TopPodcast.com
Menu
  • Home
  • Top Charts
  • Top Networks
  • Top Apps
  • Top Independents
  • Top Podfluencers
  • Top Picks
    • Top Business Podcasts
    • Top True Crime Podcasts
    • Top Finance Podcasts
    • Top Comedy Podcasts
    • Top Music Podcasts
    • Top Womens Podcasts
    • Top Kids Podcasts
    • Top Sports Podcasts
    • Top News Podcasts
    • Top Tech Podcasts
    • Top Crypto Podcasts
    • Top Entrepreneurial Podcasts
    • Top Fantasy Sports Podcasts
    • Top Political Podcasts
    • Top Science Podcasts
    • Top Self Help Podcasts
    • Top Sports Betting Podcasts
    • Top Stocks Podcasts
  • Podcast News
  • About Us
  • Podcast Advertising
  • Contact
Not in our directory?
Add Show Here
Podcast Equipment
Center

toppodcastlogoOur TOPPODCAST Picks

  • Comedy
  • Crypto
  • Sports
  • News
  • Politics
  • True Crime
  • Business
  • Finance

Follow Us

toppodcastlogoStay Connected

    View Top 200 Chart
    Back to Rankings Page
    News

    Volts

    Volts is a podcast about leaving fossil fuels behind. I’ve been reporting on and explaining clean-energy topics for almost 20 years, and I love talking to politicians, analysts, innovators, and activists about the latest progress in the world’s most important fight. (Volts is entirely subscriber-supported. Sign up!)

    www.volts.wtf

    Advertise

    Copyright: © David Roberts

    • Apple Podcasts
    • Google Play
    • Spotify

    Latest Episodes:
    Another hot rocks company gets in the storage game Feb 07, 2024
    Show notes

    In this episode, I interview Fourth Power CTO Asegun Henry and CEO Arvin Ganesan, who bring high-profile experience in energy research, policy, and regulation to their new and promising thermal storage startup.


    This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.volts.wtf/subscribe

    One easy way to boost the grid: upgrade the power lines Jan 31, 2024
    Show notes

    Upgrading power lines — “reconductoring,” in the biz — is a straightforward way to boost the capacity of the electrical grid by enabling it to transmit more power and leak less of it. In this episode, TS Conductor CEO Jason Huang and researcher Emilia Chojkiewicz speak to the great potential of reconductoring, if balky utilities can be convinced to deploy the new technology.


    This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.volts.wtf/subscribe

    Electrifying battery recycling Jan 24, 2024
    Show notes

    Given the trajectory of the electric vehicle industry and the expected lifespan of an EV’s lithium-ion battery, the US is only a few years out from needing large-scale, cost-effective, decarbonized ways to recycle batteries. In this episode, Steve Cotton, CEO of Aqua Metals, describes regenerative electro-hydrometallurgy — the new battery recycling method that’s not only fun to say, but run on clean, cheap renewable electricity too.


    This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.volts.wtf/subscribe

    Michigan targets clean electricity and faster permitting Jan 19, 2024
    Show notes

    In this episode, Michigan State Senator Sam Singh details the ambitious clean energy policies that have been enacted since Democrats won a legislative trifecta in 2022, including some bold reforms of clean-energy permitting.


    This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.volts.wtf/subscribe

    Transitioning off of fossil gas in Australia Jan 17, 2024
    Show notes

    The Australian state of Victoria, home to the city of Melbourne, is the country’s most densely populated state and also its most dependent on fossil gas. In this episode, Lily D’Ambrosio, Victoria’s Minister for Energy, Environment, and Climate Change, shares about the state government’s aim to shift away from fossil gas, its aptly named Gas Substitution Roadmap, and the current status of its decarbonization push.


    This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.volts.wtf/subscribe

    The Chevron Doctrine: what it is and why it matters that the Supreme Court might kill it Jan 12, 2024
    Show notes

    In this episode, David Doniger of the Natural Resources Defense Council explains what the Chevron doctrine is, why the federal judiciary has traditionally been deferential to agencies’ regulatory reasoning, and the potential fallout in the very real chance that the current Supreme Court does away with the doctrine entirely.


    This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.volts.wtf/subscribe

    A Connecticut reformer is shaking up utility regulation Jan 10, 2024
    Show notes

    In this episode, Chairman Marisa Gillett of Connecticut’s Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) talks about her aim to reform the cozy regulatory environment enjoyed by the state’s big utilities, PURA’s new Equitable Modern Grid Initiative, and how ratepayers benefit from a shakeup of the status quo.


