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:
    What the midterm elections mean for climate & energy Mar 24, 2023
    Show notes

    What do the US 2022 midterm elections mean for climate and energy policy? To help go through the results, I contacted Whitney Stanco, a senior analyst at Washington Analysis LLC, an independent research firm out of Washington, DC. She has been tracking energy policy for decades and in particular has kept a close watch on the states. With Whitney's help, I walk through the election results, first at the Congressional level and then in the states, and contemplate their implications for energy policy. We pay special attention to the four states where Democrats have new trifectas and the power see their policy preferences made into law.


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

    Which technologies get cheaper over time, and why? Jan 13, 2023
    Show notes

    In 2021, a group of Scholars at Oxford University published a paper that made big waves in the energy world. It argued that key clean energy technologies — wind, solar, batteries, and electrolyzers — are on learning curves which guarantee that, if they are deployed at the scale required to reach zero carbon, they will get extremely cheap.

    This is, as they say, big if true. In September, I had one of the lead authors, Doyne Farmer, on Volts to discuss the paper in-depth. He made a convincing case for the paper’s thesis, but when I asked him why these technologies were on learning curves and others weren't, he could only speculate.

    That's the question that's been on my mind ever since. Why are some clean-energy technologies getting rapidly cheaper while others aren't? What is it about particular technologies that make them amenable to learning curves?

    I cast that question to the academic gods, and lo, they returned with a paper, and that paper is what we’re here to discuss today. It’s called “Accelerating Low-Carbon Innovation,” by Abhishek Malhotra of the School of Public Policy at the Indian Institute of Technology in New Delhi, India, and Tobias Schmidt of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, Switzerland.

    It sets out to chart technologies against two basic axes: design complexity and need for customization. That creates a schema that can help illuminate why some technologies developed quicker than others.

    I don't want to say much more than that, since I have my Malhotra and Schmidt here with me to help explain.


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

    Cute pictures of my pets! (And also a fundraiser) Jan 06, 2023
    Show notes

    Volts was born on December 7, 2020. It recently turned two years old and I forgot to wish it a happy birthday. I also forgot to send out my once-a-year fundraising note.

    However! Better late than never.

    If you have learned from or been entertained by my podcasts over the last year, if they have helped you become more useful, and if you are in a financial position to do so, I hope you will consider signing up as a paid Volts subscriber. It is a relatively modest sum — you pay less for a year than you'd pay for a nice pair of pants — but it means the difference between me continuing this work and me getting a real job.


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

    Reflecting on the work of the soon-to-retire House climate committee Dec 28, 2022
    Show notes

