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:
    The Volts/Catalyst pod crossover you didn't know you were waiting for Nov 03, 2023
    Show notes

    In this episode, Shayle Kann, cleantech investor and host of the podcast Catalyst, shares his educated opinion on the most overhyped and underhyped technologies and trends in clean energy.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsIf you listen to Volts, you probably also listen to — or at the very least, should also be listening to — Catalyst, the Canary Media podcast hosted by veteran cleantech investor Shayle Kann. Like Volts, it features fairly nerdy deep-dive interviews, though they are mercifully shorter, and they’re more focused on cleantech, less likely to drift into politics and activism. (Shayle is a partner at Energy Impact Partners, where he assesses and funds cleantech companies for a living, so unlike me he brings some expertise to the table!)Anyway, our pods have been mutual admirers for a while now and we thought it would be fun to do something together. So the following episode features Shayle and I discussing a few technologies and trends we think are overhyped, and a few we think are underhyped. We get into electric stoves, interest rates, thermal batteries, and much more. It was just as fun and enlightening as I expected — especially where we disagreed — so I hope you enjoy it as much as I did. All right, here we are. I'm here with Shayle Kann, the host of Catalyst. Shayle, welcome to the greatest crossover event in podcast history.Shayle KannMan, I had already written down that joke. I had written down that literal joke for my monologue. I got to come up with something else.David RobertsIt's the Infinity War of podcasts for nerds. You know, Shayle, I have been listening to Catalyst for a long time, a big fan, and we've been talking for a long time now about how we ought to do something, do some sort of crossover, have some sort of chat, especially since we're both quasi under Canary now. So what we decided on was to chat a little bit about the clean energy landscape via the lens of a couple of what we feel are overhyped trends or technologies and a couple that we think are underhyped. And so we're just going to walk through things that way and have a little chat along the way about what we're seeing and doing. So, Shayle, are you ready to go?Shayle KannI am. But before we start, can I ask you a question?David RobertsYeah, please.Shayle KannSo when I was trying to come up with my overhyped and underhyped things, I was having, like, a surprisingly difficult time determining what I think is overhyped or underhyped relative to whom? You know, I kept coming up with things where I was like things that are overhyped to the people who care about energy on Twitter, which is not representative of anything important. So I was trying to figure out overhyped or underhyped by whom and to whom. And I don't know if you struggled with the same thing?David RobertsI did struggle with that. We do live in a weird, tiny, little insular world in which many things are overhyped that normal people have never heard of. And vice versa. So I think I did a mix. So you'll just have to explain the context of your answer while you're answering. You have to explain underhyped or overhyped to whom while you're answering. Some of mine are definitely overhyped or underhyped to our audience.Shayle KannRight? Yeah, exactly.David RobertsWhich, as you say, does not mean much to the wider world, since we both have audiences of energy nerds, handsome, viril, unusually intelligent energy nerds —Shayle KannOf course.David Robertsin our audiences.Shayle KannYeah, I also struggled a little bit with, like, there's some things that I think might be overhyped because I overhyped them. Just a bit circular.David RobertsI know one of my underhyped is something that I have been relentlessly trying to hype for years, but I just don't think I have the hype power to bring it up to the hype level, where it would be sufficiently hyped. So we'll discuss those along the way. So we starting then with your first underhyped trend. So tell us what it is and perhaps to whom it is underhyped.Shayle KannOkay, so I think this is underhyped by almost everybody outside of a relatively small corner of the clean energy world that's like trying to pound the drum as loud as possible about this, which is the trend of onshoring of manufacturing in clean energy supply chains. Onshoring, and I guess I would add near shoring or friend shoring, but predominantly onshoring. So let me contextualize a little bit, which is I know you were around for the whole solar story as solar was just starting to mature, but the short version of that story in my mind, if you go way back in solar history, was Japan was really the first market that both installed any meaningful amount of solar and produced it.Right. You had these companies like Sharp and others, way back in the '90s. And Japan had this feed-in tariff for residential solar, and that was small and steady for a long time, and not a whole lot happened. And then what really kickstarted the solar market was demand in Germany, first because of their feed-in tariff, and then in the US. Predominantly in California, thanks to the California Solar Initiative and the renewable portfolio standards here. And then it spread through other parts of Western Europe, as other countries like Spain and the Czech Republic and Italy and others started introducing their own policies.But demand was clearly coming from Western Europe. Manufacturing followed briefly. Right. In Germany in particular, you had some of the big early solar manufacturers were German companies, and the US looked like it might be on the verge of a domestic manufacturing renaissance, largely of the next generation of technologies thin film solar. And then, of course, everybody knows how the story ended up playing out, which is that basically all of that manufacturing moved to China and then kind of spread into Southeast Asia as trade barriers started to get enacted and has stayed there. Right. And the thing that I think is underhyped that people don't appreciate starts with solar but doesn't end with solar, which is that thanks predominantly to the Inflation Reduction Act, but not exclusively, we are seeing a crazy renaissance in domestic manufacturing of clean energy components.I woke up this morning to another announcement. This is Canadian Solar, which, despite the name, is really a Chinese solar manufacturer, setting up a five-gigawatt cell manufacturing facility in Indiana.David RobertsYeah, it's crazy. They're one after the other these days. I've almost become numb to them already, and it's only like a year. A year? But it's just one after the other.Shayle KannThat's the key point. Right. We're barely over a year since the IRA. And yeah, it's solar cells and modules, but obviously the battery and EV supply chain is the other places is playing out in a huge way and it's an enormous amount. And we've never seen anything like this in the history of clean energy.David RobertsYeah, this is one of the things I struggle to convey to people outside our world. I think it's gotten out that the IRA is a climate bill, but I do not think it has appreciated the sort of brashness or the sheer ambition involved in attempting to stand up a domestic supply chain for these things out of almost nothing. Right. And it's just a huge, conjuring feat accomplished with a boatload of money. And it's happening right in front of us. It is quite remarkable. I do wonder. As big as the growth seems from our end, since we're starting from a relatively sort of desiccated manufacturing base, as people have been complaining about for years, do you think we're going to get to a meaningful chunk?I mean, China is like 90, 95% on most of these materials, most of these manufacturing, most of these supply chains — other than it brings us jobs, and it employs a lot of people in a lot of areas that are hurting, and so it's good for that reason, manufacturing is good. But do you think we're going to be able to build up enough of the manufacturing on our shores that we can throw weight around in the actual market? Or do you think it's more of like an insurance policy we're doing? I struggle to conceive the scale here that we're shooting for.Shayle KannYeah. And I don't think it's going to be consistent across various parts of the supply chain. Right. We may end up assembling a lot of our EV battery packs in North America, but that doesn't mean that we're going to be producing all of our lithium chemicals here, for example. Right, there's places where China's stranglehold on supply chain is stronger than other places. Rare earth elements is another one. Right. Like China's super dominant. And it's going to take a lot for us to play a big role there. But in other places. Like I said, battery assembly and maybe solar, interestingly enough, we've got a ways to go there.Now, to be clear, I don't think there's a future wherein the US produces as much of any of these things as China does. But we don't need to if our point is to get high on our own supply, basically.David RobertsIt's resilience, right? Mostly it's just sort of having a little buffer in case China tries to play games. I think that's sort of how it's being viewed in the administration.Shayle KannWhich is happening. Right. Like we just saw China just announced that it's going to curb or at least require licensing of exports of graphite to other countries. That's a big deal. Graphite is a predominant anode —David RobertsAnd they utterly dominate graphite. It's like 99%. I think on graphite it's something ludicrous.Shayle KannExactly. So I think the geopolitical element of this is definitely a dri... It's a combination of the geopolitics and the China-thing, along with the "economic development in regions that need it"-thing that make this so attractive.David RobertsAnd plus, not to rant, but here we have in this country, we've been complaining and complaining about parts of the country that have been hollowed out by globalization, right? Especially a cliche now. And those parts have gone red. It's the white working class, it's angry at Democrats because of globalization, blah, blah, blah. So here is a huge multi hundred billion dollar, very direct effort to reverse that, to send, to get manufacturing going back in exactly those parts of the country. Like, you've seen the maps. These are red areas where these jobs are going. Here we have a multi billion dollar effort precisely targeted at reviving manufacturing precisely in those areas.And it's like you can't get the news to talk about it.Shayle KannI think that's true. You said you think people woken up that the IRA is a climate bill. I'm not sure. I think people don't pay any attention to the IRA.David RobertsMight be optimistic. Okay, well, we could talk about that forever. Because another aspect of that is the sort of sort of Europe being kind of having its butt up on its shoulders about our industrial policy and our supposed protectionism and the sort of trade tensions that this is sparking with Europe. But we can't get too sucked into it. We've got a lot of items to get through.Shayle KannYeah, save that one. Okay, so that's my first underhyped. What about you? What's your first underhyped trend or technology?David RobertsWell, this one people will laugh at me about this one, as you did when I emailed it. But my first underhyped is thermal storage. Anyone who's been listening to either of our podcasts —Shayle KannYeah, I was going to say, you and I have both been hyping this one. This is the one where you're reflecting a failure on our collective part.David RobertsI know, a failure of our scale. I think this deserves — I'll say this right now, thermal storage is having a little bit of a moment in our audiences, right? In our energy world, in our sort of kind of nerd circles. But I personally think that it is eventually going to be a sufficiently big piece of the puzzle that it's going to sort of escape our world and become — I think normal people can sort of grope around with batteries now. I think normal people get, "oh, you have wind and solar, you need some batteries." I think that's like escaped our world into the general understanding.I think thermal batteries are going to play a big role in this for the simple reason, as you know, we've both interviewed the head of Rondo. I interviewed the head of Antora. I don't know if you talked to him too. I think the reason it's going to be a big enough deal that even normies will hear about it is that it is going to be this kind of skeleton key that unlocks the decarbonization of industrial heating, industrial heating and cooling. Which is one of the big, quote unquote, difficult to decarbonize sectors, this sector that everybody's worrying and fretting about and tearing their hair out about.Like, we know how to do electricity, we know how to do transportation, we know how to do home heating and cooling industry is the big unsolved problem. And I'm not sure the news has gotten out that I just don't think it's unsolved anymore. I think thermal batteries alone get you some large chunk of it, 80% or whatever. There are lots of process emissions in some of these processes that still have to be hashed out. And by the way, Canary is in the midst of running a great series of articles about exactly this, about concrete and steel and the specifics of how to decarbonize them.But basically, if you think of replacing, for a given industrial application, replacing a natural gas pipeline and a natural gas boiler with an electricity pipeline, an electricity line, and a thermal battery, they get you basically the same thing. And so voila. There like half the final energy we use is heat. Half of that is industrial heat. Voila. There's your industrial heat. To me, thermal, in addition to just being delightful technologically, I love the whole just the simplicity of heating up a box of rocks until you need the heat. I love the technology of it. I don't feel like the news has gotten out.It also basically tackles the industrial heat problem and there's not a ton left over after this, I think.Shayle KannSo, I have one comment and then two questions for you on this one. The comment is, I obviously generally agree with you. We and I have both been very bullish on thermal storage. Listeners of this podcast, for full disclosure, know that we're investors in Rondo. The way that we think about it actually is — for your industrial heat, the world ends up splitting into two categories: There's high-temperature industrial heat and then low-temperature industrial heat. I think for high-temperature industrial heat, thermal storage is awesome. And exactly as you said, it may end up being the solution. For low-temperature industrial heat you may just be able to electrify directly. We like heat pumps for low-temperature industrial heat. So, you kind of split the world that way. My first question for you, thermal storage is not a new concept. These companies are new and they have new —David RobertsOne of the oldest in all of energy, really.Shayle KannBut there was a wave of excitement around thermal batteries maybe ten years ago. And I'd say two things were different about those attempts than the new ones. One is the materials they were using. They're often stuff like molten salts that are highly corrosive and tough to handle. But two is that they were all talking about electrical to electrical storage, right? So they were serving the function that a lithium-ion battery would serve on the gri…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    What? The sun isn't always shining?! Nov 01, 2023
    Show notes

    In this episode, Princeton professor and energy modeler Jesse Jenkins tackles the question of how we can build a decarbonized energy system that relies on inherently variable wind and solar power.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsIf you’ve spent much time discussing clean energy on the internet, you’ve probably come across a disturbing piece of information: the sun, it seems, is not always shining. What’s worse, the wind is not always blowing! It’s crazy, I know. Unlike coal or natural gas or nuclear — “dispatchable” power plants that we can turn on or off at will, when we need them — we do not control solar power and wind power. They come and go with the weather and the rotation of heavenly bodies. They are, to use the term of art, “variable.” Many people, bringing to bear varying levels of good faith, conclude from this fact that we shouldn’t or can’t shift to an electricity system that is based around wind and solar, at least not without occasionally shivering in the cold. Is that true? Do we know how to balance out the variability of wind and solar enough that we can fully decarbonize the grid with them? This is probably the number one question I hear about renewable energy, the number one reservation people have about it, so I decided it’s time to tackle it head on.To help, I called on longtime Friend of Volts, Princeton professor and energy modeler extraordinaire Jesse Jenkins. We walked through the basic shape of the problem, the different time scales on which variability operates, and the solutions that we either have or anticipate having to deal with it. This one is long and occasionally gets a bit complex, but if you’ve ever wondered how we’re going to build an energy system around wind and solar, this is the pod you’ve been waiting for. All right, I am here with Princeton professor and longtime friend of Volts, Jesse Jenkins. Jesse, welcome back to Volts. Thanks for coming back.Jesse JenkinsHey, Dave. It's always good to chat with you.David RobertsJesse, the reason we're doing this is that in the course of my research, I have come across some extremely disturbing information which I felt like I needed to share with you and the world as soon as possible. Apparently, the sun is not always shining and the wind is not always blowing.Jesse JenkinsWait, what?David RobertsI know this changes everything, so we're going to have to talk through this.Jesse JenkinsOh, man.David RobertsBut seriously, I don't mean to make too much light of this. This is a subject about which people say lots of dumb things, but it is at its heart, I think, a perfectly valid question, a perfectly valid area of concern. In fact, it is the central area of concern about renewable energy. It is the central question to answer, which is the term that used to be used is intermittent. Renewable energy, wind and solar are intermittent, I think. Now the preferred term of art is variable, but I think probably the most accurate terminology for our purposes is non-dispatchable.It just means we don't control it; we don't turn it on and off. It comes and goes with the weather.Jesse JenkinsYeah, I prefer just weather dependent. Right. I think it makes more intuitive sense to people. Like you said, it's solar and wind power, so it depends on the weather. That is not shocking, but also defining of what the resource is.David RobertsAlso dependent on the turning of the planets and the solar system.Jesse JenkinsThat's true.David RobertsBut anyway, people know what we mean. We don't control them. A lot of people, I think, especially people who are coming, who haven't given a lot of thought to the clean energy transition and are starting to grapple with it for the first time, I think intuitively run up against this question early on in their thinking, which is "how do we deal with this?" So, I want to take those