Investor Vinod Khosla says focusing on 2030 climate targets is the wrong approach
SEATTLE — Vinod Khosla, the founder of the Silicon Valley venture capital firm Khosla Ventures, says 2040 is the more important goalpost in combating climate change than 2030.
Khosla, who is currently worth more than $5 billion according to Forbes, made the claim at the inaugural Breakthrough Energy Summit in Seattle last week.
“If we try and reduce carbon by 2030, we will be much worse off than if we set the reduction target at 2040,” Khosla told an audience of conference attendees.
That’s because Khosla, who cofounded computer hardware firm Sun Microsystems in 1982 and spent 18 years at venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins, is interested in big bets. Relatedly, in July 2020, Khosla published a Medium post claiming that a dozen ambitious, catalytic leaders would transform the climate space more than a hundred less transformational leaders.
Khosla was on stage with John Doerr, another investor who, like Khosla, invested early in climate tech starting in the early 2000s and then watched as a fair amount of those so-called Clean Tech 1.0 companies flamed out. Collectively, venture capital firms invested more than $25 billion in climate tech companies between 2006 and 2011 and subsequently lost more than half their money, according to a paper from Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The investing bust discouraged investors and the sector all but dried up for a few years.
Vinod Khosla and John Doerr speak on stage at the Breakthrough Energy Summit in Seattle on Tuesday October 18.
CNBC Cat Clifford
Doerr was more optimistic about the potential of iterative change than Khosla. “We need more of the technologies that are economic now deployed now,” Doerr said on stage.
But Khosla doubled down on his viewpoint that 2040 is the more consequential deadline.
“People who think we have the technology is wishful thinking. We can deploy the current technologies. I am not saying slow down, but we need the breakthroughs,” Khosla said. “And if we put a short-term window on all the breakthroughs and focus on 2030, we will be worse off in reality, even though I wish it wasn’t true… What we need and what we are likely to get is different. And 2040 is the right goal to set.
Khosla’s view is iconoclastic in the climate space.
In April 2021, President Joe Biden announced that the United States is aiming to reduce net greenhouse gas pollution by 2030 by 50 to 52 percent from 2005 levels, with the ultimate goal of having a net-zero emissions economy by 2050.
“We’re planning for a both short-term sprint to 2030 that will keep 1.5 degrees Celsius in reach and for a marathon that will take us to the finish line and transform the largest economy in the world into a thriving, innovative, equitable, and just clean-energy engine of net-zero — for a net-zero world,” Biden said in Glasgow, Scotland, in November at the COP26 summit.
The United Nations’ seminal Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released in April states that to have a hope of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, the amount of global warming which has been codified in the Paris Climate Accord, greenhouse gases have to peak before 2025 and be reduced by 43% by 2030. Methane would need to be reduced by a third, the report said.
Why Khosla thinks short-term goals are a mistake
Focusing on “short term goals will force us to deploy suboptimal technology,” Khosla told CNBC.
For an innovation to be meaningfully successful, a technology has to be successful without government subsidies. “Every single technology at scale, has to achieve unsubsidized market competitiveness. And if it doesn’t do that, it’s the wrong technology,” Khosla told CNBC.
Nuclear fusion is one example of the kind of breakthrough technology Khosla considers critical, but which will not be commercialized by 2030. Khosla Ventures has invested in Commonwealth Fusion Systems, a fusion startup which spun out of Massachusetts Institute of Technology and is one of the frontrunners in the fusion space.
Fusion is the way the sun generates power and is the corollary reaction of nuclear fission, which is the way conventional and existing nuclear power reactors generate energy. Fusion has not been replicated at scale on Earth but if it can be, it offers benefits over nuclear fission, including no long-lasting radioactive waste.
Fusion “is an an exciting example,” Khosla told CNBC. “It’s far better than nuclear fission. It’s far better than coal and fossil fuels for sure. But it’s not ready. And we need to get it ready and build it.” (Khosla is not alone: The private sector fusion industry has seen almost $5 billion in private investment, according to the Fusion Industry Association.)
Khosla is 67 years old and he says “it’s likely while I’m still working — and I plan to work for a while, health permitting — will see every coal and natural gas plant in this country replaced with a fusion boiler. Every single one. That’s the goal. Within my working lifetime.”
Another transformative example is deep, advanced geothermal energy, which comes from the natural heat of the earth underground.
“But I’m not interested in today’s geothermal, because it is such a niche — it doesn’t scale,” Khosla told CNBC.
“We focused on the wrong problem, which is take existing geothermal and make it slightly more efficient, instead of saying create 100 times more sites where geothermal can be mined” by drilling much deeper into the earth where there are much hotter temperatures, Khosla said.
For example, Khosla pointed to the work deep geothermal company Quaise is doing. (Khosla was the company’s first financial backer.)