    In this episode, Florida Rep. Kathy Castor, chair of the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, describes the committee’s ambitious goals and notable achievements over the past three years.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsIn 2019, in the wake of Democrats’ congressional victories, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced that she would be re-forming the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, which had been disbanded by Republicans in the previous session. She appointed Florida Representative Kathy Castor as chair.At the time, the decision caused considerable controversy in the climate community. Climate activists were pushing for a more ambitious committee, with the power to write a full Green New Deal legislative package. Instead, the committee was to be an advisory body only, meant to do research and develop policy suggestions.History is littered with congressional committees that busily produce reports and whitepapers that no one reads. But the climate committee proved much more potent than that. Castor set about gathering testimony from hundreds of witnesses — scientists, policy wonks, and average citizens alike — and putting her expert staff to work translating their testimony into policy recommendations. But the recommendations did not simply decorate reports. The Democrats on the committee, and the Democrats educated by the committee's work, took those recommendations back to their own committees, where they found their way into a wide variety of bills. The bipartisan infrastructure bill, the CHIPS Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act contained numerous policies that originated in the climate committee.Altogether, hundreds of the recommendations made by the committee found their way into law — a crazy-high success rate for a committee with no real power. As the committee prepares to sunset — of course Republicans are disbanding it again — it has put out a final report, summarizing all its achievements and pointing to the work that remains to be done.I called Rep. Castor to get her thoughts on the committee's work, the achievements she is most proud of, and what progress she thinks can be made in the next two years.Alright, then. With no further ado, Representative Kathy Castor. Welcome to Volts. Thank you so much for coming.Rep. Kathy CastorOh, I'm delighted to be here, David. Thank you.David RobertsSo just to start off, I'm assuming that the coming Republican majority is going to shut down the committee. Has this been explicitly stated yet, or is this just ... are we all assuming? Is that a valid assumption?Rep. Kathy CastorYeah, the ranking member, Garret Graves of Louisiana, did kind of spill the beans. The problem is, on the Republican side, the Speaker-to-be, Kevin McCarthy, does not quite have the votes yet. So that leaves everything in limbo getting organized for the new year. But, they've made it plain that the climate crisis is not a priority for them, and therefore the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis will not exist in the next Congress.David RobertsSo then it's been wrapped up. It's been a whirlwind three years, I guess, since you were placed in charge of this committee. Have you had a chance to kind of pause and step back and think about it all, or are you still kind of in a sprint til' the end of the term?Rep. Kathy CastorIt has been a sprint right til' the end, especially since the large appropriations package and the defense bill were not completed due to really foot-dragging of the US Senate. We have so much more left to do. I mean, we are thrilled that this was the most important Congress when it comes to clean energy and climate action and building more resilient, safer communities across the country. I mean, this was the Congress, the one that people inside and outside have been pressing for decades, frankly. But there's still so much more left to do. We're living in a climate emergency, and the world's top scientists tell us it is just urgent that we reduce climate pollution across the board. And now we have the tool. We passed a number of the tools, but implementation will be key, and that's what we're looking ahead towards.David RobertsI wanted to ask you, looking back on it, if you can cast your mind back to 2019, when you became chair and you had a majority in the House, but very narrow-split Senate, looking back, were you surprised by the productivity of this Congress? How did it perform, relative to your expectations from back in 2019?Rep. Kathy CastorGosh, it was yes, I think the the fact that we were able to accomplish so much when the United States Senate was divided 50-50 truly exceeded our expectations, but we really didn't have a choice. Policy could not wait any longer, while so many private actors, private sector, clean energy entrepreneurs, some utilities, some states and local communities are going gangbusters. The federal government and the Congress had not responded. So the stars finally aligned when we kind of knitted together pieces of the climate movement across the country, across the economy, and had the plan ready when President Biden was elected. But a 50-50 Senate, that was a roadblock. But looking back now, it's pretty impressive. The bipartisan bills that we were able to pass into law.David RobertsYeah, my expectations are so low, naturally, that I was quite pleasantly surprised. So let's talk about a little bit about what I think is one of the most striking features of this last few years, which has been a crazy time. But I wrote a piece back in, I think it was 2019 or 2020, about the climate movement kind of splintered apart after Waxman-Markey back in 2008, 2009, and was kind of just fractured and drifting up through, I would say probably like 2018. And then, of course, I've been writing about these processes, whereby groups are talking to one another, and there's been just this intensive policy discussion and activity.And the left seem to sort of pull together around a policy vision, which I sort of characterized as standards, investments, and justice: SIJ. I tried to get SIJ to catch on, but it never quite did. But then your committee comes along, you consult with hundreds of people. You get testimony from hundreds of people. And that's kind of that shared vision is more or less what you came around to. And for all the chaos of the ensuing years and all the sort of ups and downs and roller coaster of it, there was remarkably little, I thought, conflict within the Democratic Party or within the left about policy specifics.There seemed to be a weird sort of policy consensus that kind of held firm. Did that strike you too, especially relative to like, 2008, 2009, when, you know, whether you supported cap and trade or not was this, you know, this absolute marker of your purity or your intentions and all this, you know, all the very vicious policy fights back then? I thought there was a strange amount of consensus around policy this time around. Did you find that as well?Rep. Kathy CastorI'm glad that we made it look easy, because it wasn't. And it really started with Speaker Pelosi's vision coming back in tackling the climate crisis, there's nothing like having a professional committee, staff of experts. Some of the other committee chairs in the Congress, they protect their turf, their jurisdiction, but she understood that solutions to the climate crisis cut across all jurisdictions and they needed to be knitted together. So having Ana Unruh Collin serve as our staff director, a brilliant, knowledgeable scientist, but policy guru. And then Alison Cassady is our deputy, who had served under Chairman Waxman, went through EPA after a report and now is helping Codesta in the White House get all of these clean energy and resiliency policies done. Fatima Maud, great on transmission in the power sector. Samantha Medlock, who understood that the climate we have to prepare and adapt, so another professional. So there's