questions as good faith questions and talk through answers to them to the extent we have answers, to the extent we do know how to deal with it, to the extent we do have the tools to deal with it, and the extent to which it remains to some extent unsolved.I want to start with a couple of really big picture questions before we hone in on the details. I think the first big one to ask is just what greenies, what climate people seem to be recommending, and what we seem to be doing, at least in the early stages, is shifting from an electricity system based on dispatchable power plants that we can turn on and off at will to a system that is fundamentally based on non-dispatchable weather-dependent power plants that we can't turn on and off, which, as we're going to talk through, raises a whole host of issues and problems to solve.So I think the first thing to address is just why do that at all? Why take on that trouble? Why not just shift from dirty dispatchable energy to clean dispatchable energy like nuclear, hydro and geothermal? Why take on the burden of dealing with variable energy at all?Jesse JenkinsYeah, it's a great question, and the reality is that now the reason is that wind and solar are really, really cheap. That wasn't the case a decade or two ago. And we sort of set off on this path supporting wind and solar and other clean energy technologies in different countries, not sort of knowing exactly where the cost declines would travel. And what we've seen is that basically, in the west at least, the cost of building new large scale nuclear power plants, which is our sort of most mature and previously scaled carbon free generation technology, they've only gone up over the last couple decades, and we can talk more about why or that's probably a better subject for another podcast.Just observe that that is a factual statement. In other parts of the world, like China and South Korea and UAE, where they're used to building large scale civil works projects, they've been able to build nuclear plants at a reasonable expense. And it's a big part of the mix for those countries. But what we've seen is a tremendous decline in the cost of wind and solar power. And what we chalk that up to is what's known as experience curves. I know there's a great Volts cast in the archives on this topic. You can go back to listeners.But the idea is that as we scale up and deploy basically any technology, but in particular wind and solar at scale, we drive a whole set of processes kind of centered around innovation and competition that lower the cost of the technology. And that's done through economies of scale, either in manufacturing or production of the technology itself. It's done through incremental innovations and sort of improvements that just get more efficient and better at producing and building these things over time. It's done by learning, by doing sort of tacit knowledge. The skilled workforce develops and the engineers of the processes develop over time.And all of that drives the cost of technologies down as we build more of them. That's true for ships and flat panel TVs and aircraft and also for wind and solar. And particularly true for wind and solar because they are very small modular technologies that are repeatedly built both in manufacturing and in installation characteristics that make them well suited to not just learning, but rapid learning or rapid experience curves. The sum product of that is that wind and solar are the cheapest way to get electricity, period. Not just clean electricity, but electricity in most of the world today.Solar is the cheapest in most of the world. And if it's not, it's probably wind, with a few exceptions. And so that's the main reason to rely on it. It's a cheap source of both clean and abundant electricity.David RobertsRight. So this would be something that the market would be pulling people to do anyway. These set of problems around variability would be problems that we would be trying to solve regardless because people want cheap energy and here's cheap energy. And so, people are going to figure out how to maximize their use of the cheapest energy available. In large part, this is being driven by forces that are not directly related to climate change. Obviously, we need to do it as fast as possible because of climate change, but this is not, as I think many people naively think when they first encounter it, something that we're taking on just because of climate change.It is because this prize is out there, this super, super cheap electricity. And if you can run your widget on super cheap electricity, you're going to want to figure out how you can do that.Jesse JenkinsYeah, I mean that's true. Now, I think it's important to remember that we supported wind and solar when they were expensive alternative energy technologies. That's what we called them back in the mid-2000s, right? And we supported them for a variety of reasons. Right. Because of climate change. Yes, but actually originally because of energy security concerns that were sparked by the Arab oil embargoes in the 1970s. And that's what drove the early era of solar and wind development in the US, Denmark, Japan, and other countries that wanted to get off of imported fossil energy.We still burned a lot of oil in power generation at that time. And so, finding alternative sources of electricity was important for energy security. That has come back to the fore of our attention, of course, with the invasion of Ukraine and Russia's unprovoked invasion there, which sparked Europe to really dramatically reorient on a rapid pace away from imports of fossil fuels, gas, coal, and oil from Russia, which they were very dependent on. And it shot the cost of natural gas and gasoline here in the US. Where we, yes, produce more fossil fuels than we consume. So we're sort of physically energy secure, but we're still connected to these global energy markets.And so when a dictator on the other side of the world decides to invade his neighbor for no reason, that drives up the cost of gas at the pump and the cost of natural gas for our heating here in the US, like, overnight. So there's a bunch of important reasons to pursue these fuels. They also, of course, have no air pollution. Right?David RobertsAir pollution. Yes. Let's throw air pollution in there because the science on air pollution, as you and I know, just gets worse and worse and worse. The evident damage of it gets worse and worse.Jesse JenkinsYeah. And not just mortalities but also it makes us dumber. There's a lot of clear indication that particulate pollution, actually it affects our cognition, it affects our hearts, it affects our lungs, it impedes development of young children. I mean, it's just nasty stuff. And so if we can produce energy that's made from a domestic resource, like the abundant wind and solar that we have across the United States and other countries, that we can do so affordably and that we can do so without any air pollution, those are all really good reasons to rely on wind and solar and to want to tackle the associated challenge of dealing with their variability and weather dependence.David RobertsOne other general level question. This is something else I think people kind of come to intuitively and there are not great straightforward answers out there, which is and this is a variant of the first question, but I think importantly different. A lot of people want to say there are times when the sun will not be shining and the wind will not be blowing, i.e., there will be times when renewable energy output is at zero and demand will still be there. So you'll have to have backup resources capable of satisfying all that demand. But if you have to have 100% backup, why not just make the backup the main thing?Again, why go to the trouble, you know what I mean? This idea that because they are variable, they require basically 100% redundancy with non-variable resources strikes a lot of people as sort of crazy. Like, why don't we just build the non-variable resources and skip the first step? So what do you say to the 100% backup hang up?Jesse JenkinsYeah, so the reality is you don't need 100% backup. You do need a sufficient amount of what I call firm capacity available. It's capacity that you can use whenever you need it for as long as you need it. Which makes it a really important complement to weather-dependent resources like wind and solar, as well as to we'll get to their role later, but to energy limited or time-limited resources like batteries or demand flexibility, which are key parts of the puzzle as well. And so you need a certain amount of firm capacity. It's a pretty significant amount.But the reality is it's not 100% backup. You don't need one for one, because there actually are really no times when there is no wind or solar across a large area, unless you're talking about maybe an island grid that really has no geographic diversity. But yes, there's nighttime and there's winter, but generally there's some wind somewhere, right, at all times. And so you don't need 100% backup. So that's the first thing. And the second is that, again, for all the reasons I just went through, we want to rely as much as we can, again, not all the time, but as much as we can on wind and solar.Because the fuel is free, the cost of installing them is incredibly cheap. And when you have wind and solar, you displace other dirtier fuel-consuming resources like natural gas or coal, and that saves money and it saves lives and it improves energy security. So all of that is the sort of main value add of wind and solar. I call them fuel-saving variable renewables, because when you've got them, you don't need to consume other fuels. And it turns out that if that's the kind of grid you're building, then there are pretty cheap sources of standby capacity that don't cost very much upfront and are perfectly fine to pair with also very cheap wind and solar to play that backup role. I mean, the one example is combustion turbines.David RobertsWe should say that it's also unlikely that a trough in renewable supply is going to overlap with a peak in energy demand. Those peaks in energy demand tend to be during the daytime.Jesse JenkinsThat's true today, although I would worry more about that in the future as we electrify heating when the demand is likely to peak in the winter overnight. And so it may be more likely that we do line up one of those periods, what the Germans call Dunkelflaute — You have no solar output or very little solar output even during the daytime because it's winter, it's very cloudy, and then you have a prolonged period of a big, high blocking high that sits across a wide region, a weather front that limits the wind output that can occur both in the winter and the summer.And so, it is a challenge and it's something we have to plan our renewables-based grids to be resilient to. But again, that's why we don't depend entirely on wind and solar. We need a portfolio or a team. The way I describe it is there's a couple of metaphors. One is you need a balanced diet in your day-to-day life. And the fact that starches or wheat is cheap, right, as a cheap way to get calories, means that the bulk of your food pyramid or whatever is going to be from those sort of cheap sources of calories, rice, starch, all the sort of staple crops.But of course, you also can't subsist entirely on those staple crops. You need a balanced diet of different things, playing different roles and combining with each other in a way that gives you a balanced diet. So the same thing's going on in the grid. We have imperfect substitutes here for each other. They all produce electricity just like all foods produce calories, but…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    What's the deal with district energy? Oct 25, 2023
    Show notes

    District energy refers to a system in which a shared central plant distributes steam, hot water, and/or chilled water to multiple buildings via underground pipes. In this episode, Rob Thornton of the International District Energy Association shares about district energy’s newfound popularity and the role it could play in the clean energy transition.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsDistrict energy is one of the oldest concepts in all of energy, dating back at least to the ancient Romans. It simply refers to connecting multiple buildings to a common source of heating and cooling — a furnace, heat pump, geothermal well, or what have you — and distributing the heat via water or steam flowing through underground pipes. There are hundreds of district energy systems in operation, in every country in the world. (Virtually all of the buildings in Iceland, which I visited recently, are heated by district energy systems running on geothermal.)However, fossil fuel heat has been so cheap for so long that district energy has never quite become the default — it’s just been too easy to stick a natural gas furnace in every building. There hasn’t been much pressure to share heat.But with the climate crisis and the clean energy transition, that’s changing. These days, lots of people are looking for cleaner sources of heat and more efficient ways to share it, so district energy is becoming sexy again. Among other things, it’s a great way for cities to meet their carbon goals without overburdening their electrical grids.With all that in mind, I contacted Rob Thornton, the head of the International District Energy Association, to chat about the clever new sources district energy systems are drawing on (everything from sewage to deepwater lakes), the infrastructure they can integrate with, and the other services they can provide.All right, then. With no further ado, Rob Thornton of the International District Energy Association. Welcome to Volts. Thanks so much for coming.Rob ThorntonThanks for having me, David. Pleasure to be here.David RobertsI am super into district heat, so I was delighted when you all reached out to me. I've been meaning to do something on it, but I think it's, at least in the US, not particularly familiar or well understood to most people. It's relatively rare in the US, which we will discuss later. So, let's start with a definition. What is district heating?Rob ThorntonSo, we call it district energy because it's both heating and cooling in cities, campuses, communities. Essentially, it's a central plant that's providing steam, hot water, and/or chilled water to an underground thermal piping network to provide heating and cooling to buildings in a city central business district, campus, airport, hospital, healthcare, et cetera. So, it really is the aggregation of multiple users of heat or cool provided by a central plant. So, each individual building doesn't need to dedicate space or equipment, right, to boilers, chillers, et cetera. So, yeah, that's the simple definition.David RobertsCould not be more simple. It's using one source, a single source of heating and cooling for multiple buildings, which you think seems like an obvious thing to do. What, in terms of existing district energy systems in the world, what is that central source? Typically, empirically, what's the most common current central source?Rob ThorntonI'd say at the moment, still natural gas.David RobertsJust a big boiler?Rob ThorntonWell, often large boilers, sometimes gas turbines, recovering the heat, making additional electricity. So, combined heat and power. But that's shifting with the energy transition appetite for lower carbon solutions. There's a lot of integration, optimization happening. Industrial heat pumps, renewable heating and cooling, a variety of sources. That's the advantage of district energy. You change the central plant, and actually the benefits flow to multiple, sometimes hundreds, thousands of customers by updating the central plant.David RobertsIs it safe to say these days that all things being equal, natural gas is probably the cheapest, that's why it's the most common?Rob ThorntonWell, it's cheapest, it's cleaner than some other solutions. It's dispatchable, available, widely available. And it wasn't always that way. District energy started really by the Romans, but then Thomas Edison I would really characterize as the inventor back 140 plus years ago, and he discovered he couldn't really just sell electricity. He had to actually sell heat, too. Building owners saying, "Oh, I'll buy your power, but what am I going to do with the dynamo in my basement that provides the heating?" And so Edison realized, in order to make a profit at this enterprise, I have to sell both the heat and the power.So, while it's not commonplace, in fact, district energy is prevalent. 