“A super hot rock well, like 500 degrees, will produce 10 times the power of a 200-degree well. And that’s what we need,” Khosla said. “If we can drill deep enough we can get to those temperatures — many, many — all of Western United States could be powered with just geothermal wells, because there’s geothermal everywhere if you go 15 kilometers, 10 miles deep.”
This fall marks the 25th anniversary of the US launch of the first-gen Toyota Prius — a car that, arguably, has done more to more to shift the market away from fossil fuels than any other single vehicle (more on that in a minute). That means that, in many states, you can now get “antique” or “historic” plates for a modern hybrid.
If that sounds appealing to you, here’s what it might cost to keep that OG Prius on the road for many more years to come.
“When the Prius burst into the US market, it was nothing short of a revolution,” reads the breathless Toyota PR copy. “A true trailblazer in the world of hybrid vehicles, (Prius) set the stage for the electrification movement, captivating environmentally conscious drivers with its innovative spirit.”
I think that’s true. And, as for that claim in the header that the Prius did more to shift the US auto market away from fossil fuels than any other single vehicle, ask yourself this: would there even be a Tesla Roadster (much less an “affordable” Model Y) without the Toyota Prius bringing the conversation about electric cars into the mainstream zeitgeist fully eight years earlier?
I spent enough time behind the wheel of a seriously quick and capable US Electricar Consulier to tell you this much: no, there wouldn’t.
They’re still out there
The inspiration for this article was, predictably enough, a first-generation Prius sighting in my own neighborhood. One of more than 52,000 first-generation Priuses (Prii?) sold in the US, this one was green, with a straight body, glossy paint, and the woman driving it turned out to be the car’s original owner. Her Prius – Toyota’s first gas-electric hybrid – continued to give her great service from its 1.5-liter four-cylinder ICE and high-torque electric motor, and the car’s nickel-metal hydride battery pack seemed serviceable enough, though she couldn’t tell me if it was original (her husband took care of all that).
That, along with the possibility of trolling boomers with an antique-plated Prius, led me to ask myself, “What would it really take to keep one of these on the road?”
Even if your Prius spent its entire life in a garage and has only 60,000 miles on the clock, 25 years is still twenty-five years, and rubber doesn’t care about mileage. That’s not just the rubber in the tires, either. The factory struts, bushings, CV joints, belts – even the engine mounts will surely need to be replaced. Ditto for the door and window seals.
Along with a 12V battery, fresh oil and filter change, and a thorough cleaning, that’s the kind of stuff you should budget for on day one. Here’s a quick estimate on what that would run (parts only, of course, because you work on antiques yourself):
- tires – Michelin Energy Saver A/S or Bridgestone Ecopia EP422 Plus in 195/65R15, plan on spending about $150/tire
- shocks and struts – KYB Excel-G, commonly sold in pairs, expect to pay about $200/ea.
- control arm bushings and sway bar links – MOOG control arm bushings and sway bar end links, $25-50/link
- engine and transmission mounts – Dorman or Westar makes replacements at roughly $60–120 each, depending on which mount(s) you need
- CV boots / axle rebuild kits – GSP or SKF kits typically sell $25–75/boot
- Serpentine / accessory belt – Gates makes an OE-quality replacement belt for about $40
This is the big one
You’ll notice, by now, that I’ve avoiding one particular bill. The one repair item that makes anyone looking at an older EV or hybrid think twice – the high-voltage battery. And, if you’ve done any kind of research into the cost of replacement batteries for older electric cars, you already know why that is. I haven’t mentioned it, because it’s not that bad.
I found a new high-voltage replacement battery for a Prius from GreenTec on sale for just $2,050 with a 36-month warranty, or $1,399 for a refurbished unit with a 12-month warranty. That’s not only significantly less than the price of a refurbished transmission for a Toyota Corolla of a similar vintage – it’s probably a lot less than people who still think EVs are new technology would have guessed, too.
Battery costs are going down
The costs of replacing a high-voltage EV battery in older model year cars continues to go down – and that’s true for newer EVs, too. “We’ve seen about $12-18K as an average replacement cost for a Tesla battery,” says KJ Gimbel, founder and CEO of extended EV warranty firm, Xcelerate Auto. “(At that number) we’re confident that we’ll be able to support the vast majority of claims that arise, regardless of the model.”
In other words, if you’re the type of gear head who expresses a midlife crisis by buying a sensible, reliable daily driver, you could do a lot worse than a historic Prius.
That’s my take, anyway – what’s yours? Let us know what you think of the Prius’ 25th American birthday, its role in the EV revolution, and whether or not it’ll ever gain true classic status in the comments section at the bottom of the page.
Original content from Electrek.