nothing like having a team that is in place, ready to listen.David RobertsMost of them, veterans of the Waxman-Markey fight. So, had seen how things could go, I think, and went in, determined to make them go differently this time.Rep. Kathy CastorYou're absolutely right. And what I learned watching Speaker Pelosi and just kind of growing up as a policy nerd myself, is that from the very get-go, you have to listen. You have to listen and learn. And that's what we set out to do right off the bat; listen to farmers who were hungry for climate solutions because their crops and livestock being impacted, scientists, folks in the clean tech sector, the innovators. We needed to understand what the modern solutions were. The environmental justice community, who had felt so left out of discussions on solutions, on clean energy and technology for many years, and we set out to do that, held a number of those listening sessions, but put out a request for information asking for the climate solutions across the country.And at that time, we also Hal Harvey and the folks at Energy Innovation gave us a kind of set-the-table tutorial to really point us in the direction of what gets the biggest bang for the buck when we're talking about reducing climate pollution and clean energy. And then, before COVID came down, trying to go out across the country to listen, one of the first trips was to coastal South Carolina to look at the impacts of climate on ... and coming from the state of Florida, I understand very well the impacts of climate on a tourism economy and your economic wellbeing. But then out to Colorado, to the National Renewable Energy Lab, where we really tried to bring our Republican colleagues along with us, because durable policy oftentimes has to be bipartisan. And I think looking back on the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the CHIPS Act, everything we've done in the defense bills through the appropriations, they were bipartisan, and they will be more durable. The Inflation Reduction Act, not as bipartisan, but, boy, to have ten years of continuity of clean energy tax credits and energy efficiency across the economy will provide that certainty that our innovators need.David RobertsSo you put out this report in 2020, or not 2020. When did the big report come out? Was that earlier this year?Rep. Kathy CastorIt was 2020, David.David RobertsIt's all a blur.Rep. Kathy CastorI know. It does get blurred. And in fact, we were set to release it in March of 2020, and I remember very well talking to Speaker Pelosi and Leader Hoyer on the floor, and we said, okay, well, we won't be announcing it next week because of the COVID, but we'll be back in a month to do this. And it took a little longer, but it gave us time because the country was grappling with the murder of George Floyd. And we knew that, unlike Waxman-Markey, kind of technical solution to the climate crisis, that people across America were hungry for solutions that are much more cross-cutting and focused on equity and addressing the communities that have disproportionately carried the burden of pollution.So, that gave us time to kind of build up our environmental justice pieces of it. And the other thing that gave us momentum was the youth climate movement at that time. And thank goodness we have environmental advocates across America who know how to organize. And they organized, and we heard them. Our very first hearing was with youth climate leaders, so that they understood that we were truly listening to their pleas for action. And it's important to have those protests they were protesting in the Congress, and they need to continue to press policymakers. But we listened and really turned their passion into policy.David RobertsSo this report comes out in 2020 magisterial report, I would say extremely I wrote it up when it came out. I just thought it's extremely fleshed out in the report. There were 715 policy recommendations, and your recent sort of wrap-up report that just came out says, "Out of those, 436 passed to the House, and then 314 of them were signed into law." So I did the math: that's a 44% hit rate. You got to be feeling pretty good about that. I don't know what typical expert committees in Congress produce, but that seems like a remarkably high success rate for getting recommendations into policy.Were you surprised how much from that initial report, sort of, survived the sausage-making process and sort of came out the other end more or less unmolested?Rep. Kathy CastorYeah. We looked for every opportunity in every bill moving through the Congress to build in some of those policy recommendations into law. And for folks that want to look at that groundbreaking report at climatecrisis.house.gov, you'll see we had legislation in certain areas already drafted that was ready to go, and then we made other recommendations for the need for legislation and to their credit, members across the Congress took us up on our offer. We work very closely with each congressional committee. Almost, just about every committee had a piece of this.David RobertsYeah, I wanted to ask about the ... because the committee didn't have the power to write legislation. It's just an advisory committee, which I think makes it kind of even more remarkable how much of its recommendations became a law. But tell me a little bit about the process, whereby this sort of recommendations that began in an advisory committee made their way to lawmaking committees. What was the sort of process, whereby you kind of diffused your recommendations and tried to get them into things? It seemed to work remarkably well behind the scenes. I didn't read a lot of stories about sort of infighting or backbiting so it seemed like a weirdly rational policy-making process. Tell us a little bit about how these things made their way into policy.Rep. Kathy CastorWell, Speaker Pelosi was very wise to appoint to the Climate Crisis Committee a number of members who are steeped in climate policy and politics. For example, Jared Huffman from California who was an environmental lawyer. He also sits on the Transportation Committee and has kept a very keen eye on those policies. Plus, Sean Casten, a clean energy tech guy from the midwest who understands power markets very well. Suzanne Bonamici of Oregon who is a leader in oceans policy, Ocean Solicitors. Donald McEachin, who recently passed away, was kind of our moral conscience, and had crafted an Environmental Justice For All Act that we recommended, and a lot of the policies in equity sprung from that.So, for example, as Chairman Peter DeFazio and the Congress was crafting the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that we also called the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. We had made recommendations for electrifying the transportation sector and doing it in a way that also built the bridge to workers and labor. And though it looked pretty easy looking back, I'll even say great. But these were very difficult discussions with auto makers, with auto workers, with members of Congress like a Debbie Dingell. But you had a Chairman DeFazio focused on this very important infrastructure law, something that President Biden ran on. So in the end, all of those taking, listening, and hammering out the compromises and policies in advance, we end up with an infrastructure law that includes $62 billion for the Department of Energy over five years to support clean energy transition and infrastructure upgrades, including the $7.5 billion to build the very first nationwide EV charging network.So, that had already been built into the Biden administration's goal of 500,000 public EV chargers, and a future where all Americans can have easy access to EV charging. But it also has those important — none of this happens unless we can build the batteries. So $3 billio…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    The right-wing groups behind renewable energy misinformation Dec 23, 2022
    Show notes

