u/swarrenlawrence

Grist: "Alaska’s $44 billion bet on natural gas." Since his first day in office, Trump has focused on “unleashing Alaska’s extraordinary resource potential.” Proponents like Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy extoll the economic benefits the pipeline will bring to Alaska and the energy security it will provide to allies. 

"But the cost is staggering: Official estimates put it at $44 billion, though independent analysts suggest it could top $70 billion." North Slope of Alaska holds about 35 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, making it one of the largest known sources in the US. "But with the project’s steep price tag and no firm commitments from buyers, oil majors like ConocoPhillips and Exxon Mobil have backed away over the last decade." 

Glenfarne Group, a privately held energy firm that has never operated a liquified natural gas export terminal, stepped in last year. Incredibly, "shortly after Trump was elected, state officials handed the company a 75 percent stake in the project in a NO-BID DEAL, the details of which have been kept even from the legislature." Glenfarne will lead the project’s development + financing efforts and, if the company decides to move forward, oversee construction + operation of the pipeline, gas treatment plant, + export terminal. 

"Though the state has not paid Glenfarne directly, it has poured at least $600 million into planning, design, and permitting—and initially floated paying Glenfarne an additional $50 million for its costs, even if the company decided to walk away." The pipeline’s backers are already eyeing additional federal support, including $30 billion in loan guarantees. 

“Every taxpayer should be furious that the federal government is chasing this project,” said Cooper Freeman, the state director for The Center for Biological Diversity, which is suing the federal government over the proposed pipeline’s threat to endangered species. 

I didn't even have to look up how to spell boondoggle. Which is not a breed of dog. Or is it?

AAAS: “‘Light in a bottle’ liquid can harvest and store energy from multiple sources.” Engineers + materials scientists have created a new liquid that can store energy it harvests from sources including light by physically reassembling into a gel. “In this jellylike state, the material acts a bit like a battery, retaining energy for months at a time that can then be released on demand when exposed to oxygen.” Reported last week in Chem, this proof-of-concept research hints at a future in which one single metal-free material can harvest, store, and use energy. 

“If proved out, the liquid could provide new ways to store and harness electricity or create semiconductors for devices where traditional metallic materials may have drawbacks, such as medical implants.” Researchers led by Samuel Stupp, a chemist at Northwestern University, designed a molecule made of two components: an amino naphthalene aromatic unit (ANI), which responds to light, and a methyl viologen (MV), which can store electrons. “The material starts out as a yellow liquid, but when light strikes it, the molecule’s ANI component absorbs energy and donates electrons to its MV component.” When the gel is exposed to oxygen, it disassembles back into a liquid, releasing the electrons. 

“What’s more, the material doesn’t just harvest energy from light: It can also store energy from electricity, chemical fuel, and even x-rays.” To demonstrate real-world utility, he says, it would need to pass all sorts of tests that rechargeable batteries go through today, such as evaluating its power output and stability over many charge-discharge cycles. “This material product of basic science could mark a welcome break from the past century of energy technologies: an era dominated by substances made from metals and inorganic materials.”

At this juncture, I can only dimly contemplate the future utility of this new form of energy storage in our menagerie of battery technologies, so vital for ‘electrification of everything.’

CleanTechnica: "Canadian Solar Swoops In To Troll Trump On Solar Power." Canadian Solar is the name of a leading global PV manufacturer headquartered north of our border, and they are not taking Trump’s war on solar power sitting down. Late last year the company took steps to shield its US factories from the President’s on-again, off-again trade wars, and now they are just weeks away from shipping new high-performance solar modules to eager buyers throughout the world—including, presumably, the US.

Not for rooftop solar though, as 'the company’s new Tunnel Oxide Passivated Contact or TOPCon 3.0 high-power-density photovoltaic module is aimed at the utility-scale solar power plant market.' 

"While Trump’s war on solar is among the factors putting a crimp on the small scale, residential solar industry of late, high-demand energy stakeholders are still gobbling up the clean kilowatts at a rapidfire pace." To ease its entry, "Canadian Solar [sized the modules at] the 2382 × 1134 × 30 millimeter industry-wide standard, coupled with an impressive output of up to 670 Wp."

Among other advantages cited by Canadian Solar, the new module is designed for bifaciality, meaning that it can absorb and convert light hitting both sides of the panel. "Bifacial panels can be set in an upright position rather than the more familiar angled alignment, enabling them to double as fencing on farmland." Canadian Solar also notes that the new module is purpose-built to function efficiently in hotter climates, which is another opportunity springboard for solar developers.