900 systems in North America, thousands all over the world. Every major city has district energy from Paris to New York City, obviously, Boston, San Francisco, Denver to Moscow. And even recently, though, the shift in the United Arab Emirates, all across the Middle East, massive investment in district cooling. As you would expect, right. Air conditioning is the driver there, so the industry is growing quite substantially.David RobertsWhat does it look like, just as a side thing here? Because I think a lot of people run up on this. Their intuitions break a little bit when they think about this. If you have a central source of heat, how do you use that to cool buildings?Rob ThorntonWell, I mean, heat in the form of steam can move equipment, right? So, steam, you use the pressure to drive a compressor. And in New York City, there's hundreds of buildings that use steam — turbine drive chillers, so they're still making cold water, but they're using steam instead of a motor.David RobertsGot it.Rob ThorntonRight. Instead of electricity to drive the compressor, they're using steam. You can also use heat with an absorption machine. And that basically you use heat to kind of change the chemicals, and you will absorb the heat from water. So, I don't want to get all nerdy and too scientific for you, but it isn't so much heat as much as sort of the optimization of process in a central plant to both make heat and cool and or power.David RobertsGot it. And for the record, we love scientific and nerdy here. Don't feel like you need to restrain yourself at all.Rob ThorntonAll right, noted.David RobertsOne of the cool things about these systems, and you alluded to this, is that as they evolve, we're discovering that there's all kinds of things that you can use as that source beyond natural gas, boilers and turbines. Really, you just need a big source of heat or cool to tap into. And it turns out this is something this podcast returns to over and over again is the sort of as the energy transition proceeds, we're starting to think more about heat. We're starting to think about it more than we used to because it just was very, very cheap.Fossil fuel heat was just very, very cheap. And we didn't value it, think about it much, or optimize it much, or worry about it that much. But now we're trying to phase out fossil fuels. So, we're thinking a lot more about where is heat, how can we use it, reuse it, where can we find it? So, talk about some of the other clever ways that district energy systems are — where they're finding that heat? Like, for instance, sewage.Rob ThorntonYeah, so one of our members, CenTrio, they own systems in multiple communities across North America. They're recovering heat out of the wastewater treatment, as you mentioned, the sewer system. So, Vancouver has a very similar system. I forget the year of the Olympics, but basically, the district heating system that was built to support the Olympics in Vancouver, British Columbia, was constructed to provide low carbon, reliable heat from the sewer main to the Olympic community, like the housing campus, which has become Falls Creek. And it's really been a whole economic development success. So, yeah, you're right. We were talking earlier offline about the oil embargoes, right, the first and second oil crisis that really hit Scandinavia.And they were highly dependent on imported oil. And basically, the valve closed and the price quadrupled overnight. And some of these countries, Norway, Finland, Denmark, they said, "Well, if you're going to make electricity here, you got to recover the heat." And so they required cities to do heat planning and to develop municipal heat plans. And so they recognized the value of heat, not so much for heat itself, but as a byproduct of making electricity — let's not throw it away, let's use it. And so now, today, Copenhagen, for instance, 98% of the buildings in Copenhagen are on district heat.They don't have their own boiler. And it is both like an environmental as well as an economic strategy. So, I'll come back on that, but I'm not sure if I answered your question.David RobertsWhat does Copenhagen use as their source? It's just all the different kinds of things you can use as a source that I'm interested in.Rob ThorntonSo, primarily waste heat recovered from electricity generation and waste to energy plants. In Copenhagen, there's this new asset called Copenhill, I guess, and it's basically a waste incineration plant. They recover all the trash and they use it for heat instead of pushing it to landfill. And now, this asset actually also has a public ski hill on it, right?David RobertsOh, yes. I'm familiar with this.Rob ThorntonIt's brilliant. And so I think they've really understood the scarcity and the value of using the full kind of hydrocarbon value of energy instead of throwing 60% of it away, like we have historically done with power plants in the US. They're remote, they're dumping heat into the river, the bay. In Europe, that heat is heating Paris and Copenhagen and Oslo and Stockholm. So, it's an infrastructure opportunity and challenge.David RobertsThis raises another question, which is electricity. You can transmit very long distances with relatively low losses. Heat, not so. Heat is much more difficult to transport over long distances. How close does the source need to be to the users to make this work? How far out could a power plant be that you're recovering heat from and still get the heat, say, to your village? Is there an outer limit?Rob ThorntonWell, you can move hot water more than 10 miles. In Beijing, they're doing that now. They've moved a lot of the power plants outside of the inner ring, 8 miles — they're moving the heat. Now, that requires very large piping networks underground, but it is technically conceivable. We have typically had district energy in cities, central business districts, because that was where both power and heat were generated at the time. Then in the 40s, 50s power plants got larger, they went from 200 MW to 2000 MW, they moved outside the cities. Probably the range for steam, because steam requires — it's a gas and it has to maintain under pressure.It's probably a couple of miles where after that, it begins to condense. Hot water you can push and pump tens of miles, but there is always, like an economic real estate question. Yeah, but there is an aggregation — we see district energy, there are 900 systems plus in North America and mostly clustered around vertically dense or urban requirements or college and university campuses where — they were formed at the time that the power plant was being built, like University of Colorado Boulder, the power plant was the initial building for the whole campus, and it grew from there.David RobertsOne other source I wanted to touch on before we leave, the question of sources is, I'm very fascinated by this one that uses deep lake water, which is super cold, presumably. How does that work, the physics? What are they doing there?Rob ThorntonYeah. So, think of cold like gravity. There's no such thing as cold. It's like the absence of heat.David RobertsRight.Rob ThorntonSo, just like you put ice cubes in a glass, they absorb the heat around them. They don't bring cold, they take heat.David RobertsRight.Rob ThorntonSo, what happens in Toronto or at Cornell University, these very deep lakes, the water — as you know, heat rises, right, so the surface waters are hot, but the bottom of the lake is generally always cold. In the case of Lake Ontario, 34 degrees F virtually year round. Right?David RobertsYeah.Rob ThorntonSo, what they do is they pull the water off the bottom of the lake and the pipeline goes out like a straw, and they pull it in. And that is actually the drinking water source. There's three straws that go out into Lake Ontario. That's the drinking water for the city, for the municipality. But before they use it at 34 degrees, they put that water through heat exchangers. So, the primary water is on one side of a heat exchanger. The other heat exchangers are connected to a network of underground pipes, supply and return cold water. And they basically — I need a graph to do this.So, you bring cold into a building. The cold flow is in a coil, like a radiator in your car. And the hot air in the building is breathed over that coil, and the water warms up, and the other side of the coil is colder. Right? It's like the radiator in your car. So, what we're basically doing is taking the heat out of the buildings, putting into a return network, and then that's a closed loop on the district cooling side, on the city side, what they do is they pump around like 40 degree water F, and the buildings heat it up to 54, 55 degrees, sometimes warmer.And that's a continuous circulation of cold water. And then on the lake side, that warm water, that's warming up the water before it goes into the drinking water supply of Toronto. This would be more effective if I were showing you the diagram.David RobertsIt's very visual.Rob ThorntonI'm probably confusing people more than clarifying.David RobertsNo. It's so clever how heat is fungible in some sense, right? You can just sort of trade it from one bit of water to another and move it around that way.Rob ThorntonAnd water is the most brilliant because it has a specific heat of one. So, every BTU you put in, you can get out. Water really is a remarkable — but you have to keep the water clean. You have to keep zebra mussels, et cetera, et cetera. It's not just simple standing water, but that's a chemistry story for another day.David RobertsSo, if I'm looking at a neighborhood and I'm contemplating whether it is suitable for district heat, are there characteristics? Is it just about density? Is that the beginning and the end of the story? Or what is it that makes an area or a neighborhood or a campus suitable for this?Rob ThorntonThere is an economy of scale that — you want to minimize your capital investment and optimize the number of customers that are using it. Right? So, I think that's self-evident. There are some rules of thumb, but what we're finding now, particularly in cities that are working towards reducing carbon emissions, etc., and they're really striving. They're seeing that there are these heat sources or cool sources that are really nearby that have been under-recognized, undervalued, underappreciated. So, there is a chicken and egg, right? Cornell — getting back to lake water — Cornell 22 years ago: It took them ten years of engineering, policy, education to permit the Lake Cayuga, the deep lake water cooling.But what they did was they traded an electricity bill going out to…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    What's the deal with Iceland? Oct 18, 2023
    Show notes

    Iceland aims to be the world’s first carbon-neutral nation; thanks in large part to hydropower and geothermal, it’s well on track to meet that goal by 2040. In this episode, Halla Hrund Logadóttir of the Iceland Energy Authority reflects on the country’s energy history and looks to its ambitious future.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsIceland is an island just south of the Arctic Circle, perched directly atop a rift where two tectonic plates are drifting apart, exposing the magma below. It is a small country (physically about the size of Kentucky, with a population a little larger than Cleveland, Ohio’s), but what it lacks in size it makes up for in drama. It is a land of glaciers and volcanos, ice and fire, wind and rain and snow — and deep heat that makes them bearable. I was there for four days last week, meeting with sustainability-related businesses, hearing about everything from micro-algae to grid monitoring to carbon recycling to using 100 percent of the fish. There’s an incredible amount of innovation going on there, and to my unending delight, a great deal of that innovation is in some way or another in a symbiotic relationship with geothermal, the heat and power that Icelanders pull from underground. Iceland’s electricity is entirely carbon-free — roughly 70 percent hydropower and 30 percent geothermal — and so is its heating, 90 percent of which is geothermal. Overall, 85 percent of its energy consumption is carbon-free, and it is aiming for 100 percent by 2040.To hear more about all this, I visited the Reykjavik office of Halla Hrund Logadóttir, who runs Iceland’s National Energy Authority, overseeing the country’s electricity system. She used to teach at the Iceland School of Energy at Reykjavik University and now teaches at the Harvard Kennedy School, where she co-founded the Arctic Initiative and founded the Arctic Innovation Lab. There’s no one with a better sense of the overall state of Iceland’s energy situation. We talked about the country’s history with geothermal, its current energy mix and policies, and its race to become the world’s first fully carbon-neutral nation. I'm here with Halla, who — I'm going to call you by your first name. Will you say your name for us?Halla Hrund LogadóttirSo I'm Halla Hrund Logadóttir. One of these Icelandic simple names.David RobertsYes, extremely. That is extremely Icelandic. And you're head of the National Energy Authority? National Energy Authority here in Iceland. And I've been visiting Iceland here for the last three or four days, visiting lots of startups and sustainable businesses of various kinds, and have found it absolutely fascinating, much more than I expected. Such a unique — so many things about Iceland in general, but Iceland's energy situation that are just absolutely unique and fascinating. So maybe the place to start is you could just tell our American audience, which is, you know, Americans are not known for their deep knowledge of other countries —So maybe we could just start by a little history of Iceland and geothermal, which is, I think, the sort of origin story of Iceland's current situation. Maybe just tell us what happened back in the 60s and 70s and why and sort of what the result is.Halla Hrund LogadóttirAbsolutely. And I think just to kind of start where we are at today and then looking back: Today, nine out of ten houses in the country are heated with geothermal, and overall, 85% of our primary energy use comes from renewables. So the hydropower is the other main source of electricity production, basically. But the heating mainly comes from geothermal and it is a unique situation, but it is a story that goes way back. It started with bathing that is kind of from the Vikings coming here, staying warm in this cold country. But then in the early 1900s, there was a farmer that found a way to connect his farm to a neighboring hot spring here in Mosfellssveit, which is close to Reykjavík, where we're sitting now, and a few others did the same.And so it was a story of entrepreneurship and innovation. Then municipalities noticed this technology and it became a part of a policy, to make a long story short. But then the first drilling for geothermal was done in the early 1900s and 1928 here in Reykjavík. And I think such an important part of this story is the fact that those were small projects, but they were used to heat key buildings like the hospital you can still see downtown and a primary school that we have downtown. And this was really important because it made the technology, the fact that it worked, very visible to people and made the buy-in for the technology — you always need buy-in from voters and so forth.The benefits were very obvious from these two key examples and from these small successes the big transition, the big story, begins, which also I think is interesting now when we think about the overall energy transition, it usually starts with small pilots that then become added up to a major success. Then we had the First World War that was a driver for the government to look closer at local energy resources. But then, as you mentioned, the big change was in the 60s and the 70s during the oil crisis in the world and we're an island, it was extremely expensive to import oil and gas, which were the main types of energy used here in Iceland at that time.So the government started building incentives for this transition and the major part of that incentive is the Iceland Energy Fund. Do you know of that fund? So just to share a bit about it, it's a fund that was established to help mitigate risk of drilling for geothermal.David RobertsOh, I did hear about that, yeah, I've had a couple of people talk to me about it. So they can loan a village money and if the village finds geothermal, they pay it back. But if they don't, the loan is just canceled, right?Halla Hrund LogadóttirAlmost as good as that. Yes, about 50% is canceled, but definitely the main features of it. And this is what allowed small municipalities in Iceland to really focus on exploring geothermal in their regions and about 20 district heating systems were built across the island during this time from 61 to 1983 or so. And the beauty is that these are the same systems, the same infrastructure that we're still using today. So it proves as well how stable the geothermal resource is and how important it is when we're looking at the energy transition is to make the right bets when it comes to building infrastructure because it has such a long lifetime.So these are the main factors of our history. And I think it's important to highlight this is long before climate change became a major issue, the research was not where it is today, but it was about economics, it was about energy security and then clean air. I mean, you can see pictures from Reykjavík very close, from where we're sitting now, where you have this thick smoke looming over the city and just imagining that a few decades later it would be one of the cleanest cities in the world.David RobertsYeah, stable and stable prices too, right? All of a sudden prices are not going to spike or fly around. So that's an undersold aspect of renewables, is they're the same price now; they're going to be the same price in a week, in a year, and two years. We should say, I'm not sure everyone knows exactly why there's so much geothermal power in Iceland, so maybe just say real quick about the continental plates, which I've been learning a lot about this week.Halla Hrund LogadóttirYes, we are situated on the boundaries of two tectonic plates that are drifting apart 2 centimeters per year. So you can say that you are either in Europe or North America when you're in Iceland, depending on location. But because of that, we have a lot of geothermal activity, we have a lot of volcanoes in Iceland, and because of the high temperature, we can both use our hot water that comes from the ground for district heating. So we're basically almost using the water directly, if you will, or we can use it for electricity production. And I think it's important to note that the planet has huge potential for geothermal and particularly when you look at using the water directly for district heating.And very interesting things are happening in that space across the planet. When you look at areas that have high temperatures that you can produce electricity as well, those places are fewer, but there's definitely a lot of potential there as well. But as soon as you start to look at the source as simply a heat source, then it's just fascinating to look at the potential and to witness — I mean, we at the National Energy Authority, we partner with a lot of countries in Europe. We're working now, particularly with countries in Eastern Europe that are trying to get more energy independent after the war in Ukraine.And there's resources there maybe with between 40, 60, even 70-degree temperature. These are not volcanically active areas, but they have potential to heat millions of homes and they just haven't been looking at that potential because it's been so much cheaper to import gas from Russia.David RobertsWell, I have a question related to that. So the government decided, I mean, it's a pretty cool story, the government decided we're going to move our country's heating over to geothermal and then just did it in like a decade. You don't hear a lot of stories about large-scale, ambitious, successful government initiatives these days. But the population of Iceland was relatively small. Today, 380,000-ish, but I assume it was even smaller back then. So a lot of your current housing stock and buildings have been built with district heating under them. So it's easy to do district heating if you're building a new development.But a lot of other countries, Eastern European countries, US, there's already so much building stock existing. So is it more difficult to retrofit existing buildings with this than — is that a major barrier?Halla Hrund LogadóttirIt's definitely an issue. It is much more expensive if you need to transition the whole system. But if you are using, you know, in many countries in Eastern Europe, for an example, you have like gas, you just have to change the heat source. The infrastructure are pipes. So in these cases, it can be particularly economical to just change the heat source from gas to geothermal. So those are kind of the low hanging fruits where you have existing infrastructure. Then if you look to countries for an example like China, that has been expanding quite dramatically, they have geothermal in 70 cities now.There you're looking at China using a lot of it for new buildings as well. Right, and we're talking about then heat down to maybe 50 degrees Celsius. And there the design of the building is also using floor heat and so forth to make the biggest use of the lower temperatures. But I will add to this that of course geothermal is many things and in terms of lower temperatures and in terms of where you don't have like a centralized district heating system, you can still do a lot with if you combine different solutions with heat pumps and so forth, that also take advantage of geothermal heating in a different way.David RobertsYes, this is one of my favorite projects in the US. I did a podcast about this last year, the sort of geogrid, they're doing a test up in Massachusetts where they're doing little boreholes every 50ft or so and then have heat exchangers with each house. Very excited about that. So that's heating, which is now almost all of Iceland's building heating. So when did geothermal electricity take off? It's now 30% of your electricity and the other 70% is hydro, which I assume is just rivers.Halla Hrund LogadóttirYeah, glacial rivers mainly. Right, and that's