Connect with us

Published

on

A detail of the pilot carbon dioxide (CO2) capture plant is pictured at Amager Bakke waste incinerator in Copenhagen on June 24, 2021.
IDA GULDBAEK ARENTSEN | AFP | Getty Images

LONDON — Carbon capture technology is often held up as a source of hope in reducing global greenhouse gas emissions, featuring prominently in countries’ climate plans as well as the net-zero strategies of some of the world’s largest oil and gas companies.

The topic is divisive, however, with climate researchers, campaigners and environmental advocacy groups arguing that carbon capture technology is not a solution.

The world is confronting a climate emergency, and policymakers and chief executives are under intensifying pressure to deliver on promises made as part of the landmark Paris Agreement. The accord, ratified by nearly 200 countries in 2015, is seen as critically important in averting the worst effects of climate change.

Carbon capture, utilization and storage — often shortened to carbon capture technology or CCUS — refers to a suite of technologies designed to capture carbon dioxide from high-emitting activities such as power generation or industrial facilities, that use either fossil fuels or biomass for fuel.

The captured carbon dioxide, which can also be captured directly from the atmosphere, is then compressed and transported via pipeline, ship, rail or truck to be used in a range of applications or permanently stored underground.

There are a number of reasons why carbon capture is a false climate solution. The first and most fundamental of those reasons is that it is not necessary.
Carroll Muffett
Chief executive at the Center for International Environmental Law

Proponents of these technologies believe they can play an important and diverse role in meeting global energy and climate goals.

Carroll Muffett, chief executive at the non-profit Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), is not one of them. “There are a number of reasons why carbon capture is a false climate solution. The first and most fundamental of those reasons is that it is not necessary,” he told CNBC via telephone.

“If you look at the history of carbon capture and storage, what you see is nearly two decades of a solution in search of a cure.”

‘Unproven scalability’

Some CCS and CCUS facilities have been operating since the 1970s and 1980s when natural gas processing plants in south Texas began capturing carbon dioxide and supplying the emissions to local oil producers for enhanced oil recovery operations. The first one was set up in 1972.

It wasn’t until several years later that carbon capture technology would be studied for climate mitigation purposes. Now, there are 21 large-scale CCUS commercial projects in operation worldwide and plans for at least 40 new commercial facilities have been announced in recent years.

A report published by CIEL earlier this month concluded that these technologies are not only “ineffective, uneconomic and unsafe,” but they also prolong reliance on the fossil fuel industry and distract from a much-needed pivot to renewable alternatives.

Employees near the CO2 compressor site at the Hawiyah Natural Gas Liquids Recovery Plant, operated by Saudi Aramco, in Hawiyah, Saudi Arabia, on Monday, June 28, 2021. The Hawiyah Natural Gas Liquids Recovery Plant is designed to process 4.0 billion standard cubic feet per day of sweet gas as pilot project for Carbon Capture Technology (CCUS) to prove the possibility of capturing C02 and lowering emissions from such facilities.
Maya Siddiqui | Bloomberg | Getty Images

“The unproven scalability of CCS technologies and their prohibitive costs mean they cannot play any significant role in the rapid reduction of global emissions necessary to limit warming to 1.5°C,” the CIEL said, referring to a key aim of the Paris Agreement to limit a rise in the earth’s temperature to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

“Despite the existence of the technology for decades and billions of dollars in government subsidies to date, deployment of CCS at scale still faces insurmountable challenges of feasibility, effectiveness, and expense,” the CIEL added.

Earlier this year, campaigners at Global Witness and Friends of the Earth Scotland commissioned climate scientists at the Tyndall Centre in Manchester, U.K. to assess the role fossil fuel-related CCS plays in the energy system.

The peer-reviewed study found that carbon capture and storage technologies still face numerous barriers to short-term deployment and, even if these could be overcome, the technology “would only start to deliver too late.” Researchers also found that it was incapable of operating with zero emissions, constituted a distraction from the rapid growth of renewable energy “and has a history of over-promising and under-delivering.”

In short, the study said reliance on CCS is “not a solution” to confronting the world’s climate challenge.

Carbon capture is ‘a rarity’ in Washington

Not everyone is convinced by these arguments, however. The International Energy Agency, an influential intergovernmental group, says that while carbon capture technology has not yet lived up to its promise, it can still offer “significant strategic value” in the transition to net zero.

“CCUS is a really important part of this portfolio of technologies that we consider,” Samantha McCulloch, head of CCUS technology at the IEA, told CNBC via video call.

The IEA has identified four key strategic roles for the technologies: Addressing emissions from energy infrastructure, tackling hard-to-abate emissions from heavy industry (cement, steel and chemicals, among others), natural gas-based hydrogen production and carbon removal.

For these four reasons, McCulloch said it would be fair to describe CCUS as a climate solution.

At present, CCUS facilities around the world have the capacity to capture more than 40 million metric tons of carbon dioxide each year. The IEA believes plans to build many more facilities could double the level of CO2 captured globally.