Spectacularly, "its hot-climate design contributes to a low degradation rate, arriving at an output of more than 88.85% even after 30 years of operation." As for its US factories, in its Q1 report this year Canadian Solar highlighted the forthcoming expansion of its existing 5-gigawatt solar module factory in Texas, reaching 10 GW by years-end. 

Besides evading the slings + arrows of a deranged president—a vertical orientation of modules makes them proof against hailstorms.

CleanTechnica: "Climate Solutions Need To Pass Three Tests Before They Deserve Policy Or Capital." A lot of transition analysis gives too much credit to technologies that can be made to work and not enough scrutiny to whether they matter. "The difference shows up across carbon capture hubs, synthetic fuel claims, small modular reactor schedules, cement decarbonization pathways, aviation fuel projections, ammonia shipping forecasts, grid storage proposals, critical-mineral panic stories, and hydrogen strategies." A process can work in a lab, run in a pilot, attract a grant, or look credible in a diagram and still fail as a useful pathway for climate, capital, or policy.

"The first test is technical, but not in the weak sense of asking whether something can be made to happen once, because many things can be made to happen once with enough money, attention, engineering talent, and tolerance for inconvenience." The harder question is whether the proposed solution holds together as science, engineering, operating system, and cost stack at the scale being claimed. 

"The second test is competition." A pathway that survives its own engineering and cost stack still has to beat the alternatives after the full chain is counted. "Carbon dioxide captured at a stack is not carbon dioxide permanently stored." Ammonia at a production plant is not safe marine fuel available at the right port, on the right route, with trained crew, emergency response, insurance, and regulation. 

"The third test is adoption." Even a technically coherent pathway that beats alternatives on paper has to pass through institutions, firms, workers, customers, regulators, voters, insurers, standards bodies, procurement systems, and supply chains. "It is where capital cost, downtime, permitting, safety rules, maintenance contracts, training, warranties, insurance, financing, and organizational competence determine whether deployment is likely." 

Governments + investors can support learning without pretending that every first-of-a-kind project is a future pillar of the energy system. As the British would say, 'hear, hear.'

CanaryMedia: “Rooftop solar is in for a tough few years in the US.” Trump + GOP lawmakers removed the beneficial tax credits for solar arrays on homes + businesses, with predictable results. “Nearly one year ago,…Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law and eliminated a 30% federal tax credit for rooftop solar systems…[and] battery backup systems, which homeowners increasingly pair with photovoltaics.” This was a major blow to an industry that was already struggling because of high interest rates, tariffs, and [an idiotic] seismic policy change in California, the state that has led the nation on rooftop solar adoption.”

People who buy rooftop solar systems are mainly looking for relief from high utility bills, and solar installations are already more expensive in the U.S. than in many other countries. “Residential solar costs $2.58 per watt, on average, compared with around $1 per watt in Australia, a global leader in the space.” 

Still, there are some glimmers of hope. “In California, the residential solar market is set to rebound this year and grow by 17% from last year.” Meanwhile, Florida, the No. 2 state [Texas is No. 1] for rooftop solar, is set to see its installations grow by a staggering 62% in 2026. “Some combination of ample sun, high awareness of solar, and rising utility bills has enabled the clean energy tech to keep growing even though a significant slice of homeowners already have their own panels.” 

Meanwhile, although its potential is much more modest, a far smaller and more accessible form of residential solar is sweeping the nation: balcony solar. “They can’t deliver the same wattage as a classic rooftop setup, but they’re relatively cheap and available to renters—not just homeowners.”

There is a realistic possibility that balcony solar will raise awareness, make homegrown solar available to renters, + this parallel boom may help offset the bust for rooftop arrays.

MauiNow: "San Andreas fault reaches highest stress level in 1,000 years." Recent research led by University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa scientists found tectonic stress along the San Andreas and San Jacinto fault systems in Southern California has reached—in some places exceeded—the highest levels seen in the past 1,000 years. "Study, recently published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, has direct implications for seismic hazard assessments in one of the most densely populated and infrastructure-critical corridors in the United States."

“Our results show that stress levels on multiple fault segments are now at or above the highest values seen in the past millennium and that the region may be capable of a large through-going rupture involving both fault systems,” said lead author Liliane Burkhard. “We also found that Cajon Pass may act as an ‘earthquake gate’: sometimes blocking large ruptures from crossing between the faults, and sometimes allowing them to pass through and involve both systems in a single event." 