    This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.volts.wtf/subscribe

    Decarbonizing a sprawling university system Jan 03, 2024
    Show notes

    As Chief of Energy, Sustainability, and Transportation at the Chancellor’s Office of California State University, Lindsey Rowell is charged with developing and implementing a plan to decarbonize every aspect of the school system, on all 23 campuses, with minimal use of offsets, by 2045. In this episode, she lays out what it will take to tackle this ambitious goal.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsContemplate, if you will, the California State University system. It is the largest public-university system in the country — by some accounts, the largest in the world — with more than a half-million students and some 55,000 faculty and staff, spread across a sprawling network of 23 campuses, from the top of the state to the bottom.What if I told you that it was your job to decarbonize that entire system — the buildings, the energy infrastructure, the transportation, the food, the construction materials, all of it — and you had just over 20 years to do it. Would you panic? Possibly short circuit? I'm pretty sure I would.As it happens, though, that is someone's job. Her name is Lindsey Rowell and she is the Chief of Energy, Sustainability, and Transportation at the Chancellor’s Office. She is on the hook for developing and implementing a plan to make the entire CSU system carbon neutral by 2045, with minimal use of offsets.You might think, to accomplish something so vast, she would have a team of dozens and a budget of billions. But this is a public university system, so of course she doesn't — instead it's duct tape, baling wire, and ingenuity. I had a great time talking with her about how to approach this unwieldy project. I think you will find her pragmatism and good humor refreshing.Every policy or regulation ultimately must be implemented by someone on the ground. This is what that looks like. All right then. Lindsey Rowell, welcome to Volts. Thank you so much for coming.Lindsey RowellThank you so much for having me.David RobertsThis is really interesting, a lot of really interesting stuff here — I have a million questions to get through to ask you. But for starters, why don't you just tell us a little bit about the California State University system, which is different than the University of California system. Just getting that right up front.Lindsey RowellLet's get that out of the way. We are so different. Sure thing. So, California State University system, whether you realize it or not, you probably know it. We are the largest public university system in the country, by some metrics in the world, depending on who you ask on which day. So we have 23 campuses in the system spread across the state, from the very tippy top up in Humboldt and down to the very, very bottom of the state in San Diego. So we cover the entire space in California, and we've been educating students for about 150 years.So we have really old universities. We also have a few satellite locations that offer specialty coursework in nursing or business. And we educate about half a million students with about 55,000 faculty and staff. So we are a huge, hug organization, and the schools, probably people are most familiar with without realizing that they are CSU schools, are the California Polytechnic University at San Luis Obispo — it's one that a lot of folks don't realize as part of our system. And we have three Cal Polys now, Humboldt is a Cal Poly and Cal Poly Pomona, and then, of course, San Diego State is one of our biggest.San Diego, Fullerton, and Long Beach are three of our biggest institutions in Southern California. Reason?David RobertsAre they all four-year undergrad colleges, or are there some vocational stuff or community colleges?Lindsey RowellSo no community colleges. The community college system is a separate but friendly sister organization, complete state organization. And the CSU is a four-year institution and graduate program. So we have masters, and we do have educational doctorate programs at a few of the campuses. So four-plus years.David RobertsSo 23 campuses?Lindsey RowellYes.David RobertsAcross the state. That's a lot. So tell us, then, what laws you are like — what are your mandated goals here? And are they mandated by the state of California, or does CSU have its own separate goals, or are these all just sort of state goals that you're implementing?Lindsey RowellSo, without getting too boring into the legislative dynamic of the CSU, we're sort of a quasi-state agency. So what that usually means is that most regulatory and legislative mandates are applicable to us where we're mentioned specifically. Part of that is due to the fact that we are called out specifically in the government code. So we are our own authority having jurisdiction, if you want a technical term, and then we are self support — a portion of our work is self support through student tuition and endowments and so forth. So what that means is the CSU often sets more ambitious goals.I cannot think of anything off the top of my head where we are not, at the very least, meeting California's goals. As California gets more robust in its challenges towards climate change, I think the gap between California requirements and CSU requirements is closing. But, yes, we align with the state in pretty much everything we do, either by intent or by statute.David RobertsThe broad framework I've been thinking about this in know, I think a lot about policy and laws and politics and getting laws passed, but every law that passes, someone has to do it, right? Someone has to implement it. And so I've just been giving a lot of thought to, who are the people out on the front lines implementing these things? So part of why I'm asking is, what happens if you don't meet them. Are these self imposed goals where if you don't meet them, for whatever reason, you're just like, "Ah, we swung and missed. Bummer." Or is there some legal penalty if you don't reach them?Like, what happens if you don't meet these goals?Lindsey RowellThat's a fun question because my first answer is the world ends. That's what happens. So government, as you know, is generally a carrot sort of organization, not a stick organization. I mean, punitive response to not meeting legislation is usually reserved for the private sector. And government agencies are, you know, sort of pressured to respond to these mandates, but without, you know, punitive expectations if they don't make them. That said, though, and I'm going to offer a little prediction — this is Lindsey Rowell's prediction, this is not the CSU's prediction, disclaimer — that because the intensity of the climate crisis just ever increases. And it's funny that we're doing this today, David, because I just saw all the news of the massive waves in hitting the California coastline.I don't think I've ever seen that in my lifetime due to Pacific storms. And so what I predict is going to happen is there's going to be this sort of the incentive approach, right, where there's programs to support government agencies meeting these standards and goals, and then there'll start to be some hand slapping, maybe there will be some tightening of the purse strings with regard to funding that comes our way. And then I do think eventually there will be punitive damages in the form of carbon taxes or more direct funding cut offs.David RobertsRight. So sticks will show up eventually.Lindsey RowellI think they've got to. I mean, I think at some point you can't rely on folks to do this work voluntarily. And I think governments often have to choose between the two pennies that they have to rub together, as one of my staff likes to say, which I think is a great metaphor.David RobertsWell, actually, wait, we have to rewind because