    Independent journalist Michael Thomas did a deep dive into the methods and misinformation used by right-wing groups to rally community opposition to renewable energy projects. In this episode, he discusses what he found and how climate advocates can fight back.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsIt's easy to find stories in the media these days about communities blocking solar, wind, and other clean energy projects. This has prompted an enormous amount of discourse about NIMBYs and the challenges of permitting projects. What's often left out of the discourse — and almost always left out of those stories — is how such community groups receive organizational help and money from billionaire-funded right-wingers. Across the country and the internet, there are hundreds of conservative think tanks, groups, and individuals working to stir up community opposition to renewable energy with misinformation and lies. With virtually no public scrutiny, they have secured state-level policies restricting renewable energy siting in dozens of states.Independent journalist Michael Thomas set about to learn more about these right-wing groups. He joined anti-renewable-energy Facebook groups, combed through the tax filings of various right-wing think tanks, and tried to trace funding sources. He published the results in his own newsletter, Distilled. I'm excited to talk to him about what he found: the groups involved, the tactics they use, the policies they've helped pass, and the best way to fight back.All right then, with no further ado, Michael Thomas. Welcome to Volts. Thank you so much for coming.Michael ThomasThanks for having me. I've been a longtime reader and I'm a fan of the Volts podcast. So really happy to be here.David RobertsSo for some reason you decided to jump in and immerse yourself in the world of anti-renewable-energy people and organizations and communications online. Before we jump into the specifics, what led you to this? Did you get sort of pulled in bit by bit or did you decide to do a project on this at some point?Michael ThomasYeah, it was honestly not that intentional. I was reading a lot of stories over the summer about NIMBY opposition to local solar and wind projects and was following a lot of the discourse and debate over the permitting reform bill. And one story caught my attention that was about a group of residents on the east coast that were trying to block an offshore wind farm and a substation that was going to be put on land to bring the power to land. And it appeared to be just a normal resident group, kind of the classic NIMBY arguments that they were worried about property values or didn't like the site of the wind farm.And then I read this subtle, just one line mention of a think tank that I had heard of, the Caesar Rodney Institute, and this is a part of a much larger group of think tanks that have been funded for years by fossil fuel companies and far-right billionaires. So I started looking into it and discovered that they were very involved in the effort and giving some of these resident groups money to fund lawsuits and support. And so I started to report on that story, and it kind of got me deep into the world of climate misinformation and clean energy misinformation, and I just really became curious about what was going on and if there was a bigger story here, and ended up working on a series of stories over the last month and a half. And I learned a lot in the process.David RobertsYeah, this is a theme I'll return to later, but it really in some sense should not come as a surprise to anyone that this network of anti-renewable energy, "citizen groups" across the country is being funded and coordinated by right-wing operators. Like, of course it is — you know, the Tea Party was — like, we've just learned that over and over again. But it just seems like the pro-renewable energy forces, the pro-climate forces, just kind of sleep on that and just kind of don't pay attention to it, just kind of let it run in the background.So it's a little insane that it's not a bigger point of discussion among green types. So I'm glad you did this and I'm glad we're talking about it. So one of the things you did, God bless you, is wade into Facebook and join a bunch of anti-wind and solar groups — Good Lord — so tell us what messages about renewable energy are they emphasizing in these groups? Like, what are the consistent themes?Michael ThomasYeah, so I clearly know how to have a good time by joining all of these groups and sifting through the posts. So as context, I was doing this reporting on local opposition and learning about some of these think tanks. And I learned in that research that a lot of these resident groups are organizing on Facebook groups and pages. And that makes sense if you look at the demographics of these groups, they tend to be a lot of boomers and a lot of people who are very active on Facebook. And so I joined a few of them at first.And then in the groups there are often reshares of posts and other groups. And so by joining three or four, I quickly started to see that there were way more of these groups than I had initially expected. And in total I ended up finding about 40 groups. I joined all of them and just started scrolling through and looking at the posts and taking screenshots and taking notes and trying to understand how do the people that are in these groups communicate about clean energy? What are the common narratives? Because there are usually between 500 and 2,000 people in these groups, so we're talking about tens of thousands of people in very small communities that are receiving this messaging.So it's I think, really important...David RobertsAnd of course, you know, just to point out the obvious, these are probably the hard core and they take those messages and spread them word of mouth to many, many thousands more, right?Michael ThomasTotally.David RobertsIt's a much larger audience than just the members.Michael ThomasYeah, it's also — I think — really important to note that these tend to be the most civically engaged people. So on TikTok, a video might go viral about how great solar panels are, but if the people watching that video don't show up to the county commission meeting, then it doesn't really matter necessarily. Or it does matter, but it's not as effective. So these are a lot of people who are retired or who are very engaged in their communities. And so what starts on Facebook quickly bleeds into town halls and county commission meetings. And often the discourse is really intense and really emotionally charged.But to answer your question of what sort of themes and messages I saw, there was a range of posts. Some of them were misleading claims about clean energy. Like, an example that I saw a lot of was that solar panels and wind turbines are made using rare earth materials and they're made in China, and China uses a lot of coal. And so the implication is that clean energy is not actually that clean and it's not good for the environment, which, of course, the status quo energy system we have today that relies on fossil fuels, is terrible for the environment, kills millions of people a year, and is wreaking havoc on our environment.And these are solutions that are orders of magnitude better, but certainly not perfect. So they're sort of driving a wedge in some of that. And another similar one is that wind turbines kill birds. Of course, famous argument against wind. So you'll see memes like if this was a bird that had been killed by oil spill, this image would be all over the front page news. And that one spread like wildfire. Like that thing had tens of thousands of shares.David RobertsOh, yes, you get the hypocrisy of the mainstream media in there too. You you're hitting all the buttons.Michael ThomasExactly. And then another that starts to get us into the — from misleading to just lies — is that the wind turbines or solar panels are going to destroy property values. So we're talking about 25%, 50% declines in your property value. And this is, of course, famously shared by Donald Trump in a, I think, RNC meeting a couple of years ago where he says wind turbines cause cancer and if you live near them — BANG — 50% drop in your property values. So...David RobertsLet's just pause to note that Donald Trump is just perfectly squarely in the demographic to be receiving these messages.Michael ThomasTotally. And interestingly, he's been against wind energy for years. I mean, his goes back to like, 2012.David RobertsIt's a golf course, right?Michael ThomasI think in Scotland there was a golf course that they were going to set up wind turbines near, and so he's been spreading this misinformation longer than most people. So that was a really common one — the property value argument. Of course, again, numerous studies have shown that there's either minimal or no impact on property values when clean energy projects go into a community. But there is one London School of Economics study, which is a big name, very reputable source, that found that it dropped by I think it's something like 8% or 10% that gets shared a lot in these communities and by some of these influential anti-clean-energy thought leaders.And important to look at that study and the actual details of it, because if you do, it found that there were only three homes that they looked at. So we're talking about a sample size of three. And again, if you look at much larger sample sizes, there is no evidence that it really hurts property values. And then the last two that I'll share, kind of archetypes of posts I saw, one was the "wind turbine on fire" post.David RobertsYes, I love... They love those "wind turbine on fire" pictures. I see those all the time, even on Twitter.Michael ThomasYeah, and I was really surprised to see these at first. I actually hadn't ever seen an image of a wind turbine on fire or a video. But when I'm scrolling through these groups, they're like every ten posts or something. And I started to think like, oh my God, this stuff is dangerous. Like, if a wind turbine caught fire and it falls down, you can see where it would scare you. So I looked into the data to see how common this was, and of course, I found that the Department of Energy has done a study on this.They found that I think in 2017, there were something like 50,000 wind turbines in the country, and only 40 of them had a safety incident like this. So it's an incredibly rare event that is made to seem very common and therefore really scary to imagine a project like that going up in your community. And then the last one that I'll share, this is kind of a famous anti-wind piece of misinformation, was posts about wind turbine syndrome. This is something that I had never heard of before, and I'm clearly in different communities. And so this is based on a 2006 study that found that there were a number of people living near wind farms that would develop headaches and nausea.And this study spread like crazy. And there have been something like 20 or 25 peer-reviewed studies on this since then, and none of them have been able to replicate the same findings. None of them have found any association between wind turbines and negative health effects.David RobertsI feel like I remember one out of England where they had like, wind turbine syndrome, and then they did like, a community comparison in another community. They went in early and paid residents, they basically paid residents, like, a small percentage of the profits of the wind farm, you know, to buy them in. And there was no wind turbine syndrome at all in the second community.Michael ThomasInteresting.David RobertsWeirdly. A little money can ward off of that particular syndrome, it seems.Michael ThomasSo one interesting thing that I found in some of this research on wind turbine syndrome is that there's one exception that I found where people do start to develop negative health effects, and that's if they've already read information about wind turbine syndrome or about the negative health effects. And so it's actually really sad because a lot of people are posting this stuff and they're reaching a lot of communities that may or may not end up with wind turbines. And there's a great story in BuzzFeed a year or two back that was written by Joseph Bernstein, and he interviewed a lot of people. And in the end, he kind of concludes the story, saying that as he started to talk to more people and he was sleeping in his hotel near the wind farm, he suddenly started to hear it, and he suddenly started to be driven crazy.It's unfortunate because I think a lot of people will probably have that placebo or start to be affected by those — in their community.David RobertsThat is so darkly hilarious. So let's talk a little bit about how these groups organize. I mean, it's not like these random groups of misinformed and irritable boomers know instinctively how to organize, how to communicate, how to get results, how to block things at the state level. So how's — Let's talk a little bit about the people who are helping them. And you did a piece specifically about this guy named John Droz Jr. Tell us a little bit about him. He's helping these groups organize. What is he kind of telling them? What sort of advice is he giving to these groups?Like, presumably he's on the lookout for these groups and in communication with all these groups. What's his message to them?Michael ThomasYeah, so John Droz is certainly one of the most interesting people I've ever reported on. I learned about him as I was wading into the misinformation in some of these communities. I started to see a lot of posts to this guy's website, and I went and looked at the site, and it just has tons of resources on how to block a wind project or a solar project in your community. And they're incredibly effective tools. All, of course, styled in bright red fonts and, like, Comic Sans font and PDFs, but just like, packed with dense, probably really great information if you're trying to kill a project.But stylistically, certainly interesting. So some backstory on John Droz. In 2011, he was a retired real estate investor, spent most of his career buying and flipping real estate in North Carolina. And that year, he learned about this bill that was going through the state legislature, debating what to do about sea level rise that was coming and how to adapt to that as a state. So Droz, who has no background in climate science or climate adaptation or anything related, creates 125 slide PowerPoint titled "Our Sea Level Policy: From Science or Lobbyists?". And he goes through and basically debunks NOAA.And all of these US agencies, science and all these peer-reviewed studies saying none of this is true and the sea level here isn't going to rise and climate change isn't happening and kind of puts in all of the classic climate denial in this thing. And he was incredibly effective at getting the ear of the Republican legislators. So he met with tons of them, gave this presentation to them and was even quoted in the Washington Post in an article. Somehow the Washington Post fact checking team didn't catch this. But there was a story that ran where he cited as a local physicist and as an opponent to this bill.David RobertsKind of what you call a lay physicist maybe.Michael ThomasExactly. So North Carolina eventually decides to vote against this bill. They don't take those climate adaptation measures. And this gets the attention of American Tradition Institute — ATI, which is a climate-denial think tank that became well known when they attacked som…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Induction stoves with batteries built in, and why they matter Dec 14, 2022
    Show notes