another story, really. So the electricity production comes much later with the bigger plants. I know little, you visited one of them. And with geothermal you have to make sure that you manage the resource well. And as you have witnessed, one of the elements is electricity production, that we use it where it's high temperature today. But we also use different streams of the hot water for greenhouses, for drying fish, for heating sidewalks during our snowy season, which is long, I can tell you. And for all kind of our cosmetics for food supplements.So there's a big industry like an innovation happening around the geothermal resource in general. And I would say it's very integrated in people's culture. Also, through bathing, there's not a weekend that you don't go.David RobertsWe went to Sky Lagoon on our first night here.Halla Hrund LogadóttirYeah, that's the fancy stuff.David RobertsPretty amazing. Yeah. But there are little pools all over the place.Halla Hrund LogadóttirI challenge you to visit one of them. It's like a standard thing to do for a family in Reykjavík is to go to visit one of the pools. So it ties into also just the general healthy way of living, which I think has contributed to so many different aspects of the Icelandic society.David RobertsI meant to say, the thing that surprised me most in the last four days is I knew there's lots of geothermal here, I knew there's geothermal electricity here. But as you say, there's this entire ecosystem of businesses that are symbiotic with geothermal. They use the water for different things. The cold water, the hot water, the steam, they say eat the whole animal. It's like every bit of that heat and water and steam and every bit of that geothermal is used somehow, somewhere. It's amazing.Halla Hrund LogadóttirYeah. It's the circular economy kind of thinking. And I have to say, because you come from the States and you have this incredible Silicon Valley that is the hub of technology in the world. We have two resource parks, one here in Reykjanes area and one here not so far from Reykjavík. These are resource parks that exactly work with the ideology that you described. So many companies in renewable energy working together. Carbfix, it has this major potential in the world of simply turning CO2 into stone, where you have basalt rock in the world and then Climeworks —David RobertsI talked to them yesterday.Halla Hrund LogadóttirRight. So you have these kind of ecosystems, and I sometimes say that these are tiny, tiny little Silicon Valleys that have so much potential to grow.David RobertsSo much cleverness and so much innovation. It's really surprising, all the thinking that goes on around that. So this raises a question that I get a lot from people whenever I talk about geothermal, which is, how renewable is it? Is it possible to exhaust a geothermal field? Or is it if you manage it well, is it effectively renewable forever? Is there any worry about running out?Halla Hrund LogadóttirYeah, I mean, definitely, you have to manage the resource well. You have to make sure that you're not pumping more out from the resource than flows into it, if you will. So there's definitely a sustainability management. But as I mentioned, we've been using our resources for decades and we are looking at developing more sites in Iceland now because there's so many tourists, there's more people, so the demand has grown a lot. But it's definitely a resource that you can count on for a long time and is renewable in the sense that if you manage it well, it maintains itself over time.But I will also say that because one of the hidden elements of geothermal in the renewable energy category is the fact that it is baseload. You have baseload heating from geothermal, while if you look at solar and wind, these are dependent on the weather. And then as well, i…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Reflecting on 20 years in political journalism Oct 11, 2023
    Show notes

    In this episode, veteran journalist Brian Beutler waxes nostalgic about the past 20 years of political journalism and muses about its future.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)I’ve known political journalist Brian Beutler for a long time. We met back in the late 2000s in DC, in the heady days leading up to Obama’s victory, and have kept in touch fitfully ever since.Brian, one of the smartest and most insightful political analysts writing today, has published in a wide variety of outlets, but this month he followed me into the wilderness — left his job at Crooked Media to launch his own newsletter, Off Message. He’s already written some great stuff and made some cool videos — check them out. I figured I would take the occasion to catch up with him, wax nostalgic about politics past, discuss partisan journalism, and muse about how opponents of authoritarianism might show a little more vigor. Please enjoy this long and somewhat indulgent ramble down memory lane.Text transcript:David RobertsSo I'm sitting here with my good buddy Brian Beutler, who is a political journalist living in Washington, DC. He has been a political journalist for a long time. We've known each other for a long time, been involved in this mess of political journalism for a long time. He has worked, Brian, where all of you worked everywhere. The American Prospect, did you do that one?Brian BeutlerI didn't do that one.David RobertsThe New Republic.Brian BeutlerYes, I was there.David RobertsDid you do an American Progress stint?Brian BeutlerNo, you're misremembering. I was actually with you at Grist. I think I was on a freelance contract for like six months or a year way back in 2006.David RobertsSmokes, I forgot about that.Brian BeutlerI worked at a bunch of places when I was like, a pup. So I think Raw Story still exists. First reporting gig. But I really got my training as a reporter at TPM. I was there for several years.David RobertsRight. That's the one I was trying to call to so spell it out for people. It's Josh Marshall's site.Brian BeutlerYeah, it used to be Talking Points Memo that's I think still the URL, but it's just TPM.One of the longest standing, I mean, still going strong.I rely on it all the time. I'm friends with my old editor there. He's still basically, like, running the day to day there, I think, the world of TPM. And then a very brief stint at Salon, which I enjoyed, but then The New Republic came and was like "join us instead." And so I said yes. And I did that through a really tumultuous period from like 2014, I think, to 2017. And then I was editor in chief at Crooked Media for six years, and now I am independent.David RobertsYes, this is the occasion for the pod is my friend Brian has left Crooked Media and is now launching on his own, launching a newsletter because all the cool kids now have newsletters, a newsletter called Off Message where he is going to continue political journalism. You should all go sign up. I've learned an enormous amount from Brian over the years. And so I thought, on the occasion of Brian's birth as an indie, self-employed journalist, welcome to the fold, that we would sit down and catch up and I guess you could say, does the world really need two white, bearded, middle-aged guys of roughly similar socioeconomic backgrounds and ideological outlooks, affirming one another's priors for an hour?Maybe not, but this is my pod, and if I want to have an indulgent episode periodically, that is my right as an independent. We got no bosses anymore, Brian to tell us not to do so.Brian BeutlerMy two favorite flavors are waxing nostalgic and vigorous agreement. And we're just going to —David RobertsWe're going to get right into that.Brian BeutlerGive your listeners all that.David RobertsAll right. I feel like one of the signal characteristics of political journalism, and I expect this has probably always been true in all times and places is just that a lot of stuff happens, one thing after another happens, and it's a constant scramble. And so you can do it for a long time. And you really do not get many opportunities to sort of step back and think about kind of the arc of politics as you've experienced it over the course of a career. I guess what people used to do is report their whole lives and then become opinion columnists and write books.But anyway, so one of the things I want to do is just think a little bit about kind of the arc of American politics that we've experienced and where that leaves you and kind of what you think about it and how you're thinking about politics has changed over experiencing all this. So you — when did you come to political consciousness as an adult, would you say?Brian BeutlerIt was definitely during the George W. Bush presidency, the first term of the George W. Bush presidency. And it was actually, like, less Bush vigor, although in hindsight, once I became politically awake, it kind of reverse incepted me how important it was. We've been on a wild ride since then. That was a moment when the Gingrich revolution could have been snuffed out, maybe, and normalish politics resumed.David RobertsMy estimation of the importance of that episode has, as you say, risen steadily, more or less ever since, ever since it happened. And now I see it as sort of like the turning point in US. Politics, the pivot point.Brian BeutlerSo it was 9/11 and the Iraq war, and I went through a relatively quick transition as, like, an undergraduate from, like, "Holy crap, what's happening? Wait, we got to do something about this. Oh, George W. Bush is going to do something about it," to like, "wait, these seem like crazy ideas. What did Iraq have to do with that?" And by 2004, I was like, "this is nuts." And I voted for John Kerry that year. And I voted for Democrats ever since. And it was after that that I decided I want to go into journalism. But I knew I would end up being, like, a liberal journalist and that I'd have a really hard time just ignoring everything that had happened, you know, going on TV or writing in newspapers as if I wasn't aware that things had gotten so bad or gone so far off the rails.David RobertsBut before this, did you have your callow, Libertarian high school, college period? Did you go through that?Brian BeutlerNot really. I think I did vote for the Libertarian candidate in the 2000 election, but —David RobertsI voted for Nader. Confession time.Brian BeutlerBut I was in California. I came from a really reactionary part of California. I think the expectation for most people who graduated high school with me was that they'd vote for Republicans their whole lives, and that seemed like stuffy and distasteful to me, but also the Democrats, the Clintons, whatever. And so just like, protest vote Harry Brown, Libertarian candidate, 2000. But it was never like I'm sure I did some of the reading. The Libertarians love to do the reading and then talk about the reading, but I know it's never like, "Wow, Frederick Hayek was onto everything."So it really was just like a quick transition from total political naivety to: the conservative movement in the United States has a really disturbing vision for the country, and blocking them from power has to be like priority one and kind of everything else falls beneath that and is shaped by that.David RobertsI entered the same way and this is something to do with our sort of micro generation. I mean, one of the things I sort of meant to mention is that I faffed about in grad school for a while, getting a philosophy degree after college. So by the time I sort of wound my way into journalism, I kind of slipstreamed into journalism right alongside your cohort, sort of you and Matt and Ezra and then the birth of the Netroots and all that stuff. One of the sort of interesting features of it is that I've always been about five to seven years older than most of the people I think of as my peers.So, I'm like ahead of you guys in life stage. Like, I had kids while you guys were all still living in group houses and all this kind of stuff. So, I feel like I'm seeing your future. But anyway, you look younger than us though. Oh, well, thank you. That's because I kept the same hobby my whole life. But yeah, to me also getting involved in politics, the occasion was to look under the veneer of quote unquote, normal boring. This is what I indulged in in the 2000 election, back when I was really callow and really disconnected and not really paying attention, I sort of went for the whole, like, duopoly.The parties are the same: "It's the system, man. It's the system that's broken. And who cares which face of the system you vote for, man." Voted for Nader based on all that horseshit. But pretty quickly watching 2000 and then watching 9/11 and watching Iraq, pretty quickly my whole posture was: under cloak of normal politics there's something rising on the right and it is ugly. And it is like there's an authoritarian, illiberal reactionary movement stirring beneath this facade of normality. And I need to be the town crier. I need to go out and bang on pots and pans and say, "look at this."Like, look beneath the surface at what's happening. And so it's interesting for you and me both, preventing this rising reactionary movement from taking power has always been one and the same with our journalism and our engagement with political journalism.Brian BeutlerI have a story about this, which is like, I think that if the Iraq war hadn't happened, or Bush v. Gore hadn't happened, or just things had been a little bit less extraordinary in the post 9/11 period, like, I was at Berkeley, I might have done the flip from 17-year-old pseudo-libertarian to what you were talking about a narrative progressive or socialist or something like that. Just because that was very much the milieu there still. But then 9/11 did happen, and then Iraq did happen and the imperative to try to knock Bush out of the White House was very high and the mistake of the 2000 election loomed really large.It was 2003 probably, or 2004. There was a live debate at Berkeley between Christopher Hitchens and Mark Danner, who was a journalist. I haven't read anything by him in a long time, but he was at the New York Review of Books at the time and they were having an argument about the war, and that's what the debate was. And like, obviously Hitchens had his really signature flair and charisma and pithy everything, and Danner was this more studied professorial type and he was correct about the war, but that's not how debates work, right? And so Hitchens won.But I was taken with the fact that's what they got to do with their lives. And I wanted to be able to do stuff like that. And I kind of wanted to bring Hitchens-esque persuasive abilities to the big moral issues of the day without being glib and wrong about them. And, like, everything since then, has just been kind of like the Iraq War. But it's some other extraordinary, reactionary, dangerous thing. It's Sarah Palin and the birthers or the effort to repeal Obamacare. It's just — it's just emergency after emergency after like, there's never a shortage of things to be passionate and right about in the hope of like —David RobertsYes, if you want to rail against the machine, there's been no — plenty of machines to scream against. We have no shortage. Another thing about the 2000 election that I wanted to say is it's very paradigmatic in a bunch of different ways. But the main lesson I've taken from it and this is a lesson that I feel like I've learned again and again and again has sunk in deeper and deeper ever since then, which is when a time comes of political chaos, right? Everything's up in the air. Nobody knows exactly what's happening. There's a moment of high potential energy, right?And no one knows which direction it's going to become kinetic, right? There's this sort of doubt and uncertainty. High potential energy in the air. You get these moments in politics periodically, and watching how the two sides dealt with that was so instructive because on the Democratic side, as you well recall immediately, it was, "How is history going to judge us as we do this? Right? What's the right thing for America. What's the fair thing to do? Let's meet in the middle. Let's be patient." Al Gore, whatever you think about him genuinely in that moment, had noble motives in mind, had history in mind and the larger welfare of the country in mind.And they were basically the entire party was performing as though the entire episode were being overseen and judged by some sort of referee who was applying basic rules of accuracy and fairness. And basically like they were trying to please the teacher, trying to please the referee. And then on the other side, when chaos comes up and you've seen this happen a million times since then, no one on the right had a moment of doubt or hesitation or scratching their chin and pondering the judgment of history or pondering what's fair in the big picture. No one. No one on a blog, in a magazine, in politics, no one had that moment.They all like a school of fish immediately recognized this is a moment of uncertainty and chaos. Chaos is a ladder. Let's fight, fight, fight, fight, with any tools necessary. Don't give a s**t about consistency. Don't give a s**t about fairness.Brian BeutlerAct and then react, and then act again. And then react again.David RobertsAlways push our interests, no matter what we said before, no matter what anybody else says, no matter what may be fair, blah, blah, blah. Just act on our interest. Push, push, fight, and then secure the victory. And then once you have the victory, then you have all the time in the world to come up with pleasing stories about why you did what you did and how it was all fair after all, and why we just need to move on and why we don't need to dwell on the past, et cetera, et cetera. Once the thing's over, then you can smooth it all out.But when there's chaos, immediately go on the attack. And we've seen this like, this is the essence of the two parties ever since, really. And you could say the same thing about 9/11. You could say the same thing about Iraq. Just like when Iraq came up, as you say, there were all these people on the left sort of, like, ripping their hair out, like, "what about this? But what about that?" Doing the Hamlet, like, "maybe this, but maybe that. What's the bigger picture? What's history going to say?" And on the right, it was just like, "Here's a moment of chaos. Let's fight to advance our interests on every front at every moment." And that's just, like, the deepest lesson I have written on my psyche about U.S. Politics ever since then.Brian BeutlerYeah, and I mean, I'm going to pull a version of David Brooks and say, I think there's a happy medium in between. I like that. Democrats will survey the nation. What are the pressing needs facing the country? And not like they'll address them all perfectly right then and there, but at least they'll just be like, "oh, okay, the roads and bridges are bad. Let's rebuild them. New parents don't have enough money. Let's try to give them some money." And Republicans don't really engage in that kind of assessment, and they don't even think that the government should be doing that stuff.And it's really hard to bring that analytical bench to things. If A, you're an ideologue and you think you're not supposed to do it in the first place, but B, if you're just sayi…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    A super-battery aimed at decarbonizing industry Oct 06, 2023
    Show notes