we skipped what the goals actually are, right. CSU imposes its own goals, but what is the goal? I forgot to get that on record.Lindsey RowellThat's actually a great one. We should talk about that. So, the CSU, we have a new sustainability policy. And I say new. Actually, I'm thinking that it's not so new anymore. So we passed a new sustainability policy right after I came back to the CSU. So this is January of 2022. And the new sustainability policy, the overarching goal, is carbon neutrality by 2045.David RobertsAnd is that the same as the state?Lindsey RowellYes, that's the same goal as the state. Now, campuses have individual goals that might be more aggressive. Some are targeting as early as 2030, which is terrifying, but great to see that ambition out there. So that's the overarching goal. But within that, mostly what we've done is aligned with the AASHE STARS program, if you're not familiar. AASHE is the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education, and they have a tracking system, and it sort of captures everything with regard to sustainability across the board, in curriculum, in student basic needs, in diversity, equity, inclusion.So we've sort of aligned our policy to tackle all of those overarching umbrella criteria and then the various credits underneath those. So we have a lot of goals, but the overarching one that is sort of the point to it all is this carbon neutrality by 2045 as a system.David RobertsAnd what's your job? You have to do that.Lindsey RowellExplaining that to my mother for like 15 years, we just had Christmas: "What do you do for a living?" Basically, our role at the chancellor's office is to sort of advise and facilitate and implement these goals through policy, through programs. So we do a lot of program development and more recently, a lot more advocacy. So you were talking about your interest in policy and legislation. We have gotten very heavily involved on the state and federal legislative side, trying to express the need that the CSU has to inform the powers that be of the group of individuals that we serve, which is, generally speaking, disadvantaged communities, underrepresented minorities, first-generation college students.So, as we sort of pursue all of this, our jobs kind of touch everything. We also do broad-scale procurement. We do direct access energy procurement for 14 of the campuses, meaning we buy energy on the wholesale market, then transmission and distribution to the utilities, and then bundled service for the rest of the campuses. So we have all of that. We do climate action planning for the campuses, water conservation, sustainable procurement, waste management, sustainable foods.David RobertsYeah, I was going to say, I mean, this is the point of all this setup, is to get this in readers' minds, is that you are sitting in your office having to think about how to get 23 campuses, physical campuses across the state, to carbon neutrality by 2045.Lindsey RowellRight.David RobertsAnd when I start thinking about that —Lindsey RowellIt gives you anxiety?David Roberts— it causes a pain behind my right eye. My hands start to shake. To me, that's just like a huge — maybe you've grown accustomed to it over time, but to me, it just seems like such a huge, sprawling thing. It kind of makes my brain short circuit.Lindsey RowellIt does that to us. We spend a lot of time sort of mentally advocating for each other, just going, "We can do this. We can do this. We got to just fly forward and it's eating the elephant just one bite at a time."David RobertsYeah, no kidding. The first thing I wanted to ask is just, this seems like, among other things, it's going to take a lot of resources. It's going to take a lot of money to do this. So I was just like, what is your budget? Do you have the budget to achieve this?Lindsey RowellTo all legislators and decision-makers listening, we do not. So we have about a $7 billion deferred maintenance backlog.David RobertsOh, goodness.Lindsey RowellYeah. And that's not, "woe is us", sort of — that's not that kind of a comment because the UC and the community colleges of the state at large, this is something we deal with. They're chronically underfunded organizations, as government organizations tend to be. I mean, when we talk about the numbers needed for this type of work, especially decarbonization, just electrification. So let's just talk about electrification plans. The numbers aren't even real numbers, David. They're not numbers that you and I — and we hear them. We hear Jeff Bezos has $65 trillion or whatever. We know that's a figure. But when someone says to you, "Oh, just to electrify your central plant, that serves a campus that occupies, I don't know, let's say, 4 million square feet, is going to cost you, for starters, $350 million for the engineering and the basic equipment change out."So that doesn't include things like switching everything over to the proper coils that can take the lower temperature hot water to circulate to buildings. That doesn't include any of the offsetting renewable energy and all of that that's required to actually get to net zero. That's an insane number. So when you start to think about that across a whole campus, the number is probably closer to 500 million, a billion per campus and then 23 campuses.David RobertsYeah, it adds right up.Lindsey RowellHuge numbers. They're huge numbers.David RobertsYeah. So I guess that's kind of where I want to start before getting into the details. Just like, how am I not to conclude that this is just impossible what they're asking you to do? The scale of what they're asking you to do with the money you have available to do it, how do you get around that basic —Lindsey RowellLet me give you some of my —David RobertsCoping strategies?Lindsey RowellI was going to say my coping strategies, the little things I hang on to as signs of progress. First of all, so for the CSU, we have managed to keep our energy use level over the past almost two decades, despite adding thousands and thousands of square feet. So we're good at energy efficiency, and we've managed to do it with no direct — we have no direct budget assigned for that kind of work. So this is usually nickel and diming an operational budget. This is capturing incentives through utility programs or federal grant programs.So we do a lot of sort of little things where we chip away at the problem, and that actually is tremendously effective. One of our campuses, one of our energy managers, his name is Kenny Seeton, and I can take his name in vain because we're good friends and he's been around for as long as I have in the CSU. And one of the things he does so well is he'll do things like he'll have $1,000 left on his purchasing, his pro card, at the end of the month, and he'll buy a bunch of lamps or he'll buy a bunch of meters and he'll just keep them in his office until he's got 100 of them. And then he'll rally his team and be like "All right, guys, this weekend we're going to go through and we're going to install all of these."He'll probably be the first campus to meet the net zero goals, and he's done it all without a dedicated energy budget.David RobertsAmazing.Lindsey RowellSo, the answer to your question is so fluid. I think the federal government is finally starting to put some real money behind these efforts.David RobertsYeah, I was going to ask, like, IRA, the Inflation Reduction Act, actually just showering money down on everything. Are you going to be able to harvest some of that?Lindsey RowellYeah, we're really, really trying. So that's a big part of our advocacy program. We've kind of got a two-path, two-pronged approach. One is sort of short term, what can we capture from the Inflation Reducti…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    We are closing in on zero-carbon cement Dec 27, 2023
    Show notes

