Search
Close this search box.

Getting climate, energy & environment news right.

Subscribe

Conservatives have been vocal about our climate for years. Those voices won’t be ignored any longer.

[searchandfilter id="17558"]

The Economist reports on how big tech is coping with AI’s power needs.

The C3 Take
  • Data centers and cloud computing from Amazon, Meta, and Microsoft used 90 terawatt-hours (twh) of electricity in 2022, as much as Colombia.
  • To satiate their growing energy needs, tech companies are increasingly turning to clean forms of energy.
  • Amazon, for instance, has bought a data center that runs on nuclear power and Google is exploring advanced geothermal usage.
  • AI’s power demands will be met by private sector innovation and regulatory modernization.

“Google and Microsoft have also teamed up with Nucor, a giant American operator of steel mini-mills, which consume lots of electricity. In March the trio announced that they will aggregate demand and jointly offer contracts to clean-energy projects, both early-stage commercial ones and entirely novel ‘first-of-a-kind’ ventures. The idea is to guarantee custom for developers of promising technologies like long-duration energy storage, clean hydrogen, next-generation geothermal and nuclear energy.”

Read the full article here.

Big tech’s great AI power grab

Source

Corbin Hiar of E&E News reports on a new DAC plant that is set to open.

The C3 Take
  • The “Mammoth” direct air capture (DAC) plant in Iceland will open this week.
  • The plant was designed by Climeworks will be able to permanently remove up to 36,000 metric tons of CO2 from the atmosphere annually, 9 times more than their current largest plant.
  • The U.S. has also taken steps to accelerate direct air capture with Occidental currently constructing a DAC plant in West Texas that will able to pull 500,000 tons of CO2 from the atmosphere.

“Occidental and a separate coalition that includes Climeworks have also been selected by the Department of Energy to develop two direct air capture hubs capable of eventually removing 1 million metric tons of carbon per year. Those projects are planned for southern Texas and southeastern Louisiana and backed by roughly $1 billion in federal grants.”

Read the full article here.

New direct air capture plant poised for record removals

Source

Diana Olick of CNBC reports on a startup that is reducing food waste.

The C3 Take
  • Food waste is a major problem in the U.S., with about one-third of food produced ending up in landfills, contributing to greenhouse gas emissions.
  • The startup Hungryroot uses AI to curate grocery deliveries tailored to each customer’s preferences and needs based on detailed questions.
  • Their model allows them to send only the precise amounts of foods the customer will use for meal kits and recipes, significantly reducing food waste compared to traditional grocery shopping.
  • The company claims their processes lead to 80% less food waste at their facilities versus traditional supermarkets.

“The company can reduce its own waste as well. If it determines that a user has no preference between broccoli and Brussels sprouts, and the company happens to have more broccoli in its warehouse, that’s what they’ll recommend.”

Read the full article here.

Food startup Hungryroot uses AI to reduce waste, a major climate offender

Source

With election season in full swing, the stage has been set for a second Biden-Trump showdown. For many voters, November now represents a choice between two disappointing, polarizing extremes – including on the issues of energy and climate. 

Support for climate action is high, but willingness to pay astronomical costs is not. The average American wants common-sense and effective climate action, meaningful and pragmatic environmentalism that won’t break the bank for taxpayers. But, as of now, no one on the ballot this fall represents these priorities. Voters deserve a candidate who prioritizes energy affordability and commits to environmental progress.

>>>READ: Florida’s Lab Meat Ban and the Perils of Synthetic Conservatism

President Biden has prioritized climate, but through irresponsibly colossal spending.  With the Inflation Reduction Act, the Biden administration funneled billions into a transition from gas-powered to electric vehicles, the subsidies for which could cost taxpayers upwards of $1.8 trillion. Yet the administration has failed to meaningfully modernize the regulatory system that strangles clean energy projects in red tape, including accessing the critical minerals necessary for sustainable innovations like electric vehicles. Biden’s administration revoked the Keystone XL Pipeline’s permit, paused new liquefied natural gas export projects, and slow-walked oil and gas leasing on federal lands. 