    In this episode, Antora Energy CEO Andrew Ponec talks up his company’s game-changing approach to thermal energy storage.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsBack in March, I did a podcast on the possibility of using wind and solar electricity to decarbonize industrial heat, which represents fully a quarter of all human final energy consumption. The trick is to transform the variable energy from wind and solar into a steady, predictable stream of heat by using some form of heat battery. The idea is that heat batteries will charge when renewables are cheap or negatively priced, around midday when all the solar is online, and then use the stored heat to displace natural gas boilers and other fossil fuel heat sources in industrial facilities.Among other things, this vision represents a huge opportunity for renewable energy developers — industrial heat is effectively a brand new trillion-dollar market for them to play in. And they can often enter that market without waiting in long interconnection queues to connect to the grid. Anyway, that episode, which I highly encourage you to listen to at some point, was with the CEO of a thermal battery company call Rondo. In it, I mentioned another thermal storage company whose technology caught my eye: Antora Energy. Like Rondo, Antora is part of the broad “box of rocks” category, but its tech can do some things that, for the time being, no other thermal battery can do.I don’t want to say much more here — discovery is half the fun — but I will say I’m as geeked about this technology as I have been about anything in ages. I’ve been thinking about it ever since I first heard about it three or four years ago. Now the company has launched its first commercial-scale system! So I’ve brought Antora co-founder and CEO Andrew Ponec on the pod to talk through how it works, what it can do, and how it could transform industrial heat markets.So with no further ado, Andrew Ponec. Welcome to Volts, thank you so much for coming.Andrew PonecThank you for having me, David.David RobertsThis is so fun for me. I've honestly been thinking about this tech for years and really hoping that you guys would make it far enough to justify me doing a pod with you. So I've been rooting for you. So we're going to get to kind of the role heat batteries and heat storage can play in the energy system a little bit later. But I just want to start with the technology itself. So the basic idea here is you're heating up a rock, right. And what you do with the heat, we'll get to that in a second, but let's just start with the rock itself. Tell me about the material you're using for your rocks and their qualities and why you chose that material.Andrew PonecWe looked at a lot of different options for the material that we wanted to store energy in, and there are a lot of different types of rocks, types of solid materials that we might choose. And after a pretty thorough search, we decided to focus on carbon, solid carbon. And that was for a number of reasons. We were looking at different attributes that we thought were important, one of which was cost, one of which was earth abundance. We were also looking for things that had existing supply chains and that were extremely stable and safe for long-term operation.And when we went through all of that process, carbon came out on top as the best option, although I should say that it didn't come out on top the first time around, actually because of a mistake I made in our spreadsheet. Carbon has a really unique property, which is that it gets better at storing energy as it gets hotter. So the specific heat capacity, its ability to store energy, increases by about a factor of three between room temperature and 800 or so degrees Celsius. So you can imagine what the process would be like to choose a material.We built a big spreadsheet. We put all of the materials candidates in it. We put what their ability to store thermal energy was, did some calculations on what the cost would be, and then stack ranked them. And in the first pass, carbon was near the bottom, because the mistake I had made was going online and just googling the specific heat of carbon and of course, got the room temperature value. And it was only a few months later, after we were exploring all sorts of other materials, that we kind of went back and looked and said, "Man, carbon has everything we want, except that its storage capacity is really low."And it was kind of our disappointment in carbon that made us take a second look and then realize this really remarkable property of carbon, that it gets better at storing heat as it gets hotter. And then it was by far the best choice. And that's where we've gone from there.David RobertsSo I think when most people hear carbon, especially in our space, they think about carbon dioxide, they think about carbon in the atmosphere. So what is solid carbon? What does it look like? What's it used for? Like, what is solid carbon out there doing now?Andrew PonecGreat questions. Solid carbon is one of the biggest industrial products that most people have never thought about. We use solid carbon in massive quantities, tens of millions of metric tons a year of this stuff, but it's almost always used as an intermediary in some other process. So the biggest uses of carbon are in the aluminum smelting industry and in the steel industry. So in aluminum smelting, it's actually part of the electrolysis process. And in steel making, electric arc furnaces use it because it's the only material that can survive the hellish environment within an electric arc furnace.But because none of those go into the final products, we don't think about it very much, even though by mass it's only a little bit behind aluminum as one of the biggest industrial commodities.David RobertsOh, interesting. So part of what falls out of that is, as you say, there is a huge existing supply chain. And so when you say that there's a lot of solid carbon already in use, if it became the de facto material for thermal batteries, would that represent a substantial portion of total solid carbon use? Or is its use so big and so ubiquitous that this is just sort of a marginal thing?Andrew PonecIt ends up being a drop in the bucket. We could make terawatt hours of thermal batteries using just a fraction of the carbon that's already processed as part of the supply chains for aluminum and steel.David RobertsGot it. So this is a material that is already abundant, already manufactured, already there, ready for you to go. There's no material shortages and what know, people hear materials these days and they think, "oh, what about mining and the social cost of mining" and all that. So what's the sort of like the ESG status of solid carbon?Andrew PonecThere are a bunch of different types of carbon, and each of them have different attributes with regard to how much energy goes into them. Are there any other concerns about the supply chain where they're made, are they even mined or are they synthetic? So, just to mention a few. First, carbon comes in many different forms. Diamond is one very expensive form of carbon that we don't use in our system. There's other forms of carbon that are relatively disordered, like the carbon blocks that are used in aluminum. And there are other forms of carbon that are more ordered and more pure, like graphite that's used in electric arc furnace, steel making.And actually, if you continue going up the chain, there's more and more pure, special forms of carbon. Usually, graphite, when you get to the very high end that's used in things like lithium-ion batteries and even nuclear reactors, uses a very, very special, very high purity form of graphite.David RobertsRight. And for that form, there are some supply chain issues. Like, I know that graphite for lithium-ion batteries is one of the supply chain constraints that gets discussed.Andrew PonecThat's right. And it was really important for us that we be able to use not these extremely pure and more scarce resources, but that we be able to use the kind of lower-level carbons that are used in these massive quantities in the metal industries like aluminum and steel. The good news is, because all it has to do in our system is just get hot, it doesn't need to do something special chemically or physically. We're very flexible on the type and grade of carbon that we use.David RobertsI see. And if I was just looking at a block of solid carbon that's going to go in your battery, is there anything special about it or am I just looking at a big square rock?Andrew PonecIt looks like a big, square, dark block. Yes.David RobertsAll right, so you say that carbon can hold a lot of heat. And I'm assuming you also chose it because it can hold heat and release heat over and over again without degradation. Like how many times can it cycle? How long can it last?Andrew PonecGraphite is a remarkable or carbon in general is a remarkable material with regard to its thermal stability. So just a few different aspects that you can look at it that way. One is that it's thermally stable up to incredibly high temperatures when it's processed to make the graphite, for example for electric arc furnace steel making, they heat the graphite electrically to over 3000 degrees Celsius in what are called graphitization furnaces.David RobertsGood lord.Andrew PonecSo it's used at extremely high temperatures, industrially. It's also used in industry, for example, in arc furnaces where you have huge temperature gradients where the tip of the electrode essentially has arcing lightning coming out of the tip and is well over 2000 degrees Celsius in air at the bottom of the steel pot, whereas the top of it is actually water cooled to room temperature. So huge thermal gradients, very high temperature capability. And another factor that makes it really good for this is its strength. Unlike almost every other material, graphite gets stronger as you heat it up, up to about 2400 degrees Celsius.So we often joke that if something is strong enough in our system at room temperature, then that's all we have to do because every part is just going to get stronger as the system starts charging. And that's unlike metal ceramics, almost every other material just gets weaker and weaker, even well below its melting point.David RobertsInteresting. So you're heating up carbon blocks. They're in an insulated container, and these are what, like the size of a shipping container? Is that roughly the scale we're looking at here?Andrew PonecThat's right. It was important for us that the module be road shippable so we could make it in a factory and then ship it to the customer site.David RobertsHow is the heating done? Is it just an electrical coil? Is it like an electrical resistance heat? How does the heat get into the rock?Andrew PonecThe electricity goes through a resistive heating element very much like a toaster coil, a resistive coil, and heats it up to the glowing hot temperatures that the system operates at.David RobertsYeah, when I talked to John from Rondo, he was saying that one of the things they were worried about is inconsistent heating. And they've come up with all these different ways of trying to evenly distribute the heat as it's heating up the rocks. Is that an issue with carbon as well? Like, are the coils like, sitting next to the rock? Are they going through the rock? Or this might be getting too much in the weeds, but I'm fascinated by this stuff.Andrew PonecIt's a great question and please do get into the weeds. I love it. So one of the things that we looked at also when choosing a storage material was thermal conductivity. So its ability to move heat within itself. And graphite has a thermal conductivity that's at these temperatures at least ten times higher than most other types of rocks. And that means you don't have to worry so much about that inconsistent heating. So all of the companies that are working with rocks or bricks or other materials that are non-carbon based have to be really careful about do you differentially heat different parts of the system or even different parts of a single brick or rock. But in graphite it kind of smooths it all out very quickly because of that high thermal conductivity.David RobertsOh, interesting, interesting. Okay, so you're taking this renewable energy, you're putting it through a resistance coil, heats up, heats the solid carbon, and then you heat this solid carbon up really, really hot. So explain the temperatures you get to. And then one of the most fascinating parts about this for me is how you get the energy back out of this rock. And this has to do with heat transfer at high temperatures. Some things that I, a humanities major, did not know about heat transfer, I learned from reading about this tech. So explain how hot the rock gets and then what it looks like to get energy out of a rock that's that hot.Andrew PonecSo we heat electrically to over 2000 degrees Celsius. So these big carbon blocks are glowing white hot at 2000 C when the system is fully charged. And those temperatures are very hot from a conventional perspective. They're also much cooler than many of the applications where graphite is used industrially. But at those very hot temperatures, there aren't many options for materials you could use to get the heat out. The conventional way of getting heat out of a thermal energy storage system is to use some sort of fluid. It could be a molten salt, a molten metal, it could be air, helium, something that you're then pumping or blowing through the system through lots of little channels to get good heat transfer and then pulling back out of the system again.David RobertsRight.Andrew PonecAnd if you go up to these very high temperatures, you find that your options are limited. The gases end up having a very low heat capacity. Viscosity increases with air, for instance, with temperature. So it's very hard to pull the heat out at those high temperatures. Similarly, there just aren't that many options that aren't really exotic for liquids that you could use. And even the liquids that you have have some sort of problem typically with freezing at above room temperature. So you could immediately clog up your pipes or pumps or valves if the system ever were to cool off.So these are some of the challenges that we were facing when we wanted to get all of these wonderful qualities of graphite in our system, including the ability to go to very, very high temperatures, but we weren't sure how we would get the heat out. And so the "aha" moment for us was to realize that we didn't need a fluid at all to get the heat out. That the movement of a fluid through the system to move heat, which is called convective heat transfer, is only one of the three mechanisms of heat transfer. There are two others.One is conductive, so just moving directly through the solid, and the other is radiative. So that's just light, that's glow. Even though graphite is a very conductive material, it's still too hard to conduct the long distances you would need within the system. But light can travel long distances very easily. And so we realized that by changing the geometry of the system, opening gaps within the system that can allow light to move, would actually do everything we needed as far as getting the heat out of the system, even at temperatures where we had few other options.David RobertsYeah, so the short version of that answer is light.Andrew PonecYes.David RobertsThe heat comes out of the rock as light. It is so hot that it is glowing like the sun, and the heat is coming off it as light.Andrew PonecYe…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Minnesota forces transportation planners to take climate change seriously Sep 27, 2023
    Show notes

    In this episode, Minnesota State Representative Larry Kraft shares about the state’s ambitious, progressive transportation policy, which includes climate accountability measures that no other state has implemented.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsIn 2022, Democrats narrowly won a trifecta in Minnesota — House, Senate, and governor — whereupon they launched into an absolute frenzy of activity, passing bills on everything from abortion to paid leave to gun control to free school lunch to clean energy. Vanity Fair called it a “tour de force for progressive legislation.”I covered the state’s new clean-energy law on a previous pod, but I also wanted to take a closer look at the big transportation bill that was signed in May. It passed somewhat under the radar, but it’s got some very cool stuff in it. One key feature is that it requires both state and municipal transportation-planning agencies to take the state’s climate goals into account when assessing new projects — to hold themselves accountable to those goals. As obvious as that may seem, it’s not something any other state has done. To discuss the significance of this and some other provisions of the bill, I contacted one of its primary authors, first-term state Representative Larry Kraft (D). We talked about what these changes mean for transportation planners, the kinds of transportation projects that can reduce emissions, the new money the state will raise for public transit, and the state’s new e-bike incentive (!).By the way, if you enjoy this conversation, you should know that Kraft co-hosts a podcast of his own, on climate policy in small and mid-sized cities. It’s called City Climate Corner, with co-host Abby Finis. Check it out.All right, then, with no further ado, Representative Larry Kraft of Minnesota. Welcome to Volts. Thank you so much for coming.Larry KraftOh, my gosh. Thank you for having me. I'm super excited to be here.David RobertsThis is cool. You are a freshman legislator. You entered the Minnesota legislature in 2022, last year. It's sort of hilarious to me: You slipstreamed into the most exciting and productive legislative session for Democrats in living memory that I'm aware of. Like, I hope, you know, on some level, this is not what politics is normally like, Larry.Larry KraftYeah, I have good timing. And I tell you, I hear that. And what I tell people is, you know "I'm sure you're right. But at this point, it's all I know. So let's keep going."David RobertsYeah, you just go in and you start passing bills, changing things right and left, wow. The Minnesota success story, I think people have heard a lot about it by now. There's more bills than you can shake a stick at, more progress, just a wild amount of progress. But let's focus on transportation. So Minnesota is similar to many other states in that transportation has become the largest source of greenhouse gases in the state. I think it's 25% —Larry KraftYeah, 25, 27%.David Roberts— in Minnesota. So this is sort of my overall impression: Especially at the state level, is there's been this sort of, like, parallel tracks going for a while now of on the one side, happy climate talk, which ends up mostly focused on the easy stuff, which is electricity, right? And then transportation over here on this other track just expanding, getting more and more carbon intensive willy nilly, and the twain have not really met. So this is like what's happening in Minnesota, really. To my mind, maybe Colorado got there a little bit ahead of you. But really what's happening in Minnesota is the first time that people grappling with climate change really are taking on transportation in a serious way.So let's start by just talking about what kind of targets are on the books in Minnesota now, prior to this transportation bill. Let's just talk about sort of like, what targets have been set in terms of greenhouse gases and in terms of VMT, vehicle