    The cement industry, responsible for roughly 8 percent of total global carbon emissions, is notoriously difficult to decarbonize. But a new startup, Sublime Systems, aims to manufacture zero-carbon cement that can easily be substituted for the traditional version. In this episode, Sublime CEO Leah Ellis talks through the company’s vision and process.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David Roberts:Of all the so-called “difficult to decarbonize” sectors, cement is among the most vexing. Making cement produces CO2 not merely through fuel combustion (in kilns that reach temperatures of up to 1400 C), but also through chemical processes that split CO2 off from other molecules. It is responsible for roughly 8 percent of total global carbon emissions.Most gestures at decarbonizing cement to date are fairly desultory — things like adding special additives or injecting a little CO2 when the cement is mixed into concrete. The only widely available method that could theoretically produce no- or low-carbon cement is post-combustion carbon capture and sequestration. And there are plenty of people who would question whether that's actually viable at all, much less widely available, given that it would roughly double operational costs for a cement plant.There are lots of startups out there attempting to solve this problem (as reported by Canary last month). Perhaps the most intriguing is Sublime Systems, a team that has developed something truly new and exciting: a system for manufacturing cement that requires no high heat (thus no combustion emissions) and uses inputs that contain no carbon (thus no chemical emissions). That makes the cement, at least potentially, not just low-carbon but zero-carbon. What’s more, the company says that, in form and performance, its product is a perfect drop-in substitute for traditional Portland cement, so it wouldn't even require any changes in the construction industry.A carbon-free drop-in cement substitute — at scale and at competitive cost — would be genuinely transformative. I contacted Sublime CEO Leah Ellis to talk about cement chemistry, the company’s process, and the plan for reaching megaton scale. This one was truly fascinating and educational for me; I think you will really like it.All right then. Leah Ellis, CEO of Sublime Systems, welcome to Volts. Thank you so much for coming.Leah EllisThank you so much for having me.David RobertsI'm excited today to talk about concrete, everybody's favorite subject. But first I wanted to ask you, I know you and your partner originally were trained as and educated as battery scientists. I'm just curious how you ended up here. What drew you into this area, this problem?Leah EllisYeah, my co-founder is a professor at MIT, Yet-Ming Chiang, and he's in the material science department, and I'm a chemist by training. I like to think of chemistry as the central science that combines everything from physics to biology. All of the good stuff you can sort of spread into anything from a foundation in chemistry. So I did my PhD in lithium-ion batteries. I worked with a prolific inventor, Jeff Dahn, and after that I wanted to continue working with an inventor. As you may know, in academia, there are so many different styles of research.I mean, some people like microscopy and mechanisms, but I really like the creative aspect, like discovering something that could be useful or to solve problems. And not many academics and professors think through that lens. So I've always been very lucky to work with prolific inventors, both in my master's and my PhD. So for my postdoc, I sought to work with people who thought like that. So my co-founder, Yet-Ming Chiang at MIT, is a prolific inventor and also a serial entrepreneur. So Sublime is his 7th startup, and five of the previous six have been very successful.So I didn't join him with the aspiration of becoming a founder. I really knew nothing about entrepreneurship or anything like that, but I did want to invent, and I did love the way he approaches his work from a problem-solving standpoint. So that's what brought us together.David RobertsAnd he's the one who sort of flagged the problem of concrete to you.Leah EllisThat's right. So I was always aware that cement was one of the biggest levers for decarbonization. But I suppose after my PhD, where I'd worked with one of the most illustrious battery scientists, I sort of always had thought that my career would be in batteries. Like, I thought I'd painted myself into a corner. And so when I first met Yet-Ming Chiang, he asked a question that at first I thought was a trick question. He was, "Hey, Leah, like, you've got this Canadian grant to come work with me, and I know you're a battery scientist, but aren't you a little bit bored of batteries?"And I thought that was a trick question because he's the battery guru and I didn't want to insult him, but honestly, I sort of shared his opinion that, well, maybe this isn't his opinion, maybe it's just my opinion. But I think batteries are exciting, but I think there's like sigmoidal growth in any technology where it starts out slow to build momentum, and then it goes through a period where it's super hyped, and then you sort of squeeze all of the innovations out of things. And I think with lithium-ion batteries, which was my expertise, it comes to making the cans a bit bigger and the separators a little bit thinner and tweaks. And you know — I don't know, I just want to do something totally outside the box.And I think that's what Yet offered me the chance to do when he said, "If you're bored with batteries, why don't we think of a way to apply our electrochemical toolbox to cement?" And so the way he came up with that electrochemical cement tagline was he spends a lot of time thinking about reducing the emissions in the utility sector. And I think we have all of the technology needed to do that. I mean, not saying it will be easy to deploy solar, wind, long duration storage, but at least we have the technology. So that's not necessarily where most of the early stage R&D is needed.And so he was thinking at the time, like, how do we use low cost renewables, assuming that we'll figure out all of the utility stuff and really get to low cost intermittent renewables? And how do we take intermittent renewables and apply that to decarbonizing the next biggest tranche of emissions, which is cement? So cement, if it were a country, would be the third largest emitter after China and the US. So it's 8% of global CO2 emissions back in 2018, it fluctuates, but it's like 7% or 8%. So it's big game hunting when it comes to decarbonization. So we've always worked backwards from that electrochemical cement tagline.David RobertsAnd it's 8% of current emissions. But also, you make the point that's just going to go up, right? There's just going to be more and more cement as far as the eye can see.Leah EllisRight. And as everything else, I hope, goes to zero. I think these so-called hard to abate sectors like cement and steel, they may be both seven or 8% now, but in coming years, as the grid gets decarbonized, these numbers are just going to get larger because neither cement nor steel are going to go away. And in fact, we're going to use more cement, especially in places like India and Africa, that will undergo a phase of dirty growth unless we develop and deploy these clean technologies in time.David RobertsRight. So, let's talk about cement then. I mean, if you're looking for the big problem with no solution yet, it seems like you really nailed this one. So, let's talk about cement. I've been reading sort of the background materials of your company and reading about cement in preparation for this. I have tripled my knowledge about cement over the last 72 hours, starting from an extremely low baseline. What