Researchers built a physics-based computer model that simulates how stress builds up and releases along the southern San Andreas + San Jacinto fault systems, including at Cajon Pass, which is a critical junction between the two fault systems. "Scientists fed the model a 1,000-year record of earthquake history of the region reconstructed from geological evidence, such as radiocarbon dating of displaced sediments and tree-ring records." 

"Right now, with stress at historically high levels across the region and more than 160 years elapsed since the last major rupture, the system is in a critically loaded state." Clearly, focus must be on retrofitting structural braces into homes, schools, other public buildings, bridges of all types, + training of first-responders. 

Here's a solid recommendation: Have shoes at the bedside so that you won't need to step barefoot on broken glass in the dark. How's that for a visualization?

ColumbiaClimate: "New Research Indicates That in the Future, Trees May Store Less Carbon Than Expected." During photosynthesis, plants absorb carbon dioxide [CO2] from the air and then use sunlight to power the conversion of CO2 and water into sugar, with oxygen released to atmosphere while the carbon stays in the plant. A new study of oak trees, published in the journal Science Advances, found that even as they photosynthesize late into the year, their growth stops by mid-summer. Much of the long-term carbon storage that forests provide depends on trees converting the carbon they absorb through photosynthesis into new wood. "Many researchers have predicted that rising atmospheric CO2 levels will enhance photosynthesis and stimulate tree growth, putting some of that planet-warming carbon into long-term storage inside wood."

However, the observed decoupling of photosynthesis from growth suggests that increased carbon uptake does not necessarily translate into greater wood production. "Instead, some of the absorbed carbon may be used to produce foliage or used in short-lived metabolic processes rather than being locked away long term, reducing the amount of carbon stored in forests compared with previous expectations." Some of the carbon goes into the woody biomass of trunk, branches + roots. "The rest goes into foliage and fruits and is temporarily stored as starch, or is converted into compounds that are released into the soil to feed microbial communities, make nutrients available for uptake and defend against pathogens."

Carbon stored in woody biomass may take decades, centuries or even millennia—depending on conditions—to re-enter the atmosphere, thus constitutes a carbon sink. “The moment you have dry and hot conditions, growth activity stops pretty instantly while photosynthesis seems to continue at a slightly decreased rate.”

Tree planting is not a silver bullet, rather a pellet of silver buckshot.

Oilprice.com: "India’s Solar Capacity Set for 22% Annual Growth Through 2035." The headline says it [almost] all. The consultancy estimates that India’s total power demand will rise by 6% every year over the next decade, “driven by economic growth, rising urbanisation, manufacturing expansion and increasing electrification across sectors,” Solar growth will vastly outpace overall power demand as power-intensive data centers will drive an unbelievable 22% compound annual growth rate (CAGR) in solar energy capacity from 2026 to 2035.

“Given solar capacity expansion in our base case, the share of solar shall rise from 28% in FY26 to 61% by FY35 and to 65% in the bull case." 

India expects to nearly quadruple its solar power capacity and triple wind power-generating assets within ten years, according to the new Generation Adequacy Plan published by the country’s Central Electricity Authority. They project "to have a total of 509 gigawatts (GW) of solar power capacity installed by the end of the 2035-2036 fiscal year, up from 140 GW installed solar PV capacity as of January 2026." The fact that India's electricity grid is expanding at a slower pace than the boom in renewable energy installations, is leading to an increased share of clean energy curtailments + threatening to slow the solar and wind boom in the world’s most populous country. 

Okay, class, in 2 words—what are the solutions to this problem of curtailment—which wastes some of all that free sunshine. Good job, nearly all of you got it without looking. 

Storage. 

Transmission.

CanaryMedia: “Industry can dodge fuel shocks by electrifying. What’s the holdup?” As the Iran war spikes fossil fuel prices, Oxford University experts demystify electric tech’s vast potential to decarbonize industry—and how policy can help. “First, the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 spiked liquefied natural gas prices, affecting manufacturers around the world and even forcing factory shutdowns in Pakistan and Bangladesh.” More recently [plus in ongoing fashion in spite of pronouncements], the U.S.-Israel–led war in Iran has choked the flow of oil + gas through the Strait of Hormuz, driving up costs yet again for plants in Europe, Asia, + beyond.