If you drive an electric vehicle, make charging at home fast, safe, and convenient with a Level 2 charger installed by Qmerit. As the nation’s most trusted EV charger installation network, Qmerit connects you with licensed, background-checked electricians who specialize in EV charging. You’ll get a quick online estimate, upfront pricing, and installation backed by Qmerit’s nationwide quality guarantee. Their pros follow the highest safety standards so you can plug in at home with total peace of mind.
Ready to charge smarter? Get started today with Qmerit.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Orange EV may not be a household name like Mack or Kenworth, but this small-ish maker of all-electric heavy duty terminal tractors is making a name for itself where it matters: on the job. And this week, the company’s deployed fleet logged its ten millionth hour of operation!
Despite claims from oil-backed “efficiency” groups and fossil-backed hydrogen propaganda to the contrary, battery-powered heavy-duty EVs are proving themselves more than capable of getting the job done today, with millions upon millions upon millions of over-the-road miles as proof. Now, Orange EV is throwing its own data into the mix, with a deployed fleet of HDEVs that’s logged ten million hours of operation across more than 27 million low-speed, extreme duty miles.
“Ten million hours makes one thing clear: Orange EV has taken electric terminal trucks from possible to proven,” said Kurt Neutgens, President and CTO of Orange EV. “Our 340 customers are operating at an average of 97% uptime, with no compromises, proving you can cut costs, boost performance, and improve health and safety all at once.”
What might be more impressive than the miles covered, though, is how few trucks Orange has deployed to get to that number. The company reports that multiple units have already surpassed 30,000 hours of active service while others still are approaching a full decade of daily use — and all of them are still running on their original Orange-designed LFP battery packs.
“Diesel yard trucks rarely achieve this level of durability, but Orange EV delivers with every truck,” adds Neutgens, a former Ford engineer. “Every hour of safe, reliable operation raises the bar for what fleets should expect from their equipment.”
Since delivering its first customer truck back in 2015, Orange EV has deployed more than 1,600 trucks across 40 states and four Canadian provinces. Together, these trucks have eliminated approximately 200,000 tons of carbon dioxide and saved fleets over $100 million (US) in fuel and maintenance costs alone. And, in more than 10 million hours of duty, not a single Orange EV yard truck battery has experienced a thermal event.
Electrek’s Take
Over at The Heavy Equipment Podcast, we had a chance to talk to Orange EV founder Kurt Neutgens ahead of last year’s ACT Expo for clean trucking. On the show (available here), Kurt explained how his experience at Ford helped inform his design ideology, and that the Orange EV was designed to be cost competitive with diesel options, even without subsidies.
Give it a listen, then let us know whether you think the big yard dogs’ success will help debunk the “messy middle” myths or not, in the comments.
SOURCE | IMAGES: Orange EV.
If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
EUNICE, NEW MEXICO — Paul Lorskulsint was a shift manager at a brand new uranium enrichment facility deep in the American Southwest when catastrophe struck Japan in 2011.
A massive tsunami and earthquake had caused a severe accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. Thousands of miles away in Eunice, New Mexico, Lorskulsint turned on the television to make sure his team could witness what was happening across the Pacific Ocean.
Lorskulsint knew the disaster in Japan was a watershed moment for the nuclear industry. The plant where he was leading an operations shift had just opened in 2010, after the European uranium enricher Urenco had spent years building the facility in anticipation of growing demand.
Over the ensuing decade, public support for nuclear power diminshed and a dozen reactors closed in the U.S. as the industry struggled to compete against a flood of cheap natural gas and renewable energy. Demand for the low enriched uranium that fuels nuclear plants dwindled.
“The price of what we sold basically went through the floor,” Lorskulsint, who is now the chief nuclear officer at Urenco USA, told CNBC. Urenco’s long-term contracts with utilities insulated the facility during the downturn, he said, but the price drop put further expansion plans on hold.
Paul Lorskulsint, Chief Nuclear Officer, Urenco USA talks about the uranium enrichment process.
Adam Jeffery | CNBC
Headquartered outside London, Urenco is joinly owned by the British and Dutch goverments and two German utilities. Its New Mexico facility is the only commercial enrichment facility left in the U.S. The last U.S.-owned commercial facility in Paducah, Kentucky, closed in 2013 and its owner the United States Enrichment Corporation went bankrupt during the downturn after Fukushima.
Fourteen years later, the situation has reversed once again. Urenco USA is racing to expand its enrichment capacity. The nuclear industry is gaining momentum as electricity demand in the U.S. is projected to surge from artificial intelligence and the push to expand domestic manufacturing. Doubts persist about whether U.S. power supplies will ramp up quick enough to meet the needs. Increasing uranium enrichment will be a key part of the process, despite the history of past disappointments.
Also, U.S. enriched uranium supplies are at risk. The U.S. still imported 20% of its enriched uranium from Russia in 2024, a legacy of the now shattered hope for friendship between the two countries after the collapse of the Soviet Union and end of the Cold War.