is interesting to me is that the process whereby cement is made, the emissions mostly come from trying to get lime. So, let's talk a little bit about how cement is made.So, cement, the recipe for cement, as you say on the website and in all these briefing materials, is calcium silicate hydrate (CSH). There are, I'm sure, details that matter, but that's the basic recipe for the basic kind of cement that we've been using for hundreds of years. CSH, they call it calcium silicate hydrate, and that is made of lime and silica and water. We can talk about silica and water later, but they're pretty easy to come by. So, mostly it's about getting lime, it's about how do you get lime? And the way we get lime now is starting with limestone.So, maybe you can just briefly describe the process whereby conventional cement is made. How do we get from those raw materials to the cement that we are familiar with in bags, mixing with water, et cetera?Leah EllisYeah, as you say, cement, the principal ingredient is lime, calcium oxide. And fun fact is, that's where Sublime Systems got their name. I was looking in a rhyming dictionary for something that rhymed. No shortage of cement puns. I can keep them coming if you like. Or maybe you don't like.David RobertsThat's excellent.Leah EllisSo, lime is calcium oxide or hydroxide. It's a reactive calcium that reacts with silica and water to make cement. Or when cement reacts with water, then it becomes concrete, that calcium silicate hydrate phase you mentioned. So, today, and historically, the path to making cement has been by thermally decomposing limestone, which is calcium carbonate, which is 50% by weight CO2.David RobertsYeah, that kind of blew my mind. I don't know anything about chemistry, so all chemistry blows my mind.Leah EllisYeah, it is mind-blowing. I mean, you think of cement, which is the world's largest industry by mass. So we use more cement than any other material besides water. And the prime ingredient in cement, it's about 65% weight calcium oxide. And then that comes from limestone, which is 50% by weight, CO2. So you just do the math. It's very easy to visualize. Just the massive CO2 emissions is staggering.David RobertsSo the emissions from cement are almost all around this process of getting lime. They're 50/50 — you break it down 50/50. So 50% is getting the kiln hot enough to break limestone down, which requires extremely high temperatures. What is it, 1400?Leah EllisYeah. So the way we make Portland cement, which is the modern cement that we've been using for the past almost 200 years, is you take limestone and then heat it first to 900 degrees Celsius. And that is the temperature at which limestone decomposes into reactive lime and CO2, and then to make Portland cement, which is a specific chemistry of cement, you heat it further to 1400 degrees Celsius, at which point the lime and the silica fuse together to make a phase called alite tricalcium silicate. And then that is quenched. So it's dropped very quickly from that hot kiln and sort of freezes that phase.That when you grind the cement into a powder that now reacts very vigorously with water, it releases a lot of that extra heat and that turns into the hardened concrete.David RobertsSo just to give people a visual here, a conception, this process of heating lime up and getting the lime out of the limestone, that's where all the emissions come from. They're about 50/50 the emissions.Leah EllisYeah, about 50/50. And of course, it depends on the design of the kiln. Some of them are more efficient than others, but it's about 50% limestone emissions, 50% fossil emissions. And to get to that very high temperature, you often require a very high caloric, luminous flame, which requires bituminous coals — is often the primary fuel for this type of kiln.David RobertsRight. So it's 50% this special kind of coal heating up this special kind of kiln to the extraordinarily high temperature of 1400 C. And then the other 50% is the CO2 in the limestone being broken out and then vented, I guess emitted. Which is just the reason I'm harping on this point, is just that I think a lot of people think of decarbonization as primarily an energy thing. But it's worth noting here that even if you find a decarbonized way to get that heat, that 1400 C heat, you're still left with 50% of the emissions. Right, because you still have CO2 coming out of the limestone as it's heated.Because we've talked a lot on this pod about alternative sources of heat and about heat batteries, thermal storage batteries that conceivably could get up to 1400. They have that in their sights. But I just want to emphasize that even if that problem is solved, you still got 50% of the problem left, which is all the CO2 that's embedded in limestone attached to the lime. So that's our current cement. 50/50, heating up lime, breaking the lime out of the limestone. Let's talk about ways that people have tried to approach, before we get to Sublime's approach, let's talk about other ways people have thought about this.It's a big problem. And if you think about decarbonization long enough, you end up here. What else have people tried to do with cement? I know there are a couple of things floating around, but maybe you just tell us sort of like, what are the other alternatives here?Leah EllisYeah, there are, as you say, not many technologies, if any, besides Sublime's, that can address both halves of the cement CO2 problem, the limestone and the fossil fuel, simultaneously. So you could electrify the heat in some way with a thermal battery or find some sort of electric kiln. And electric kilns have material problems. It's difficult to get things that withstand that temperature — the heating elements — if you're using resistive heating, for example.David RobertsIs anyone doing that yet? Is there an electrified heat source specifically making cement yet, or is that just an idea?Leah EllisNot that I know of. I mean, I think that would be the obvious solution, I think is to electrify the kiln. And I know there's some efforts with plasmas and solar concentrators and stuff like that, but I think that one would be, if it was easy, someone would already be doing it.David RobertsGetting extremely high heat with electricity is vexing.Leah EllisRight. And you can do it. The challenge is, like, can you do it efficiently? And then even if you do it, have you really solved the whole problem?David RobertsRight.Leah EllisSo, there's that. And then I'd say, like, what the industry is doing right now. And to their credit, they are doing everything they can to decarbonize, especially in the past three to five years. So there's a focus on alternative fuel. So, cement actually plays an interesting role in the garbage ecosystem because it's such a high temperature. It's just a really great place to dispose of things because everything at that temperature vaporizes into CO2 within a matter of seconds. So it's a great place to burn tires. It's a very clean way to burn tires.David RobertsWhat, in cement kilns?Leah EllisOh, yeah.David RobertsThey're throwing tires in there?Leah EllisYeah, I've actually visited a kiln that had this tire injection port, and I was able to stand on top of it and watch them drop tires into this kiln. About every 20 seconds, a hatch in the kiln, rotary kiln, would open, and it would drop in. I actually have a video I can send you a link to. It's one of the coolest things I've ever seen, but, yeah. The plant manager told me that the tire turns entirely to CO2 within 20 seconds. I think many of us have seen a tire fire which creates, like, black, choking smoke.But if you get to 1400 degrees C, it jus…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Getting better at mining the minerals needed for clean energy Dec 20, 2023
    Show notes