miles traveled.Larry KraftRight. So in 2007, Minnesota passed. Actually, it was a bipartisan bill on climate that set state goals as 80% emission reductions, greenhouse gas emissions reductions by 2050, and then set some interim targets. In this last session, we updated that to be net zero by 2050. And then on the transportation side, there's been folks that have been working on this for a few years and set a vehicle miles traveled reduction goal of 20% reduction per capita by 2050 and 14% by 2040.David RobertsAre those targets, are these sort of aspirational things, or are those binding in some way? Are those statutorily binding?Larry KraftThey were not statutorily binding. It was in a climate action framework that the governor initiated that the VMT target started. But I think what we did this session was to give some teeth behind them and some mechanism to actually achieve them.David RobertsRight. So before we get to that, let's talk a little bit about RMI. Rocky Mountain Institute did a big study basically looking at what would happen for Minnesota were it to hit those VMT goals, what would be the sort of economic effect, say a little bit about those conclusions and how it came to those conclusions, like why those things would happen.Larry KraftRMI came and did a presentation about what was going on in Colorado early in our session. And then we're doing the analysis on Minnesota. But what they said was, if we could hit the vehicle mile travel goal of 20% reduction per capita by 2050, it would save Minnesotans $91 billion. And that was from a mix of things like just number one, not needing to drive as much and the cost of cars being $10,000 - $11,000 per year. Saving money there, but also a lot on the health side by the fact that you'd see a reduction in air pollution and the savings that would come from that and then also just from not as many people dying on the roads would be a significant savings.David RobertsSo $91 billion cumulatively for the state, which I think I saw, RMI broke it down. It's like $3 something billion a year, which is not a small thing in a state the size of Minnesota.Larry KraftNo, it is not.David RobertsSo this is a worthy goal. So you passed this big transportation bill. It has a bunch of stuff in it, a lot of things. But what I found most intriguing is the requirements it puts on transportation planning agencies. So explain to us what the Minnesota Department of Transportation has to do now that it didn't have to do before this bill passed. What is the new regime?Larry KraftRight. So it starts by saying that MnDOT — MnDOT is how we refer to it — has to set greenhouse gas emission reduction goals statewide, commensurate with the overall state goals, and then has to split them out regionally in a way that makes sense. And specifically that means in certain areas of the state, more metropolitan, there's going to be a bigger opportunity to reduce emissions and VMT than there may be in some greater Minnesota areas. So it has to start by doing that. And then what it has to do is look at if there are new projects on its system that were to increase capacity or increase VMT and emissions, that it then will have to offset them in some other way.David RobertsYeah, I want to get to that. But it also puts this same obligation on municipal planning organizations, does it not? So at the state level and then also at the municipal level.Larry KraftIt requires for the metropolitan regional planning organizations, especially in the Twin Cities area, which is the seven-county area around Minneapolis and St. Paul, it's about 55% of our population. So yes, it does that there. And then the other piece of it is for the metropolitan area, that organization has to incorporate those targets into its regional plan such that cities that are part of the region have to incorporate the climate targets as well as the VMT and greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets and transportation into their comprehensive plans.David RobertsSo it's kind of a fractal thing here. The Minnesota Department of Transportation has to plan around these emission goals and then, at the smaller level, the municipal organizations do. And specifically, the Twin Cities Metropolitan Council has to incorporate that in its city planning.Larry KraftCorrect.David RobertsIt's kind of funny. Like these states pass these greenhouse gas targets, which you would just assume, well, of course, the transportation agencies have to take those into account too. Like, why wouldn't they? But as far as I know, this is the first — I mean, this goes beyond even what Colorado did, I think, doesn't it? I mean, are you aware of another state that has formalized this kind of thing for its transportation planners?Larry KraftNot in the same way that we have. I think there are pieces of it and we certainly learned a lot from Colorado. We talked to them and we modeled the way we were starting from a lot of things that they were doing. But we definitely really thought about there was a piece of this that was transportation focused on MnDOT and the fact that you have to address land use to really get at long-term transportation emissions reductions. And so there was another part of the bill and initially started as two separate bills, but the other part was very focused on land use and how do we incorporate that? And then, they came together.David RobertsInteresting. And the land use stuff is mostly down at the regional and municipal level, right? I mean, that's where most of those decisions are made.Larry KraftCorrect.David RobertsAnd now those decisions have to be made with greenhouse gas goals in mind.Larry KraftYes.David RobertsIt seems to me on some intuitive level that if you have a project that is going to expand highway capacity, it is almost by definition going to increase greenhouse gases and vehicle miles traveled, is it not? And so if the state goal is fairly rapid reduction in greenhouse gases in VMTs, it looks like the implication is you just need to stop building new highway additions. I assume that's not what's going to happen. So how does that work out? How do you do an addition to highway capacity that doesn't increase VMT or GHGs?Larry KraftSo the interesting thing is in working through some of the objections on this with the city and county engineers, they analyze some previous projects and sometimes you have a project where you're maybe expanding capacity, but it eliminates a lot of congestion that has flowed over onto other roads. So the GHG emissions might in some cases not be negative or might not be all that negative. VMT is a little bit of a different story. So what the bill provides then is that if there are increases from induced demand or whatever, that they then have a prescribed set of things that they can do to offset that.Ideally first within the project themselves, maybe it's by adding more transit, maybe it's by adding some micromobility or some bicycle pedestrian infrastructure, but there's a set of things that can be done to offset any induced demand increase.David RobertsLet me pause on this induced demand question, because this is one of the sort of long-running issues in transportation. One of the long-running controversies is that the Greens are always yelling that these state departments of transportation make these completely unrealistic calculations. Like if we add another lane to this highway, it will ease congestion and everyone will flow faster. And then inevitably what happens is you add the lane, more traffic comes to fill up the lane, congestion remains as bad or worse than ever. This repeats over and over and over again. So who's going to be sort of in charge of the analysis, I guess is what I'm asking?Who is making the calculation about whether and how much a project will reduce or increase those metrics?Larry KraftThat is the responsibility of the Department of Transportation. That said, they do have to publish the results of the analysis on any project on their website, so there's a transparency that's required within it.David RobertsAnd so people can check. Are they cognizant of this induced demand thing? Would you say that they're relatively progressive in the way they do these calculations? Because state departments of transportation vary very widely across the country.Larry KraftYeah, well, I will say that I think they are and they were a willing partner as we created this legislation.David RobertsThey're not going crazy in opposition? That's another thing I was going to ask about. This seems like this would be exactly the kind of thing they hate. What was their sort of disposition around it?Larry KraftYou know, because there had been work done over the past several years in Minnesota on this stuff. A few years ago, they brought in someone by the name of Tim Sexton who's the Assistant Commissioner of Sustainability Planning and Program Management. So I don't know how many DOTs have someone with that title, but he's explicitly focused on this kind of area. So they kind of knew that something like this might be coming and had thought through and were prepared to have good discussions on it.David RobertsInteresting. So the party that is proposing the expansion of the highway is the party that will be responsible for offsetting its emissions. So, who is that party? Is that generally a private developer? Is that the state? Or, who exactly is the person or entity in charge of these expansions?Larry KraftThis is one of the things we had to work through in that it happens in different ways. Sometimes it is the DOT themselves that's doing it, but often it may be a regional planning organization or a city or a county where the funding is coming through. So they're responsible for thinking through what happens with their project. And the way this works is ideally you would find a way to offset it within the project itself. But if they can't for some reason it is possible then to offset any increases in a series of other ways of looking at things in areas that are more challenged from an environmental justice perspective or elsewhere within the region. Or even if not, they can look statewide.David RobertsHmm. So if I'm I don't know a city in Minnesota and I'm proposing to widen the highway coming into the city, so I submit that project to the state DOT, state DOT, analyzes it and says "this will in fact increase greenhouse gas emissions and VMT." So I, the city planner, then first look at the project itself and try to figure out how to do it more lightly. Or then I look around at other things I could do in my city. And then if worse comes to worse, I look around statewide and I'd find projects that what reduce VMT and greenhouse gases.Larry KraftExactly.Larry KraftThere is an interlinking process that's specified, and so it looks at things that you can do locally, but if not, you can connect with other projects or other actions elsewhere within the state that would reduce emissions. So, maybe you can't reduce emissions where you are, but maybe there's something else you can interlink with that is where transit is being added or where additional pedestrian or bicycle infrastructure is being added in another project. And so you can interlink the projects.David RobertsAnd so, what are these offsets like? What are the sorts of things if I'm the city planner and I'm trying to offset the increases from my highway widening, what are the kinds of things that are on the table here?Larry KraftRight, so there are nine of them listed right now. One is a transit expansion. Another is transit service improvements, active transportation infrastructure, micromobility infrastructure like shared vehicle services, transportation demand management like…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    The campaign for public power in Maine Sep 22, 2023
    Show notes

    In this episode, Maine State Senator Nicole Grohoski discusses an upcoming ballot measure that gives Maine voters the opportunity to replace the state’s unpopular for-profit utilities with a nonprofit public utility.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsMaine’s two big investor-owned power utilities — Central Maine Power and Versant Power — are not very popular. In fact, they boast among the lowest customer satisfaction scores of any utilities in the country, perhaps because their customers face some of the nation’s highest rates, suffer more and longer outages than average Americans, and pay more to connect rooftop solar than ratepayers in almost any other state. This November, Mainers will vote on a radical alternative: a ballot measure to replace the two for-profit utilities with a single nonprofit utility that would be called Pine Tree Power. Maine and many other states already have lots of small nonprofit municipal utilities, but this would mark the first time a whole state with existing private utilities decided to make them public en masse.Naturally the utilities are opposed and have dumped $27 million and counting into a campaign to crush the measure; supporters have mustered just under $1 million. To discuss this David vs. Goliath fight, I contacted one of its champions, Democratic state Senator Nicole Grohoski. We discussed why she thinks a public utility would perform better, what it would do for clean energy, how it would be governed, and what other states can learn from the effort. With no further ado, Maine State Senator Nicole Grohoski. Welcome to Volts. Thank you so much for coming.Nicole GrohoskiThank you so much for having me. I'm thrilled to be with you today.David RobertsI am super excited to talk about this issue. There's a lot of ins and outs I want to cover, but maybe let's just start with a brief history of this thing. So the idea here is, as I said in the intro, to replace Maine's two big investor-owned utilities, Central Maine Power and Versant Power, with a single publicly owned main utility called Pine Tree Power. Tell me who first had that idea? Where did it first pop up? I know it was legislation and then it got vetoed. Just tell us a little bit about how we got to where we are now.Nicole GrohoskiThe history is really interesting, and I'll try to not spend too much time on it, but I think it's really important to start with the reality here in Maine as a backdrop. So a couple of things that are important to know for listeners is that we, as Mainers, find that our electricity isn't really affordable or reliable and our utilities aren't trustworthy. So we have, for many years running now, the worst customer satisfaction in the country, some of the highest rates in the country for electricity, and those just keep going up. We have experienced a 20% increase this summer, with another increase coming in January.And we also have the most frequent outages in the country. And there are a couple of other reliability metrics that we're not doing so well on, including the length of outages and how long it takes to restore power. So basically what we see here in Maine is that the status quo of these for-profit multinational corporations is just not working for us. About a tenth of our residents in Maine received disconnection notices earlier this year because they just couldn't afford to pay their bills. And it's not working for companies or big corporations that really rely on low cost and reliable electricity to compete.So that's kind of the background. So a number of us were wondering, does it have to be this way? Is there an alternative to worst of the worst? We are Maine, we are very proud and independent, and we like to be leading, but this is not the way that we wanted to be leading. So there was a lot of grassroots pressure. In 2017 we had a big storm, and the power was out for days. But at the same time, there was a billing fiasco, which resulted in billing errors for over 100,000 customers, which is in a state of 1.3 million people, that's a very big percent.So there was a lot of pressure, a lot of phone calls to legislators, to the Public Utilities Commission, to the public advocate about these utilities. And so I think that really planted a seed for a number of folks. Specifically, Maine's first public advocate pointed out to some members of the legislature, including Representative Seth Barry at the time, myself, and a few others, that there were other options and that the financial and local control aspects of those options might be really helpful for Maine. So we started meeting in 2019 with the previous public advocate, economists, labor, legislators, people that were part of a group called CMP Ratepayers Unite.And that's when we formed this idea of creating a consumer-owned utility for Maine that would be non-profit and similar to the ten other consumer-owned utilities we have in Maine. I don't know that we had a name for it at that time, but we do now call it the Pine Tree Power Company. So those were the early days. And then to sort of fast forward, the Legislature commissioned a study which was done by London Economics International in 2019 to learn more about the economics and also legal pathway here. Then, of course, 2020, everybody knows what happened then, things kind of went on pause. And then in 2021, we wrote a bill. And that bill passed in both chambers in Maine with bipartisan support. As you mentioned, the governor did veto that bill.David RobertsAnd that bill was to create the utility or to put the question to voters.Nicole GrohoskiThat bill put the question to voters, and it's very similar to the language that we'll be voting on this November. So we did revise the language based on some feedback from the governor, and that is the language that is now in front of us to vote on this November, November 7. And in order to get the question on the ballot we had hundreds of volunteers working together to collect around 80,000 signatures in total, which is a little bit above the requirement needed to get a question on the ballot in Maine.David RobertsI'm a little curious why — this is a Democratic Governor Mills. What was her rationale? I mean, I guess I can imagine her rationale for opposing the public utility, but what was her rationale for opposing asking voters what they thought? Did she have a good rationale?Nicole GrohoskiNot in my opinion. I'm sure in her opinion it was great. But we read the veto letter for the most part. There was very little in there that was substantive. Some of those minor changes that we made are all things that we would have happily made in advance had we had outreach from her office about them. You know, the unfortunate thing with governors in Maine is that we have yet to elect one that has campaigned using our clean elections, publicly funding campaign option, which is something that most legislators use. So you can draw your own conclusions there about the — money in politics may have been at play.I can't say for certain.David RobertsYeah, we should just make a note here because a couple of podcasts we've done here on Volts are about state laws prohibiting utilities from using ratepayer money to lobby and pay off politicians. Maine does not have one of those laws.Nicole GrohoskiWell, we actually did just pass a law. We were one of four states earlier this year to be sure that ratepayer dollars are not going for lobbying. You know, industry membership, group memberships.David RobertsOh, interesting.Nicole GrohoskiYou know, Edison Electric, for instance, Chambers of Commerce, et cetera. So that is a new law. It will be in effect in about a month. So we'll see if that improves things.David RobertsJust in time or actually just a smidge too