“It is contributing but not to a scale that we envisage will be needed in terms of a net-zero pathway,” McCulloch said. “The encouraging news, I think, is that there has been very significant momentum behind the technology in recent years and this is really reflecting that without CCUS it will be very difficult — if not impossible — to meet net-zero goals.”

Electricity pylons are seen in front of the cooling towers of the coal-fired power station of German energy giant RWE in Weisweiler, western Germany, on January 26, 2021.
INA FASSBENDER | AFP | Getty Images

Meanwhile, the American Petroleum Institute, the largest U.S. oil and gas trade lobby group, believes the future looks bright for carbon capture and utilization storage.

The group noted in a blog post on July 2 that CCUS was a rare example of something that is liked by “just about everyone” in Washington – Democrats, Republicans and Independents alike.

Where do we go from here?

“Frankly, tackling climate change is not the same as trying to bring the fossil fuel industry to its knees,” Bob Ward, policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change at the London School of Economics, told CNBC via telephone.

“If the fossil fuel companies can help us get to net zero then why wouldn’t we want them to do that? I think too many environmental groups have conflated their dislike of oil and gas companies with the challenge of tackling climate change.”

When asked why carbon capture and storage schemes should be in countries’ climate plans given the criticism they receive, Ward replied: “Because if we are going to get to net zero by 2050, we have to throw every technology at this problem … People who argue that you can start ruling out technologies because you don’t like them are those who, I think, haven’t understood the scale of the challenge we face.”

The CIEL’s Muffett rejected this suggestion, saying proponents of carbon capture technologies are increasingly reliant on this kind of “all of the above” argument. “The answer to it is surprisingly easy: It is that we have a decade to cut global emissions in half and we have just a few decades to eliminate them entirely,” Muffett said.

“If on any reasonable examination of CCS, it costs massive amounts of money but doesn’t actually reduce emissions in any meaningful way, and further entrenches fossil fuel infrastructure, the question is: In what way is that contributing to the solution as opposed to diverting time and energy and resources away from the solutions that will work?”

Continue Reading

Environment

Mercedes-Benz unveils the new CLA Shooting Brake EV with impressive range

Published

on

By

Mercedes-Benz unveils the new CLA Shooting Brake EV with impressive range

The new CLA Shooting Brake is the first electric Mercedes vehicle available as an estate. It’s more spacious, more capable, and more high-tech than ever.

Meet the new Mercedes CLA Shooting Brake EV

Mercedes introduced the new CLA Shooting Brake on Tuesday, its first electric estate car. The Shooting Brake arrives as the second EV from the luxury brand’s new entry-level family of vehicles.

The electric wagon takes the best of the new CLA, which was revealed just a few weeks ago, and adds more space and capability.

It’s also bigger than the current CLA Shooting Brake, offering a more spacious interior. The new EV measures 4,723 mm in length, or 35 mm longer than the outgoing model.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

With an extended wheelbase of 2,790 mm (+61 mm), the electric version offers 14 mm more headroom and 11 mm more legroom in the front. Rear passengers gain 7 mm of headroom but lose 6 mm of legroom compared to the current model.

Mercedes-Benz-CLA-Shooting-Brake-EV
Mercedes-Benz CLA Shooting Brake models (Source: Mercedes-Benz)

Boot space is 455 L, which is 50 L more than the CLA sedan, but 30 L less than the outgoing Shooting Brake. However, it does include an added Frunk (front trunk) for an extra 101 L of storage space.

With all seats folded, overall storage space is 1,290 L. It also comes with standard roof rails, which Mercedes claims can easily fit surfboards or bicycles with a 75 kg (165 lbs) load capacity.

Mercedes-Benz-CLA-Shooting-Brake-EV
Mercedes-Benz CLA Shooting Brake with EQ Technology (Source: Mercedes-Benz)

Inside, the new Shooting Brake is nearly identical to the CLA Sedan. It features the new Mercedes-Benz Operating System (MB.OS) with its fourth-gen infotainment.

The setup includes a 14″ infotainment and 10.25″ driver display screens. An extra 14″ passenger screen is available. A trim piece with star-pattern graphics replaces it if not. All three screens are powered by the latest-gen chips and graphics from Unity Game Engine.

Mercedes-Benz-CLA-Shooting-Brake-EV
Mercedes-Benz CLA Shooting Brake EV interior (Source: Mercedes-Benz)

Powered by the new Mercedes-Benz Modular Architecture and an 85 kWh battery, the new Shooting Brake EV offers up to 473 miles (761 km) WLTP range.

It will be available in single and dual-motor powertrains. The base CLA 250+ Shooting Brake has 268 hp (200 kW) output and a WLTP range of up to 473 miles (761 km). Meanwhile, the dual-motor CLA 350 4MATIC Shooting Brake has combined 349 hp (260 kW) and a range of up to 454 miles (730 km).