    To create a clean-energy economy, the US badly needs an advanced mining industry that can provide huge amounts of key minerals for batteries and other technologies — and it’s nowhere close to where it needs to be. In this episode, KoBold Metals CEO Kurt House describes the current state of mineral exploration, the significant changes it needs to make, and how machine learning and artificial intelligence can help it get there.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsBuilding the machines and batteries needed to decarbonize the economy will require enormous amounts of a few key minerals. The proven reserves of those minerals, sitting in mines now operating, are nowhere close to enough to satisfy what is expected to be skyrocketing demand.Without the minerals, we can’t make the clean-energy economy. And we don't know where the minerals are going to come from.What's worse, exploring for new mineral deposits has been getting less and less efficient over the last several decades, as the amount of investment needed per successful discovery has risen. We seem to be getting worse at finding this stuff right when we badly need to be getting better.That state of affairs has drawn in several new startups that endeavor to use machine learning and artificial intelligence to improve mining’s hit rate. The most talked-about is KoBold Metals. With financial backing from Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, and other big-name investors, KoBold is now exploring for minerals on four continents.To get a better handle on mining and how we can improve at it, I contacted KoBold CEO Kurt House. We talked about the projected gap between supply and demand, the somewhat primitive way current exploration works, the massive data-gathering and coordination project the company has undertaken, and the role of justice and equity in this AI-accelerated future of mining.Kurt House, CEO of KoBold Metals, welcome to Volts. Thank you so much for coming.Kurt HouseI'm so pleased to be here. I'm a huge fan. I listen to the podcast all the time, so it's fun to talk to you live.David RobertsWe're going to talk about something that is of great interest these days, which is finding the stuff that we need to build the clean energy economy. This is something I did a series of articles on a couple of years ago, and it's come up repeatedly over the years. People talk about possible shortages of materials as one of the bottlenecks that might slow the clean energy transition. So maybe let's just start there with setting some context, talk a little bit about the big four minerals that you focus on and sort of what we know about how much we have access to and how much we project we're going to need.Kurt HousePerfect setup question. So, the energy transition is fundamentally about getting off fossil fuels. It's fundamentally about electrifying the economy to the greatest extent possible. So we electrify transport, all electric generation becomes renewable, et cetera, et cetera. That requires a lot of very specific materials and very specific materials because different elements have different physical properties, obviously, and they do different things better and worse than others. And some of those elements are really difficult to substitute for, for very, very deep physical reasons. So KoBold is focused on what we call "the materials of the future," and those are lithium, cobalt, copper and nickel.That's not at all to say that there aren't other important materials for the energy transition.David RobertsAre those four the most important? By just mass, just, we need most of those —Kurt HouseNo, by total mass, it'd probably be aluminum and steel, iron for steel. The reason these are so important, there's two orthogonal reasons that we focus on these. One is how difficult they are to substitute for in specific applications. And I'll talk about that. And then the orthogonal element to it is that they are exploration problems. So aluminum is really useful in a whole bunch of reasons, but it's not an exploration problem. There's just gobs of bauxite, aluminum silicon oxide on the planet, and we know where it is. It's just a matter of processing it in more efficient and less carbon intensive ways.So, it's a metallurgical challenge. It's not an exploration challenge. In the case of lithium, cobalt, copper and nickel, you could take any forecast you want, but basically the end state is something like 2 billion electric vehicles on the planet, plus a whole bunch of renewable energy build out. And any way you slice it, those are just gigantic numbers, and they require gigantic amounts of lithium, cobalt, copper and nickel. And then you can say, "Okay, that's how much we need at, say, 2050 to be mostly off fossil fuels by 2050, how much exists in the reserves of current mines?"So if we take all the mines that are producing today, and they're going to produce out for the next several decades, that's another number. That's another quantity. And that you also have to add in all of the other uses for these minerals. Right. If the economy just goes on, and there's lots and lots of uses for nickel and copper, in particular in stainless steel and all manner of electrical applications for copper that just happen anyway. So you have to add up those, plus the energy transition metals and compare them to existing mine supply and existing mine reserves, and you get a gap.And then, if you multiply by current commodity prices, that