late. So the bill of particulars here then, against these two utilities, as you say, they have really low ratepayer satisfaction scores, lots of power outages, more than usual, higher rates, some of the highest rates in the country. Like every state, Maine has a Public Utility Commission that is meant to regulate its utilities. That has members appointed by the governor or elected? I'm not sure how it goes in Maine.Nicole GrohoskiIn Maine, the commissioners are appointed and then subject to Senate approval.David RobertsSo why not just use the PUC to sort of get these utilities in line? That seems like it would be the sort of first order of business.Nicole GrohoskiIt's a great question. I mean, I think everyone kind of wants to default to using the systems we have in place, but I have a couple of thoughts about that. Our Public Utilities Commission I do think is full of folks who are hardworking and really trying to get under the hood with utilities. But there's a lot of information there that the utilities really understand best. And so when you have questions, you're going to ask the utilities and there is sort of a long term back and forth relationship there. Some people might call how that turns into regulatory capture sometimes.Additionally, we do have the ability to fine the utilities if they're not performing up to snuff and that has happened. It doesn't happen that often, and the most recent fine, I think was around $10 million. At the same time they had a significant rate increase and are pulling out over $100 million in profit every year. So it's not really proportional and we could theoretically increase those fines a bit. But there is hesitance. I think the legislature has interest in doing some of that but the utilities are of course not interested and I think we would see another veto pen action is my guess.But all that being said, this effort to create a consumer utility has led to a lot of us just digging down into what is the history of utilities in this country and regulation. And what we found is that utilities are natural monopolies so it makes sense for there to be regulation because there isn't competition. But the folks who sort of started the effort to create public utilities commissions were those who were going to be regulated. And so there has been this hand in glove relationship since the start around the regulators and the regulated.David RobertsIt's not ideal.Nicole GrohoskiThat's probably a subject of a whole other podcast but —David RobertsIt doesn't work quite like you would want it to.Nicole GrohoskiExactly. And additionally, I would say I have recently been talking to folks in other states and other people have served as public advocates. And what I find remarkable is the backflips and cartwheels that we go through with regulation to try to outfox the utilities when, by no fault of their own, the investor owned utilities are created with their number one mission to be maximizing repair profit. So it's like we could keep trying to think of creative and clever ways to balance this out. But at the end of all of it, I keep coming back to the fact that we don't have our roads, which are critical to our economy and our safety and our way of life in the private sector; and nor are our schools, nor is our military.Why does it make sense for something as important as our electricity grid to be subject to for-profit motivations?David RobertsListeners will be rolling their eyes right about now because this is something I say I find a way to say it almost every episode no matter what we're talking about. But utilities, they are structured such that they make money insofar as they spend money. So all they really want to do is deploy more big infrastructure. And so as you say, like PUCs find these elaborate Rube Goldberg mechanisms to sort of beg and plead with them to do things like efficiency or distributed energy, know on and on, inter, regional transmission, name it, all of which are sort of just counter to the basic incentive.So as you say, you can spend the rest of your life coming up with more and more elaborate ways to try to trick them into doing something against their interests. But at a certain point you just got to grapple with the central issue which is that they're set up wrong, they're set up badly, they're set up to not want things that are in the public interest and at a certain point you got to just deal with the root cause. Anyway, sorry to go off on my standard canned rant there. So then a skeptic will say these two utilities, just so people are clear about this, these are not vertically integrated utilities.These are just distribution utilities. They just have wires, they just distribute power. They do not own generation. They're dealing with a certain set of supply issues, a certain set of power plants, a certain geography. Maine is very heavily forested which is a nightmare for transmission lines for all the obvious reasons. So it just has a sort of set of things that it's dealing with. And so I guess the skeptic is going to ask what reason do we have to believe that given the sort of same resources that Pine Tree, a public utility, would perform any better?Nicole GrohoskiWell I think we have a lot of evidence that it would because we already have ten consumer owned utilities in Maine. Just for an example, there is one that's called Eastern Maine Electric Co-op. That's a traditional co-op. It is more rural than most of Maine. You might find it interesting that it is serving about 1.2% of the state's load in kilowatt hours but it is in an area that's twice the size of Rhode Island. Now EMAC, which is in rural downeast Maine is directly adjacent to the territory of Versant that I live in and the cost for delivery in EMAC is nine cents and the cost for delivery in Versant is 13.1 cents per kilowatt hour.So I don't think that's just some kind of magical happenstance that when you take profit out of the equation you're just paying less. We know that together CMP and Versant are sending out about — was last year was $187 million a year in profit. So I think if Mainers are in charge of our utility we can decide do we want to use that money to lower rates? Do we want to use it to reinvest in the grid to increase reliability? And I think it would probably be a mix of both of those things.David RobertsAnd that amount of money you think is material enough that it would show up as improved performance, show up as measurably improved performance?Nicole GrohoskiI do think so. I mean I think for your listeners, while Maine is large and rural we do have 1.3 million people. So, when you sort of divide those numbers out it does make a difference. And we've had some independent economic analysis that shows us that Mainers would be saving on average $367 a month, excuse me, a year, because of the fact that we're basically going from expensive rent for the grid to a lower cost mortgage. So I think it's easy to explain it to folks in terms of, like, "What's better when you're looking for housing, dropping your money down a rent hole, black hole for the rest of your life, or swapping out to a mortgage where you've got a lower interest rate than what we see now with the guaranteed return on equity that happens for our for-profit utilities."David RobertsYeah, this was another piece I wanted to ask about. So part of why you think this will be cheaper for ratepayers is just you take that huge slice of profits that are going, as you say, out of state to the owners of these utilities and keep that in state and that alone will buy you some better service. There's also the issue of investor-owned utilities expect and want and are guaranteed relatively high rates of return on their investments and often resist making investments if the rate of return is lower than that. But as you say, a public power utility can be more patient with its capital, right?Can make inv…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    How climate activists can help get things built Sep 20, 2023
    Show notes

    In this episode, organizer Jeff Ordower of 350.org talks about how the environmental movement can shift its focus from blocking what it doesn’t like to building what it does.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsIt is a much-discussed fact that the environmental movement cut its teeth blocking things — mines, pipelines, power plants, and what have you. It is structured around blocking things. Habituated to it.However, what we need to do today is build, build, build — new renewable energy, batteries, transmission lines, and all the rest of the infrastructure of the net-zero economy. Green groups are as often an impediment to that as they are a help. So how can the green movement help things get built? How can it organize around saying yes?Recently, the activist organization 350.org hired Jeff Ordower, a 30-year veteran organizer with the labor and queer movements, in part to help figure these questions out. As director of North America for 350, Ordower will help lead a campaign focused on utilities standing in the way of clean energy. I talked with him about organizing around building instead of blocking, the right way to go after utilities, the role green groups can play in connecting vulnerable communities with IRA money, and what it means to focus on power. All right then, with no further ado, Jeff Ordower of 350, welcome to Volts. Thank you so much for coming.Jeff OrdowerThank you so much, David, for having me. I'm excited to be here.David RobertsOkay, well, I want to get to 350 and climate activism in a second, but first I'd like to just hear a little bit about your history in activism, which is mainly on the labor side. And what I'd really like to hear, and this is probably like a whole pot of its own, but insofar as you can summarize, I'd love to hear from your perspective when you were working as an organizer in labor. Looking over the fence at climate activism, what was your sort of take or critique like from the labor perspective? What did you think climate activism was doing right or wrong?Or what did you think you could bring to climate activism from the labor side?Jeff OrdowerYeah, I both did labor organizing and I come out of base-building community organizing. I actually come out of the notorious ACORN was where I spent the first half of my organizing.David RobertsThe late, lamented —Jeff OrdowerYeah. So it's very similar. But I started in labor, moved to ACORN very quickly, and then as ACORN was destroyed, both helped to start new community organizing efforts. And then lately, over the last few years have been involved with labor organizing. And it's interesting because I really started tracking what was happening in climate around Copenhagen, which was 2008, 2009, at the same time where ACORN was going through its difficulties. And we were trying to figure out what to build and how to build it and how to build something that was more intersectional. So I was — the personal piece of my story is I was working in St. Louis, which is where I'm from, and part of what we do as community organizers is think about how do we challenge the local power structure?It's about power and it's about how we build power for folks who don't have the power that they need and help collectively do that. And St. Louis is, like many midwestern towns, is kind of a branch office for many Fortune 500 companies these days. So the most powerful players in the region were coal companies. Peabody Coal was the largest private sector coal company in the world. Arch coal was the second largest in North America.Both were headquartered in the St. Louis region because it's at the confluence of the Missouri and Mississippi rivers. So, as the only Fortune 500 company in the city limits of St. Louis that was getting tax breaks, there were lots of reasons to fight Peabody and so started on a campaign about that, but there was also this tremendous excitement that was happening. So we were both at the beginning of the Obama administration. There was a time of great hope. For those of us who —David RobertsI recall vaguely, vaguely distantly.Jeff OrdowerWell that's interesting. So, for climate folks, they're like, "Oh, this is not a time of great hope." But the fact that after six or seven attempts, depending on how you count it, at winning health care for everyone in the country, I look back at that early days of Obama and say, wow, we got financial reform to some degree, but we got health care was the most important thing that changed so many people's lives. So I actually think climate folks view that era a little bit differently than we might in having really a generational win. And I'm sure we'll get into this a little bit later, but it is how I think about IRA is also the next generation or the next generational win that we've gotten.But, looking at that, I think the sheer number of resources that the climate movement was mustering — you know there were many organizations in St. Louis at the time that had been newly created that were doing work. There was a global movement, there were these incredibly ambitious, and I just want to say badass, for lack of a better word, youth, climate activists and organizers. So I think there was a lot to be admired about what was happening. And the fall of 2009 with 350 managing a global day of action, it's when I first started tracking 350.org. So, that was where I really lauded at what was happening.The climate movement was so exciting to think about the global nature, to think about what they were doing. I think where also looking over the fence where things seemed harder was I think about organizing. And I think many of us, community labor organizing, think about organizing and not mobilizing and how folks build longer term power. And it was less clear to me how the climate movement was doing that and how really the most affected people were — you have a lot of people whose job was to whether it was to get signatures or to do lobbying. But there didn't seem to be formations not just where people could speak from their experiences but also really exercise the longer term campaigning and power building that was necessary.And so that felt like, and still feels to me a little bit like some of the weaknesses in the climate movement. And obviously more than a decade later, we also have strengths too. I mean that the Sunrise movement is the complete counter to that actually moving folks in hubs in a very significant way for youth organizing. I think, 350.org with our 100 chapters, that the game has changed somewhat. But at the time it really felt like much more emphasis on mobilizing, much less emphasis on organizing.David RobertsRight. So people would show up in the streets and march but you didn't see the sort of long-term accretion of power coming out of that?Jeff OrdowerYeah, and it's not just the accretion of power, it's also the relationship of having real organization where you have folks who are directly affected by issues, make decisions collectively. That's how things get stronger. It's how you figure out tactics that work. It's the relationship between staff and members. It's members figuring things out. Building of power comes through some trial and error and that comes through a process of collective work where you have democratic organizations. And that's similar — it's the most clear in labor fights because if the workers aren't really willing to fight the boss then you can't have a union no matter what.David RobertsRight.Jeff OrdowerAnd you can think of a thing as an organizer that should work. But really, it's what people who are going and working on the shop floor or these days working in an Amazon warehouse or working in a Starbucks, what they think is going to give them the courage to stand up to the boss. It's not what you think as an organizer. And so I think that's what's so important and that comes over time and building that. And I think where the climate movement sometimes struggles is it has just some of the sharpest, most brilliant policy minds in the world but it doesn't always have that relationship with folks who are the most affected to be able to figure things out and have this trial and error that organizing really is about.David RobertsSo let's then talk from a really high level, 30,000 foot level or whatever the phrase is about where the climate movement finds itself. Sort of what kind of moment is the climate movement in right now? I think you have said and written that this is a sort of historic turning point. How would you describe that in a broad way?Jeff OrdowerYeah, I think it's kind of two parts. So one, we've had this historic generational win with IRA in the US. And so the one piece of it is the task before us is whether we can rise to the occasion and use it. And I know in previous podcasts and I sometimes use the pod to talk about previous pods, but both the IRA is filled with carrots and not sticks. But I think we can do a lot with those carrots. And I think we can really transform our energy system and also do that in a way that promotes equity and justice and it's an opportunity before us.And then the second thing is we also have to do that while recognizing that all of the above is insufficient, that we actually do need to convert the way we live and we work so we can't just continue to build pipelines and mine coal and also add in some renewables. There has to be a real transformation. We have to make some hard choices and we have to and this is where it comes back to power. We have to build the collective power to do that. So I think we're at a crossroads. We have more tools than we've had before in the toolbox, at least in the US, to really have a just transition. So it's a question of whether we can step up and build the power that's necessary to consummate that transition, if you will.David RobertsWell, let's talk a little bit about that because the premise of this conversation is sort of the attempt by 350 and I think probably broader than 350, but we'll focus on 350 —Jeff OrdowerDefinitely broader than us, yes.David RobertsTo sort of pivot from purely oppositional trying to stop fossil fuels from getting built, to a more prospective, forward looking support for building things, right? This is a big topic in green circles right now. There's this whole school of thought that liberalism is not used to building things and the whole approach of sort of abundance and building is different than what we're used to. We have to reorient ourselves, et cetera, et cetera. At a general question about that, which I think is probably the one that strikes most people first and most forcefully, is just this: The conventional wisdom in organizing or the conventional wisdom about organizing is just that it's easier to get people fired up about things they hate and oppose and want to stop.For one thing, it's just clearer, right? When you stop something, you've stopped it, right? It's a clear win. It's not ambiguous. You got big, evil, corporate bad guys that you can demonize and sort of rally people around that. And just generally, like, anger fires people up. And the sort of conventional wisdom is that it's very difficult to organize around building for a lot of reasons, I think we'll talk about, but just for a million reasons. There's a lot more arguments among advocates about what to build, where to build, when to build right? And what are the right trade offs and all these kind of things.So do you agree with that general conventional wisdom? Do you think it's true that it's just easier to get people fired up around