam signed multibillion-dollar energy transition deals in 2022 that were heralded as drastic shifts in financing that would enable the coal-dependent countries to pivot to cleaner energy.The deals, known as Just Energy Transition Partnerships, were funded by developed nations to help the two countries phase out and retire their heavily polluting coal-fired power plants and replace them with clean energy alternatives such as solar or geothermal.But nearly two years later, critics say little progress has been made under the deals. Supporters say that’s not a fair assessment, arguing that stakeholders are now collectively making policies for the first time, which could attract more funding, and that the projects simply need more time.Here’s a look at Indonesia and Vietnam’s JETP deals, issues they face and progress that’s been made. What do Indonesia and Vietnam's deals entail? Indonesia's deal provides over $20 billion for the early phase-out and retirement of coal-fired power plants and the development of clean energy sources like solar or geothermal. It also moves to bolster the country's renewable energy supply chains over the next three to five years.Nearly all of Indonesia's energy needs are currently met by fossil fuels, with 60% coming from highly polluting coal. In 2021, Indonesia’s energy sector emissions included around 600 million tons of carbon dioxide, the world’s ninth highest, according to the International Energy Agency. Population and economic growth are expected to triple energy consumption by 2050.Vietnam signed its $15.5 billion deal in December 2022, aiming to get nearly half of the country's electricity from clean sources by 2030. A substantial part of that requires Vietnam to develop energy infrastructure to keep up with the country's rapidly growing renewable energy production. Lack of a blueprint slowed down progress The large financial packages focused on clean energy transitions, but there were no guidelines for implementing the deals, said Grant Hauber, an adviser to the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, a U.S. nonprofit.“It turns out that’s really hard because there are so many social, political and economic elements ... to figure out,” he said.Vietnam has prioritized its electrical grid and energy-storage facilities while laying the groundwork to build offshore wind. But neither these plans nor its earlier national electricity plan answered the big question of how the operators of Vietnam's relatively new coal-fired power plants would be convinced to retire them — or how they would be compensated for doing so.The Vietnamese government and Rachmat Kaimuddin, who heads Indonesia's National Energy Transition Task Force, did not respond to requests for comment by The Associated Press. Mismatch in money and expectations The pledged funding for JETP is a fraction of what countries need. Indonesia says it needs over $97 billion and Vietnam around $134 billion to meet their 2030 goals.The source of funding has also raised concerns. At least 96% is expected to be taken on as debt, with the remainder as grants, according to the ASEAN Centre for Energy, an intergovernmental organization that reviews Southeast Asian energy interests.“Indonesia and Vietnam face similar risks regarding their ability to repay these debts and the subsequent effects on their debt-to-income ratios and national fiscal health," wrote researchers at the ASEAN Climate Change and Energy Project.The deals were designed to entice future investors, said Fabby Tumiwa of the Institute for Essential Services Reform, an Indonesian think tank focused on energy policies and regulations. That is why projects are taking their time to determine how much money they need and how best to get it, he said.Experts say national governments and financial institutions have faced delays in matching available funding with projects that are ready to start. Foreign investors expected “shovel-ready projects” and Indonesia hoped for financing with clearer terms, said Tiza Mafira, director at the Climate Policy Initiative in Indonesia. “It simply wasn't the case." More focus on clean energy and new policies Vietnam's policy reform faces challenges ranging from a cautious bureaucracy unwilling to make decisions and spend money amid an ongoing anti-graft campaign to internal tension within its Communist Party, according to Western diplomats. Vietnam’s Communist Party also insists that electricity prices remain low despite the state utility incurring losses.Recent policy changes have addressed some of those challenges, including the completion of an $884 million, 500-kilometer-long (310-mile) transmission line from central Vietnam to the northern provinces in about six months, a decree that allows factories to buy electricity directly from wind and solar power producers, and a new law that's being drafted for rooftop solar.The deals could be a model for other countries, said Sandeep Pai, the director of the multinational energy think tank Swaniti Global. But the limited funding offered mostly through loans could dissuade other major fossil fuel-dependent countries from signing similar deals.“Until there is actual money on the table and other countries see real success in initial JETP countries, it will be difficult for others ... to sign on,” he said.The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - July 2024

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.