gap is about $15 trillion.David RobertsGood Lord.Kurt HouseWe call that — exactly — the "missing metals gap". And so it's not the total amount of metal we need. We actually need a lot more. But that's the value of the metal that we need to find, right? We need to find and then develop into mines.David RobertsThat represents metal we need, but we don't yet know where it is or where it's going to come from?Kurt HouseExactly. Because I've subtracted out existing mine supply. Right. And not just existing mine supply, but existing mine supply, plus mines that are in late stages of development. We know they're going to be mines. We've just included that in existing mine supply. So it's really the things that we need to find new deposits that no one in the world knows where they are right now. And then we need to develop them into operating mines — to build new mines. And then those mines need to go into production, and they need to operate for many, many years to produce the necessary amount of metal.And the value of that metal, roughly speaking, is $15 trillion.David RobertsAnd that all needs to happen — if you look, like, 2050 used to be a lot farther away than it is these days. And now if you look at those lines, they're going up and to the right pretty steeply. So all of that stuff needs to happen much more quickly than it has in the past.Kurt HouseExactly right, David. And that is what makes this so difficult. So, in round numbers, in very round numbers, it's about 1000 new deposits need to be found, and then 1000 new mines need to be developed.David RobertsWow.Kurt HouseAnd that, obviously, that's a function of I'm using sort of median mine production. It could be 700 if they're bigger or whatever, but it's order of magnitude 1000. It's a huge number. And then you can say, "okay, well, how fast are we building new mines today? Finding new discoveries and building new mines today?" And the answer is, "not nearly fast enough."David RobertsWell, this is something you told me about last time we talked, which has stuck in my head ever since. You called it "Eroom's law of mining," which is Moore's law backward. Explain what you mean by that.Kurt HouseYeah, precisely. So, Moore's law. The audience will be very familiar with Moore's law. Right. One of the most remarkable demonstrations of human ingenuity of all time, which is that the density of transistors on chips has doubled every 18 to 24 months for 55 years now. And the result is a ten to the 10th order of magnitude increase in computational speed, computational power. So we get better and better and better computation, and that's why you and I can talk remotely in real time from far — everything else that people know. Okay, that's Moore's law. So go back to 1990 and look at how much money the industry was spending in aggregate on exploration, and then divide that number by the number of good new discoveries they were making per year.David RobertsRight? Dollars per discovery.Kurt HouseDollars per discovery. And by good discovery, I just mean a discovery that definitely becomes a mine. It's a good tier one, tier two discoveries, we'd say, in the industry, but it becomes a mine. That number was about $300 million in today's dollars. In 2023 dollars, that was about $300 million per good discovery. Today, that number is about $3 billion. It's gotten an order of magnitude more expensive to find the next deposit. We're getting worse. So we call this Eroom's law, because over the last 40 years, we've gotten ten x worse at exploration, we have to put in ten times the amount of resources to find the same amount of stuff.Or put it another way, we'll find one 10th the stuff if we invest the same amount in exploration. And exploration expenditure is basically flat, roughly speaking. So we are way, way, way behind and we're spending roughly half a percent a year of what would be needed based on the current exploration effectiveness, dollars per discovery. So on the current rates and current expenditure investment, it will take about 200 years for humanity to find enough deposits.David Roberts$3 billion. If you think about 1000 new mines needed —Kurt HouseThere you go.David Roberts1000 times $3 billion adds up to some large —Kurt House$3 trillion. And that's just exploration expenditure. That's not including the cost to actually build the mines, which is a lot more.David RobertsSo let's break this down a little bit or unpack this a little bit, because with Moore's law, I think people get, on the one hand, getting more computing power out of tinier and tinier spaces gets harder and harder. Like the job gets harder and harder because you're working with just less space and tighter materials and et cetera. But our improvement at doing it is growing faster than the difficulty, basically. Like, we're getting better faster than it's getting harder, I guess, is the way you would put it. If we just remained the same good at doing that, productivity would be declining because it would be getting harder and harder and we wouldn't be getting better.That seems to be what's happening in mining. It's not that we're getting dumber or worse at mining, it's just that finding the stuff is harder because we've already found the easiest stuff. So finding stuff gets harder and harder, but we're just not getting better at it.Kurt HouseYou explained it perfectly. That's exactly right. Another example that I've used, that's even a better example because you just took Moore's law a