anger and it's more difficult to do this sort of forward looking thing that you're thinking about here?Jeff OrdowerYeah, it's a very good general philosophical question because for decades with comrades, you have the conversation do you organize out of anger or do you organize out of love? I think that this is a related question and the answer is I think polarizing and organizing out of anger is important and matters and lots of people do that and works for them. But I also think organizing out of a vision of what's possible and the world in which we can live and what's possible if we can open the door and really change material conditions for folks, I think that is just as compelling and I think folks will join and build together as well. Now I'm thinking about this question.There's many directions we can go in this, but I do want to say organizing for solutions doesn't mean that we're just organizing to build renewable energy or utility scale solar, wind. It also means there's a lot of people, people and their companies and their corporations that are in the way. And so we still have to clear out a lot of these barriers. And it's not just fossil fuel companies, but it's also the pernicious role of utility companies.David RobertsOh yeah, we're definitely going to get to that.Jeff OrdowerOkay, I didn't mean to jump ahead.David RobertsOh, my friend, we're definitely getting to that. I know you're the North American director now and so maybe you won't have anything to say about this and we can just cut it if you don't. But one of the interesting things when I had lunch with May, the head of 350, a few months ago, she was talking about this shift. And one thing she told me that I had not understood, I don't think, is that a lot of the impetus for this turn away from sort of pure opposition more to building things came from 350 branches in the developing world.Jeff OrdowerThat's right.David RobertsAnd I think maybe naively you would think those are the people getting hurt worst by oil and gas pipelines and have the least environmental protections down there and that's the protection they need. But they say otherwise. So maybe talk a little bit about why that is.Jeff OrdowerWell, I think people are clear that they're getting hurt by pipelines. I also know, again, it's hard for me in the Global North to be like, "Here's what people in the Global South think," but here's what's been reflected to me that — first of all, when you talk with many activists, in the Global South. They say whatever is happening for us around emissions just generally is a drop in the bucket compared to the damage over the last hundred years that countries in the Global North have caused. But related to that, there's the reality of like, what do people need to actually get the energy that they need?And that's around renewable energy that's around solutions. Energy is just so unaffordable. It's increasingly challenging given what's happening, given the war, and given that, again, the Global North is going to capture all the oil and gas that they can. And given the issue with governments that having a real ability to have diffuse solar is absolutely critical to how people can live and get what they need to do. And so I think for many of our groups, if you talk to folks in the Philippines at 350, they'll say our ability to actually deliver solar to more remote fishing villages is absolutely critical.And that also as a bulwark against the increasing level of climate chaos that we're facing. Unfortunately, the grids are weak and get knocked out all the time. And so if you're facing typhoons, if you're facing hurricanes, you need to have some kind of resilient energy. And so I think folks are talking about the solutions for those two things, and they're not saying it in the context of like, let's build pipelines and renewables. They're also saying some of…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    How to accelerate rooftop solar & household batteries in the US Sep 15, 2023
    Show notes

    How can the US make it easier, faster, and cheaper for homeowners to install rooftop solar? In this episode, Sunrun CEO Mary Powell shares her vision for boosting not only residential solar, but other forms of residential electrification too.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsIn Australia, one out of three households has solar panels on the roof. In the US, it’s one out of 25. That probably has something to do with the fact that in the US, rooftop solar is twice as expensive, twice the hassle, and takes twice as long to get installed.Why is the process so broken? And what could be done to make it smoother and faster?To discuss these and related matters, I went to the source: Mary Powell, the CEO of Sunrun, the nation’s largest residential rooftop solar company — or more accurately, the nation’s largest residential electrification company.Before taking the top spot at Sunrun, Powell spent more than 20 years in leadership at Green Mountain Power, Vermont’s largest power utility and a nationally recognized pioneer in clean energy. Sunrun brought her on to help the company move into products — batteries, EV chargers, virtual power plants — that were once thought the province of utilities.I talked with her about how to speed up the rooftop solar interconnection process, the role of net metering, Sunrun’s move into vehicle charging and VPPs, and the future of distributed energy. All right, then, with no further ado, Mary Powell of Sunrun. Welcome to Volts. Thank you so much for coming.Mary PowellOh, my pleasure. I was looking forward to chatting with you.David RobertsMary, I'm looking at my notes here and I have — let me just count real quick — one million questions to ask you. So, we're going to have to move quick here because I've got so much. But just by way of framing, I was in Australia recently and was listening to them talk about their rooftop solar success story there, the sort of rooftop solar miracle. So the US is at, I think, something like 4% rooftop solar penetration. And Australia is up around 30%, 35%, something like that. One out of every three households, mainly because it is two to three times less expensive and way, way, way faster to get on your roof there.Most of what I want to talk about are in different forms. How can the US process be made cheaper and faster? That's kind of, I think, the theme of our discussion here today. But before we get to the reality of why things take so long, let's talk a little bit about perception. So I guess Sunrun is now the biggest residential solar company in the world — I know, in the US.Mary PowellYeah, certainly in the US. Yeah, we're the largest, not just residential solar company, but we are the largest in the combination of solar-plus-storage. So we really see ourselves as a clean energy lifestyle company, and we're really well positioned to meet customers wherever they are on their clean energy journey and help them transform their lives to something that's more affordable, certainly something that's cleaner. So we have solar, we have storage, we have sophisticated electric panels, we have EV chargers, and of course, we have that amazing partnership with Ford on the F-150 that you can use to back up your home.David RobertsGoing to get into all that later.Mary PowellGood.David RobertsBut I assume as part of what you do, you do a lot of consumer research, a lot of talking to homeowners. So the first thing I'm interested in really is what do US homeowners say they want when they come to you? Why are they now installing rooftop solar and batteries? Why are they doing it? Or perhaps even more to the point, what do they say about why they're not doing it? What are the sort of pain points you hear about from customers?Mary PowellSo the reason customers are going solar, and increasingly, as I said, solar-plus-storage in California now we're up to probably about an 80% attachment rate. So customers that are going solar really want the benefits of storing their energy as well and having the resilience and the comfort and the peace of mind that comes with that. Back to what I'm hearing from customers: It's so interesting. I would say for so many years, largely it was an industry where customers were enticed to go solar to save money, so they knew they could save money off of what they were paying their utility.And Dave, that's still true. I mean, in every market that we sell in, the cost per kilowatt hour that you generate on your roof is lower than the cost you're paying your utility. So many customers still find the value of savings to be very appealing, but it really has evolved over time where so many customers, I talk to customers every single week as well as I've worked in our stores and I've been in customers homes. And increasingly what you're hearing is that they just want stability. I mean, I've heard so many customers have said to me, "Mary, like, it's fine if I save money, but honestly, I just want greater independence and I want stability.I want to know that the price isn't going to go up of the energy that I'm getting." And of course, you also have so many customers that want solar energy because of the clean energy attributes. But so many customers now are really enticed around the energy independence we can provide. And then, as customers increasingly adopt electric vehicles, that makes them painfully aware of what they're paying on the kilowatt hour basis with their utility. So that also then entices them to really want to go solar.David RobertsSo what do they say is stopping them then, the ones who are not pulling the trigger?Mary PowellI would say back to your opening. We don't make things easy, not Sunrun, but in the country, we don't make it an easy process for customers. And then I think for many customers, I've heard many customers who come back to us later because they say, well, it just feels like such a big decision and a big project, and then when they realize, "Oh, actually, I don't have to put any money down, it gets installed in a day." In many cases, we now can install up to two homes in a day. So they're starting to see it's not a big infrastructure project.But I think for many customers, they initially maybe feel that it does. But also to your point that you started our conversation with, there's a lot, particularly in some parts of the country, it's a very onerous process and a long process, and some customers just drop out along the way.David RobertsI think because there's only 4% penetration in the US, it's still somewhat of a novelty to most people, I think. Most people probably don't have a really good sense of what's involved. So maybe just walk through what is the process of getting solar on your roof and what are those pain points? What are the points that are difficult and take a long time?Mary PowellIt's not uniform, so it's different all over the country. It really depends on the state that you live in and the utility that you're served by, as well as then sometimes also local regulations and restrictions. But let me talk it through in sort of the easier and then the maybe more challenging state. So in the sort of more straightforward geographies, you could have a conversation with your salesperson, you could have a quote. Within days, you make a decision.David RobertsSo, nobody needs to come to your roof now to figure out your suitability anymore. Is all that done by satellite and whatever now?Mary PowellYes, there's a lot of advanced technology that we can use to understand whether a customer is suitable. In the process we do have somebody, actually, we do have photos that we have to get and we obviously want to verify everything. And so you start with that initial consultation, you get an initial design and then, yes, we go through the steps of finalizing that design, making sure it's the absolute right design. Once we understand the nuances of your home, once we understand the electrical infrastructure, the roof, the design of the roof, the age of the roof, the layout, and then that moves into full design.And then you have to obviously work through interconnection with the utility and any permitting that needs to happen.David RobertsWhen does that happen, though? Does that happen as I'm planning my system? Or do I build my system and then contact the utility and say "Hey, I've got the system, I want to connect" ?Mary PowellWell, first of all, at Sunrun, what we do is we want to make that easy for all of you. And I first went solar 14 years ago, bought the system outright in Vermont with a local company, and then since then have gone with solar storage and EV charging with Sunrun twice and once before I became CEO. And they make it very easy. So they made it a very easy process. So they basically just keep you updated. But Sunrun is the one that shepherds through all of those process steps that we then make the customer aware. I mean, obviously for the customer, it may entail that somebody has to stop by the home if there's local inspection that needs to happen, but we basically shepherd that for the customer.But you have to work on interconnection. So again, in some jurisdictions interconnection is actually very straightforward. Vermont's a great example of a very solar friendly state where the utilities make the interconnection process very easy. There's some states where it's very time consuming with months of delay for studies or paperwork. There's many states where the utility interconnection for home solar and battery systems, the costs can range from one hundred dollars to ten thousand dollars depending on study costs or required upgrades. Yes. And then there's some where there's just solar is prohibited.David RobertsYeah, there's more and more areas now where they're just saying "No more." Right. Like you're cut off. Which seems kind of crazy.Mary PowellYeah, it does to me, too, particularly as a former utility CEO, because even if I were facing what they like to call a solar-saturated circuit, it's an amazing opportunity just to put some storage, some power packs or utilizing some other storage technology at the substation and basically just soak up all that energy and use it exactly when it's best suited for the grid. So there's many, many solutions that we could absolutely see.David RobertsIt occurs to me that if the customer is just interfacing with Sunrun and Sunrun is hashing through these difficult and extended interconnection processes, it seems like a business risk for Sunrun, basically is the customer aware that it's not Sunrun's fault basically that it's taking so long? Are those tricky discussions?Mary PowellI'm a firm believer in really setting expectations appropriately up front. So we've done a lot of work on that, on our customer obsession and customer experience to really make sure that right up front it's all laid out so that they understand the steps of the process, but they don't have to necessarily be exposed to having to deal with all the steps. So again, in many cases when you lay it all out and you tell a customer "So in your jurisdiction it's going to take six months, and these are all the reasons why," most customers are okay with that. But to your point, when things increasingly become more complicated through that process, there's obviously a risk of losing some of those customers and they don't end up going all the way through the whole process.David RobertsRight. Well, let's talk then about interconnection process. As you say, it's not ideal that it differs so radically from one utility to the next. And it's not ideal that it can take three to six months. It's not ideal that it's impossible now in some areas. So what are some reforms? Like what are some steps to take to make that whole process smoother and more predictable and more uniform. And who needs to take those steps?Mary PowellRight. And back to your example of Australia. Again, the differences are exactly what you're talking about. The differences are that it's very standardized there. So those are the kinds of solutions that we're seeing that could help reduce costs and speed up deployment of home solar and batteries. So it's really having standardized costs for residential interconnection so that there are no surprises or unequal costs that will make a project too expensive for a family. For example, in Illinois, through the Climate Equitable Jobs Act enacted, they enacted a $200 interconnection fee so there are no surprises with upgrade costs, and it remains affordable for all households.So there's great examples all over the country. I think it's really about how do we make those more standardized, faster and more affordable interconnection with online and standardized interconnection technical requirements, such as allowing meter collars. I don't know how much you've spent time looking at meter collars, but meter collar adapters, they avoid main panel upgrades, so they save time and costs. So dozens of utilities allow for customer owned meter collars, but the majority still continue to block their use. So again, a really simple change. Utilities could easily allow third party certified electricians to approve main panel upgrades, also avoiding increasing and unnecessary utility delays.Those are a couple of examples. There's also ensuring interconnection access with smart inverter functionality. A few states have enacted fast and open interconnection rules that leverage smart inverters. For example, Hawaii now uses a combination of a voltvar function and a volt watt function to avoid the need for distribution, circuit hosting capacity, and customer service upgrades.David RobertsExplain it at my grandma level. What is the significance of a smart inverter? What does that get you? What does that do for you?Mary PowellI think the easiest way to explain it to grandma or anybody is really, when you think about it, the design of the utility system is literally like the same fundamental design as 100 years ago. So when I use these names and these technologies, it's really simply saying, moving towards putting technology on the grid that makes it smarter and more effective so that it's more flexible to allow additional solar energy on the circuit. So it kind of gets back to what I was saying about the example of where we have utilities that are saying no more solar in XYZ territory. They could solve that through some of these kinds of technologies.They could also solve that through just, again, putting storage in substations along those circuits so it allows them to then utilize that energy. So even on clogged circuits, customers can interconnect solar and batteries to the grid and they can avoid high upgrade costs.David RobertsAnd what is SolarAPP? Tell us a little bit about that initiative.Mary PowellYeah, SolarAPP was launched by NREL in 2021 to basically address the permitting times and to cut down on permitting.David RobertsWhich is different than interconnection.Mary PowellYes.David RobertsPermitting comes before or after interconnection or it's all at the same time?Mary PowellTo me, that's all at the same time. I am sure there's a linear process to it that I'm not aware of. But at the same time as you're having to get things ready for interconnection, you're having to work through the permitting process.David RobertsWho is permitting? Who is the permit coming from? Is it the city?Mary PowellYes, the local AHJ. So it's the local jurisdiction that you're dealing with. So that is one of t…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Previous 1 24 25 26 27 28 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