    In this episode, scientist Sam Calisch, whose company just introduced an induction stove with a built-in lithium-ion battery, and Wyatt Merrill of DOE, who helped secure funding for the project, talk about the exciting opportunities that stoves with embedded batteries might offer for chefs, consumers, grid operators, and more.(PDF transcript)(Active Transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsIn the last few months, two separate fledgling companies — Impulse and Channing Street Copper — have announced the upcoming release of a new product: an induction stove with a lithium-ion battery built in. This might not seem like a big deal, but it is actually a peek into a whole new world of possibilities.Embedding batteries into appliances opens up all kinds of intriguing opportunities. A stove with a battery can deliver more power at the point of cooking. It can continue working when the power grid goes out. And it can serve as distributed storage to assist in grid stability.To explore the new world of battery-enabled appliances, I contacted two experts. The first, Sam Calisch, helped start Rewiring America, a nonprofit focused on national electrification. He also worked at Otherlab with previous Volts guest Saul Griffith, from which he helped launch Channing Street Copper Company, where he is chief scientist. Channing’s first product is a stove with a battery (for now, there’s a wait list, and they’re only selling in the Bay Area).My second guest is Wyatt Merrill, who works at the Department of Energy's Building Technologies Office, where he manages programs related to building electrification. He was instrumental in helping Otherlab secure more than $2 million in funding from DOE to help launch the Channing stove project. I am excited to talk to Sam and Wyatt about the merits of embedding batteries in stoves, the things battery-enabled stoves allow consumers to do, and the future grid benefits battery-enabled appliances could yield. With no further ado, Sam Calisch and Wyatt Merrilll. Welcome to Volts. Thank you guys so much for coming.Sam CalischGreat to be here.Wyatt MerrillThanks for having us. A long time. First time.David RobertsAwesome. Sam, I want to start with you putting aside the stove for a moment. Take us back to your work. You've been doing work with Otherlab. You've been doing work with Rewiring America. You're big into the whole Electrification of America thing. You're very immersed in that whole business. Tell us how all that work led to this idea and this proposal.Sam CalischGreat question. So, as you say, I've been spending the last few years really going deep on electrification, both from a technology perspective, which is the majority of my background, but also from a policy perspective, and worked really hard on a lot of the stuff that went into the Inflation reduction act. And so about two years ago, my friend Saul Griffith and I, we were working on this book called "Electrify Together" with our friend Laura Fraser, and we're doing a bunch of data analysis for it, looking at trends in cost of the technologies related to electrification. And the thesis of that book is that we kind of have all the technology we need today and we just need to deploy it.And David, you've done a really good job getting this idea out there. I think you said electrification is the main course. Right. Which I really enjoy. And so it's mostly true that we have what we need today. We just need to deploy it. But there's certainly technology developments that we can do that will make it faster, better, cheaper.David RobertsRight.Sam CalischAnd one of the trends that we were really disturbed about was all these costs were coming down. Like, if you read Bloomberg New Energy Finance, you see battery prices approaching $100 a kilowatt hour, all of this. But if you actually looked at what it cost to install those, to put them on your house or something, those prices weren't coming down. And it was mirroring a very familiar story from residential solar, where now the hardware cost of residential solar is really cheap. It's something like $0.26 a watt for the actual hardware, but it's closer to $3 a watt to put it on your house.And we were seeing the same thing happen with batteries and to do what we needed to do. Those trends couldn't continue. And so we started thinking about ways to get around that. And this idea emerged what we now call energy storage equipped appliances or ESE, or if you're feeling cheeky, maybe easy appliances where you can put a battery into an appliance in a factory instead of putting a battery on your house. And by doing that, you can do it really cheaply and really safely when you put it on your house in a sort of a bespoke way.You need to have a site plan. You need to get a permit. You need to have someone come out and do custom electrical work. You have to get it inspected. All these things just add tons and tons of cost. So we said, well, what if instead of doing that, we allow batteries to be installed in appliances in a factory at the cheapest possible cost? And then they kind of come into your house, kind of like a trojan horse inside of the appliance, and all of a sudden you have this battery backup, this ability to use more renewables to power your life, this ability to make it easier to electrify.And you didn't have to do all that custom, expensive work.David RobertsRight. You submitted a proposal to the DOE, right?Sam CalischThat's right. So we kind of wrote this idea up, and fortunately, our proposal found its way to Wyatt and some other folks who thought there was some potential inside of it and recommended it for award.David RobertsThat's a good hand off to Wyatt. So, Wyatt, tell us what you're doing at DOE, kind of what your team is doing and how you found this and why it grabbed you.Wyatt MerrillSure. I'll start with, kind of broadly, my role and the role of the team that I'm part of. I'm in the Building Technologies Office. I'm part of the Emerging Technologies Program in the office. And that office is one of a number of tech offices that comprises energy efficiency and renewable energy, or eer under DOE. So it's org charts on charts. So just to give you an idea of kind of where the project lives in DOE, so broadly, what I work on is R&D across a lot of different technologies. This is one project out of dozens that I manage.David RobertsThese are all related to building technology, though?Wyatt MerrillYes, all related to building technologies. And in particular, our Emerging Technologies Program is focused on research and development and sort of pre-competitive, next generation type technologies. So we're always doing like road mapping and analysis for what's coming next to save energy or to make electrification more viable in this particular proposal came as part of our Benefit FOA in 2020. Was the Benefit 2020? I think it was officially on the street in 2021, and that was a pretty broad funding call for a lot of different technology areas. We funded everything from heat pumps to lighting projects and windows and envelope.And there was one topic that I was in charge of for that FOA.David RobertsTell everybody what a FOA is.Wyatt MerrillSorry. A Funding Opportunity Announcement. So there was one topic that was part of that funding opportunity that was a little bit more on the open ended side. But I really wanted to think hard about certain problems that consumers face when they want to electrify. And one of those things was panel capacity and being able to make the upgrades that you might want to make without having to go through the expensive and often time consuming process of upgrading your panel at a minimum, and sometimes even having to run new service and trench new lines out to homes.And that can be a major constraint for certain people. And so I was really looking for creative ways to