“Existing and emerging technologies—such as huge heat pumps, thermal batteries, electric-resistance heaters, induction tech, and plasma-based systems—that are able to run on an increasingly clean grid have vast potential to reduce companies’ fossil-fuel exposure.”

“The industries that electrify fastest will stop being victims of the next crisis,” said Jan Rosenow, professor of energy and climate policy at Oxford and co-author of the report. ​“Every unit of fossil fuel eliminated from an industrial process is a unit that can no longer be held hostage by a pipeline shutdown, a strait closure, or a price spike.” Ancillary benefits are obvious: ‘slashing planet-warming emissions, clearing smoggy skies, and saving lives in communities downwind of factories.’ Even among people who do see the urgency of decarbonizing a sector that accounts for nearly a third of global CO2 emissions, the majority assume the solution is not electrons…but molecules we can burn: biomass, biogas, + clean hydrogen. 

Roughly 85% of industrial energy demand could be electrified by 2050—and upwards of 90% in the long term—with existing and emerging electric tech. Certainly no one is naive enough to think there will not be energy shocks in the future. And I suspect the near future.

TulaneUniversity: "Global mangrove forests rebound, offering hopeful sign for climate and coastal resilience." Mangrove forests, once considered one of the world’s most threatened coastal ecosystems, are showing signs of recovery worldwide, according to a new study from Tulane University researchers that finds decades of losses largely offset by regrowth and expansion. "The study, based on four decades of satellite data and published in the journal Science, finds that mangrove forests worldwide are no longer in net decline and are now growing overall."

After decades of loss driven by deforestation and coastal development, mangroves are expanding in many regions, largely through natural regeneration and expansion into newly formed coastal areas. "Louisiana has also seen an overall increase in mangroves over the past four decades, underscoring the broader regional shift. "Findings suggest a more hopeful trajectory for these ecosystems, which play a critical role in protecting coastlines, supporting fisheries and storing carbon." 

“After decades of loss, we’re finally seeing a global turning point for mangroves,” said Zhen Zhang, a postdoctoral scholar at Tulane University School of Science and Engineering and lead author. 'Mangrove forests declined through much of the late 20th century, losing nearly 2,900 square kilometers between the 1980s and 2010, but during the past 16 years, gains have outpaced losses.' By 2023, mangrove areas had rebounded, resulting in only about a 1% net decline over the entire four-decade period—a much smaller loss than previously estimated. "The recovery is being driven by a combination of restoration efforts and natural processes." 

The broader concern however is that sea level rise [SLR] may outpace the restoration, leaving them to drown from high water + intense storms. My wife + I recall with great affection a guided trip into the mangroves of El Salvador several years ago.

Grist: "For first time, Americans are getting more of their electricity from solar than coal." I won't bury the lede this time: "Solar provides more than twice the share of electricity it did five years ago." Neck + neck you say? "While gas and nuclear plants still lead the country’s energy mix, solar contributed 12.8% of the nation’s electrons in May, according to an analysis of government data by Ember, an energy think tank." Coal, meanwhile, provided just 12.2%. And can you guess which is heading up + which is heading down from here?

"Just five years ago, solar was less than half of its current levels and coal was at 20%" The turnaround comes even as political headwinds have shifted against renewable energy. “From Texas to California, markets across the U.S. are betting on solar to meet rising power needs.” 

It was only last summer that Congress passed the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” which rolled back enormous swaths of former President Joe Biden’s landmark climate change legislation, the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. And Trump has actively sought to hinder renewable energy development, even offering to pay at least one oil company $1 billion to stop building its offshore wind projects [currently being thwarted by litigation]. 

"The latest electricity data comes the same month that the Trump administration announced $700 million in funding for investments in the coal industry." Ironically, it included money for what would be the country’s first new coal-fired power plants in 13 years—sourced from funds previously dedicated to reducing the country’s dependence on fossil fuels, not deepening it. “Spending $700 million to bail out the coal industry is like throwing a lifeline to a ship that has already sunk,” said Lena Moffitt, executive director of the environmental group Evergreen Action. And Patrick Drupp, director of climate policy at the Sierra Club, agrees reducing dependence of legacy fossil, “that's good for people’s wallets, it’s good for their health, it’s good for the planet.”

The steady downward trend over the last several years suggests that even all the president’s men might not be able to put the coal industry back together again. Smart money is on the solar side of the bet.