Mercedes-Benz-CLA-Shooting-Brake-EV
Mercedes-Benz CLA Shooting Brake EV interior (Source: Mercedes-Benz)

Based on its 800V architecture, the new electric estate can add 193 miles (310 km) WLTP driving range within 10 minutes. Mercedes said that should be plenty to get from Geneva to Milan or Berlin to Hamburg.

Mercedes will introduce new EV variants in early 2026, followed by a 1.5 L hybrid model. Prices will be revealed closer to launch, but it’s expected to start slightly higher than the current model. The current CLA Shooting Brake starts at around €40,000 ($46,500) in Europe.

Following the new CLA and CLA Shooting Brake, Mercedes-Benz plans to launch two SUVs. Check back soon for more info on the upcoming lineup.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

U.S. moving fast to secure access to critical minerals to counter China’s dominance of market, Pentagon says

Published

on

By

U.S. moving fast to secure access to critical minerals to counter China's dominance of market, Pentagon says

MP Materials CEO on deal with the Defense Department

The Pentagon is taking immediate action to boost critical mineral production in the U.S. and counter China’s dominance of the supply chain for rare earth magnets, a defense official told CNBC on Tuesday.

The Defense Department last week agreed to buy a direct equity stake in MP Materials, which will make the U.S. government the miner’s largest shareholder. MP operates the only rare earth mine in the U.S. located at Mountain Pass, California, and a magnet plant in Forth Worth, Texas.

When asked whether the Pentagon is considering similar investments in other U.S. mining companies, the defense official said it is looking at opportunities to strengthen domestic critical mineral production.

“Rebuilding the critical minerals and rare earth magnet sectors of the U.S. industrial base won’t happen overnight, but DoD is taking immediate action to streamline processes and identify opportunities to strengthen critical minerals production,” official said in a statement.

Rare earths are used in weapons such as the F-35 warplane, drones and submarines among other other military platforms. The U.S. was almost entirely dependent on foreign countries for rare earths in 2023, with China representing about 70% of imports, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

MP Materials CEO James Litinsky told CNBC last week that he views the public-private partnership with the Defense Department as a model for other companies in industries that are important for national security but struggle to compete against the state-backed enterprises in China.

“I’d like to think that this is sort of the first, it’s a model,” Litinsky told CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street” on Thursday. “We have to deliver at MP and show that this is an incredible route to go. But it’s a new way forward to accelerate free markets, to get the supply chain on shore that we want.”

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said in April that the U.S. government was looking at taking direct equity stakes in critical mineral and rare earth miners to break China’s dominance. The Trump administration is also looking at stockpiling critical minerals and creating a sovereign risk insurance fund to protect companies investments’ in federally approved projects, Burgum said at an energy conference in Oklahoma City.

The Pentagon makes long-term investments in mining, processing and refining critical minerals, the defense official told CNBC. It has invested $540 million so far to support a critical mineral and rare earth supply chain in the U.S. and allied nations, the official said.

“That is significant, and DoD will continue to such efforts in accordance with congressional appropriations and statutory authorities,” the official said.

Catch up on the latest energy news from CNBC Pro:

Continue Reading

Environment

Crypto super PAC Fairshake reports $141 million war chest

Published

on

By

Crypto super PAC Fairshake reports 1 million war chest

Jakub Porzycki | Nurphoto | Getty Images

Fairshake, the cryptocurrency industry’s most powerful political action committee, announced Tuesday that it now holds more than $141 million in cash on hand, underscoring the sector’s growing influence as Congress takes up landmark legislation this week.

The total, which includes liquid assets like crypto, stock, and cash, reflects a surge of donations from digital asset executives and firms, including a fresh $25 million from Coinbase.

Fairshake and its two affiliated PACs — Defend American Jobs and Protect Progress — have raised $109 million since Election Day in 2024 and $52 million during just the first half of this year.

“We are building an aggressive, targeted strategy for next year to ensure that pro-crypto voices are heard in key races across the country,” said spokesperson Josh Vlasto.

Ethereum succeeded beyond anyone's expectations, says network co-founder Vitalik Buterin at EthCC

The announcement lands in the middle of what lawmakers are calling “Crypto Week” on Capitol Hill, as the House begins deliberations on a trio of long-awaited bills that would define how digital assets are regulated.

The legislation includes the dividing of oversight, setting new stablecoin rules, and a bill banning the creation of a central bank digital currency.

The crypto industry is no longer just lobbying for survival, it is shaping the political landscape. Fairshake saw nearly every candidate it backed in 2024 win their race.

“We stuck to our core strategy from Day 1,” Fairshake previously told CNBC. “We supported pro-crypto candidates and opposed those who played politics with jobs and innovation, and won.”

WATCH: How crypto and fintech may perform under the second Trump administration

How crypto and fintech may perform under the second Trump administration

Continue Reading

Trending