The U.S. will completely ban the import Russian uranium by 2028 in repsonse to Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, leaving a gapping supply deficit just when Washington, the utilities and the tech sector are developing the most ambitious plans in decades to build new reactors.
Nuclear plants like Palisades in Michigan, Crane Clean Energy Center in Pennsylvania and Duane Arnold in Iowa are planning to restart operations this decade after closing years ago. The tech sector is investing hundreds of millions of dollars to bring advanced reactors online in the 2030s to help power their computer warehouses that train and run AI applications.
“It is a pivotal moment, the next five to 10 years for the nuclear industry,” Lorskulsint said. “We’re going to have to have to deliver on time, on schedule and continue to maintain that momentum, which is a significant challenge.”
Employees at Urenco USA receive a cylinder of feed material for enrichment process.
Adam Jeffery | CNBC
Expansion plans
In deeply divided Washington, support for nuclear power is one of the few issues that can still muster some bipartisan support. President Donald Trump wants to quadruple nuclear power by 2050, a significant increase over President Joe Biden’s previous goal to triple it by that date.
The U.S. has only built one new nuclear plant from scratch in the past 30 years, raising doubts about whether such ambitious plans can be realized. But any effort big or small to expand nuclear power in the U.S. will run through Urenco’s facility in New Mexico.
The plant currently has capacity to supply about a third of U.S. demand with $5 billion invested in the facility to date. Urenco is expanding its capacity in New Mexico by 15% through 2027 as utilties replace Russian fuel. It has installed two new centrifuge cascades for enrichment this year. But Urenco’s expansion alone won’t fill the Russian supply gap, Lorskulsint said.
“Our competitors will have to expand in order to make sure that as a whole the industry is still supplied,” he said. “We’re building quickly as we can to make sure that the the industry is not short handed.”
As Russian fuel is banned from the U.S., the Trump administration is pushing for 10 new large reactors to start construction this decade. Alphabet is investing in about 2 gigawatts of new nuclear, Amazon has committed to more than 5 gigawatts, and Meta wants to bring up to 4 gigawatts online.
Urenco USA Facilities in Eunice, New Mexico.
Adam Jeffery | CNBC
The industry is worried about the supply gap, Lorskulsint said, but filling it “is not an insurmountable task.”
Urenco USA is a candidate to receive a contract from the Department of Energy to produce more low-enriched uranium, part of U.S. efforts to standup a domestic nuclear supply chain. The contract would allow the New Mexico facility to expand further with the construction of a fourth production building.
Urenco’s competitors are also seeking support from the Energy Department to build out U.S. enrichment capacity. France’s Orano is planning to build a facility in Oak Ridge, Tennesse, with operations potentially starting in the 2030s.
Publicly traded Centrus has a facility in Piketon, Ohio, where it plans to produce low-enriched uranium, but it hasn’t yet started commercial operations. Centrus is the successor company to the United States Enrichment Corporation that went bankrupt in 2013.
Centrus stock has gained more than 400% this year as investors bet on a growing demand for enriched uranium due to U.S. plans to expand nuclear power.
Paul Lorskulsint, Chief Nuclear Officer, Urenco USA talks about the uranium enrichment process next to centrifuge cascade.
Adam Jeffery | CNBC
Supply chain bottlenecks
But enrichment is just one stage in a long supply chain that will be stretched by growing demand. Uranium delivered to the U.S is often mined in Canada and it is then converted into intermediate state called uranium hexafluoride that is the feedstock for enrichment.
The feedstock is spun in Urenco’s centrifuges to increase the presence of the isotope Uranium-235 to 5%, the level needed for most nuclear plants. The enriched uranium is then shipped to fuel fabricators that manufacture the pellets that go into reactors in power plants.
U.S. nuclear plants are facing cumulative supply gap of 184 million pounds of uranium through 2034, according to the Energy Information Administration.The biggest bottleneck right now for Urenco is the conversion of uranium into the feedstock for enrichment, Lorskulsint said. There are only three facilities in the Western world located in Canada, France and Illinois that convert uranium into feedstock.
“Every portion of the supply chain is going to have to expand, it’s not just about enrichment,” Lorskulsint said. “We need more of everything but conversion right now is the bottleneck.”
The nuclear supply chain may not be the biggest challenge in the end, the executive said. The ageing U.S. electric grid could prove to be the real constraint on building new nuclear due how long it takes to complete upgrades, he said. While this could slow Urenco down, it won’t stop the expansion, he said.
“We came here when the market demanded it,” Lorskulsint said of Urenco’s investment in the U.S. “We were here when the market didn’t demand it. And we are now expanding to make sure that we can still support as much as the market needs from us.”
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment12 months agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024