step further. But another example I use is like fastballs in Major League Baseball were like 85 miles an hour in 1970, and then today they're like close to 100 mph. It's objectively harder to hit that fastball, but batting averages are about the same. Right? So pitchers got better, batters got better. Right. And your point is exactly right is that — are we actually getting dumber? I don't think so. We're not actually getting dumber. It's that the search space is getting way harder because, as you say correctly, the easy things have been found.And what is an easy thing? It's actually really easy to understand. An easy thing is a deposit, an ore body that's going to be mined, that's sticking out of the ground that a skilled field geologist walks up to the outcrop, looks at the outcrop, identifies ore minerals in the outcrop, and says, "These are ore minerals right here. We should explore this because there might be enough of them to constitute a mine here."David RobertsYeah, you told me that when we talked before, and it blew my mind a little bit because one of the things I'm finding out about this as I do this job more and more is just like normal american consumers are so used to everything going digital and everything being sort of like fancy and computerized now that when I go ask about other areas, I'm often struck by how analog they remain, sort of how kind of primitive they remain. And something you told me is that almost all, like literally almost all of the discoveries we've had and the mines we now have come from someone just seeing something on the surface, like literally the same way they found stuff to mine in 1800.Kurt HouseYeah, it's absolutely right. If you were to build a time machine and bring the best exploration geologists from 1960 to today, they would be very comfortable working in the industry. Very comfortable. You have to teach them email. Right. You have to teach them a few things —David RobertsZoom meetings.Kurt HouseExactly. Zoom meetings. But in terms of the field work and the techniques, they would be very similar.David RobertsAnd so should we envision groups of people out walking around looking, or how do we search the surface today?Kurt HouseYeah, I mean, field geology is a skill, and it's a hard skill to learn. It takes a lot of practice. And there are very skilled field geologists that KoBold employs, and they're absolutely essential to our business. They're fantastic. And just because a technology or technique is old doesn't mean it's bad. There's a lot tried and true methods just sort of continue for some good reason. Right. And so field mapping, for instance, which is basically, if you walk along the ground, think about, you're either walking along bedrock that's an exposed outcrop, or you're walking along soils or something else that's kind of covering the bedrock.And so field mapping exercises are, there's actually a lot of kind of tricky geometry to it, and it's about identifying the outcrops. It's about making measurements about where the outcrops go underground and then extrapolating in a kind of heuristic way what those rock bodies would look like underneath the cover. Those are sort of useful techniques, and that's what historic field geology is all about.David RobertsAnd so, historically, when someone finds something sticking out of the surface and they say, "hey, this looks like an ore concentration. This looks like a concentration of some ore that we would like to mine" at that point, then what, the mining company just goes in and just starts poking holes down, digging down and looking?Kurt HouseYeah. Once you find an occurrence, you might call that an occurrence, mineral occurrence. Then you go and explore to see if it's large enough and sufficiently high concentration to be an economic deposit. It's a good lead. Not every occurrence turns into a mine, but every mine at one point was an occurrence. Right.David RobertsRight. That's what I'm trying to get my head around is, what does that look like? What do those holes look like? Are they narrow, little pokey holes, or is this, like, a big operation when you're digging down, exploring?Kurt HouseSo, for the exploration component, they're very narrow holes. Think a few inches in diameter that you drill. And what you're trying, you're extracting core samples. Right. You're extracting to characterize the full geologic body and to characterize…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Previous 1 22 23 24 25 26 46 Next

    Related Podcasts

    Inside Strategic Coach: Connecting Entrepreneurs With What Really Matters

    1

    Inside Strategic Coach: Connecting Entrepreneurs With What Really Matters Business
    WSJ Your Money Briefing

    2

    WSJ Your Money Briefing Business
    FORTUNE Unfiltered with Aaron Task

    3

    FORTUNE Unfiltered with Aaron Task Business
    FORTUNE OnStage Presents: The Most Powerful Women

    4

    FORTUNE OnStage Presents: The Most Powerful Women Business
    Slate Money

    5

    Slate Money Business
    In The Dark – The New Yorker

    6

    In The Dark – The New Yorker Business News
    footer-logo

    Contact Us

    Toll Free: 844-670-7747

    Links

    • Home
    • Top Charts
    • Networks
    • Apps
    • Independents Podcasts
    • Podcast Advertising
    • Podcast News
    • Contact Us
    • About Us
    • Analytics & Insights

    Stay Connected

      Privacy, Terms of Use & Our Code of Ethics Protecting Content Creators Copyrights