kind of sidestep this problem. Putting aside questions around national electric code and other kind of bureaucratic constraints, I was really interested in what are some of the technology solutions out there that might make it easier for people to electrify? And when this proposal came across my desk, it was really exciting to me. Not just because, yes, you can get batteries into the home for the purpose of, as Sam said, load shifting and aligning your demand with renewable supply.That's certainly an application. But the big thing that actually I don't think Sam has mentioned yet is you can plug this into 120 volts outlet, which is for many people, a big savings on not having to run, have an electrician come in and run new circuits into the kitchen, and potentially can avoid those panel upgrades.David RobertsHad you heard of or thought of sort of embedded batteries or what was it? ESE easy appliances? Had you thought of that before you saw the proposal? Because this is one of those things which, when I first saw it, I was like, oh, well, duh. But I didn't think of it until I saw it had you heard of it before you saw the proposal?Wyatt MerrillSo I hadn't heard of it specifically in terms of we should put a battery in an induction stove. But there have been some ongoing discussions and we continue to have ongoing discussions around sort of what does the future of home energy storage look like. And a lot of the focus has been on thermal energy storage. And to the extent that we've talked about batteries, it's usually been those larger stationary batteries. But there's been more and more discussion around, well, what if we thought a little differently about this? What if there was a battery in an appliance or in an outlet even?Or how do we take advantage of devices that already have batteries, even, like battery backup systems in, like, emergency lighting? In principle, you could load shift with those if you wanted to. And so obviously there's a lot that goes into that beyond just the technology, the innovation protocols and interoperability standards and code. But in principle, there's, I think, a lot of different ways that you could imagine energy storage taking root in buildings. And so I don't want to say that we thought that this was definitely going to take off. It's been super successful just in the couple of years that we've had the project going, in my estimation.But I think it's one of a number of ways that we're thinking kind of more creatively about batteries. Of course, the other thing is, if you have one in your garage, how do we take advantage of that? With a bi-directional charger.Sam CalischRight?Wyatt MerrillSo there's all these different kind of scales and opportunities, I think, for battery storage that we need to kind of think more creatively about, in my opinion.David RobertsYeah. And one other thing about the DOE program. Is public education a piece of what you do at all, or you just feel like purely immersed in the tech? Because I just wonder, because currently I think it's like 5% of Americans have induction stoves or something like that, 10%. So they're unfamiliar to a lot of people. Is that part of your job or is that somebody else's problem?Wyatt MerrillIt's not a major part of what I work on. I'm mostly focused on the R&D, but it's absolutely part of the broader effort that we have at the Buildings Office and across EERE, and we have partnerships with businesses through Better Buildings and with states and local governments to try to get some of that messaging out. So there are programs that are more focused. I mentioned I was in Emerging Technologies. We have other programs that are focused more on deployment and workforce development and education, for sure.David RobertsLet's talk about the stove. Let's get into the stove.Sam CalischAwesome.David RobertsFirst of all, I know what an induction stove looks like, and I think probably most people do. It just looks like a stove. Where is the battery in the stove?Sam CalischWell, it's funny you say, you know what induction stoves look like? A lot of coverage of induction stove often uses incorrect pictures. It uses pictures of radiant stoves because they actually glow and are sort of more interesting to look at. But induction stoves are just invisible magic stoves.David RobertsI think they're beautiful, like, all the sleek, smooth surfaces. Like I'd love induction.Sam CalischAbsolutely. And then you take them apart, and they're even more beautiful inside.Wyatt MerrillAnd you paint them yellow. Have you seen the stove at Otherlab?David RobertsOh yeah, yes.Sam CalischSo we we've got our demo unit that we take to farmers markets. We cook people grilled cheese and talk to them about induction. This is our version of the public education campaign. It's painted bright yellow and blue, and you can wheel it around the park, and people kind of look at you funny, and that's the goal.David RobertsBut, like, where is the battery in the stove? Is it near the surface? Is it in the back somewhere? I want to get a physical sense of what's going on.Sam CalischOur battery goes down at the bottom. It's kind of where there's a lower drawer underneath your oven.David RobertsRight.Sam CalischThat's the space that we use for a battery.David RobertsAnd how big is it? Can I see the battery if I own the stove? Or is it embedded somewhere where sort of out of the way?Sam CalischYou could definitely see it. I don't think I'll recommend that people go and mess with their batteries or their copper stove, but we're not hiding anything. It's right there down at the bottom.David RobertsBigger than a shoebox. How big is the better physical?Sam CalischYeah, most of the plan form, like, most of the footprint of the stove and maybe like four or five inches thick slab.David RobertsGot it. So pretty big, and I would imagine fairly heavy too.Sam CalischYeah. So that's one reason to put it down low and also to make it kind of a modular component so you can take it off if you need to move the stove around, et cetera. And it's really important to know. These are sealed packs. They've got a robust metal casing around them. So this is about water ingress. This is about making sure they're temperature controlled. But critically, these are lithium iron phosphate packs, which are different than the lithium-ion chemistries that are in a lot of laptops and cell phones. When we think of lithium battery, and you have the vision of fire that's lithium-ion, lithium iron phosphate is an inherently safe chemistry.It doesn't have thermal runaway. It's also an inherently long lived chemistry. You get much more cycles out of it. So the kind of degrating that you experience with your phone is not a feature of lithium iron phosphate.David RobertsWe just had a pod on this on Volts a mere few days ago. So all our loyal listeners are completely up to date on this on LFP batteries. So they're longer lasting, they have a longer charge cycle. They can charge more times. They don't have thermal runaway. They don't catch on fire. Their only really disadvantage, if you call it that, is that they don't have the energy density of familiar lithium-ion chemistries, but in most applications, they have enough energy density. Two separate questions. One is, how powerful is it vis-à-vis cooking? Right? Like, what does it do for your cooking that you can't get out of a non-battery stove?And then secondarily, is it big or powerful enough to meaningfully play a role in, like, if your power goes out and you need some electricity to run your lights or whatever, does it store enough power to be a meaningful part of kind of a larger whole house backup system?Sam CalischYeah. So this battery is about four kil…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    The state of the lithium-ion battery recycling market Dec 09, 2022
    Show notes

    To get a grasp on the current state of play in the lithium-ion battery recycling market, I contacted Yayoi Sekine, an analyst who works as head of energy storage at Bloomberg NEF. We talked about current demand for battery recycling, the companies meeting that demand, the technologies used to recycle batteries today, and the coming growth in the industry.


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

    Working on the cheapest possible lithium-ion battery Dec 07, 2022
    Show notes

    As production of lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) scales up, costs will fall to the levels of the materials involved. The cheapest material that still works well to hold energy in LIBs is sulfur. Today I talk with someone working on lithium-sulfur batteries about their remaining engineering challenges & enormous market potential.


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

    Life as a traveling musician in the 21st century Nov 18, 2022
    Show notes

    A little something different today on Volts: an interview with my favorite singer-songwriter, Cory Branan. His first album came out 20 years ago and his music has been interwoven into my life ever since. Now he's got a new album out, When I Go I Ghost. We talked about life on the road, songwriting, and what comes next.


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

    Me, interviewed by Brits Nov 14, 2022
    Show notes

    The UK podcast Sustainababble has been around for eight years, but it is shutting down this year. Happily, it had me on as a guest before it turned out the lights -- we discussed the recent US midterms, the right way to think about climate change, & how to keep one's s**t together. Hosts Dave and Oliver were kind enough to allow me to send it out as an episode of Volts, so please enjoy.


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

    Previous 1 30 31 32 33 34 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