While some of Biden’s more common-sense acts, like expanding applied research and development, and most recently, easing permitting for geothermal extraction on federal lands, have been moves in the right direction, his policies have largely spurned the climate realism, job creation, and lower fuel costs associated with an all-of-the-above energy approach.

President Biden’s predecessor was also deeply irresponsible on climate rhetoric, describing the issue as “nonexistent” and a “hoax.” Words matter, particularly when it comes to actualizing common-sense climate policy. Trump’s denialist language discourages conservatives from constructively engaging on climate, which hamstrings durable progress and hampers American leadership on the issue globally. In the year 2024, denialism is profoundly out of step with voters’ priorities. It is not a winning strategy for any serious candidate – and it certainly isn’t a winning strategy for our country and world. 

The economy or the climate? Why not both?

Subscribe for ideas that support the environment and the people. 

Americans across the political spectrum want to see something done about climate change. According to a CNN poll conducted this past December, 73% of adults in the country feel the government should take steps to reduce domestic emissions. This sweeping majority includes broad support from Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike. In fact, January 2024 research from the American Conservation Coalition found that, among young conservatives, 69% consider climate change an important issue, 76% want environmental conservation to be a priority, and 76% again support a shift toward clean energy. 

At the same time, climate change largely fails to compete with traditional pocketbook issues like the economy, energy costs, and taxes. One poll from the University of Chicago found that 62% of Americans would not even be willing to pay $1 a month to address climate change. Even among youth voters ranking the importance of major issues, climate change places 13 out of 16, while inflation is in first place.

Denialism is not a winning policy. But neither is radicalism. A Pew survey from the summer of 2023 found that only about one-third of Americans believe that the U.S. should phase out fossil fuels completely and as soon as possible, with a majority instead supporting a varied, inclusive energy profile. They support climate action on the corporate and individual levels, not through top-down government mandates.

Climate is becoming a growing part of every party’s strategy. But the “how” of the strategy is critically important. Embracing free market policies that boost productivity and wages and lower energy bills and emissions will be the hallmark of any successful pragmatic energy and climate platform. 

>>>READ: New Polling Shows Where Young Conservatives Stand On The Environment

While climate might not be the absolute make-or-break issue of the 2024 election, it should still be a priority for any candidate interested in accurately and fully representing the interests of the American public. And in a tight race where every issue – and every point – counts, adapting climate policy around voters’ priorities could ultimately represent a significant electoral advantage come fall. Indeed, the issues of cost of living, inflation, and climate and energy policy are inextricably intertwined – and will be top of mind for voters this fall.

Americans are tired of being forced to choose between inaction and extremism. With months remaining before ballots are cast, there is still time for 2024 to be a turning point away from the all-or-nothing climate narrative that hurts not only voters but also the candidates jockeying for their support. A new electoral path forward is possible – but it’s up to candidates to recognize the opportunity climate offers them. 

Nadia Suben is a member of the American Conservation Coalition Action (ACC Action), as well as the founder and former president of the organization’s New York City branch. She is a student at Indiana University.

Why Candidates Should Step Up on Climate

Source

Lisa Stiffler of GeekWire reports on a biodegradable plastics startup.

The C3 Take
  • Vancouver-based Bioform Technologies, a startup making biodegradable plastics from wood pulp, has raised up to $5 million from Brazil’s Suzano Ventures, the investment arm of a major pulp manufacturer.
  • Bioform’s bioplastic product can replace single-use plastics made from fossil fuels, generating 80% less carbon dioxide emissions, and can be recycled as paper or composted after use.
  • The startup, which aims to begin commercial production by 2027, is leveraging technology developed by University of British Columbia professors to produce sustainable alternatives to single-use plastics at competitive costs.

“The startup analyzed its climate impacts and found its product generates 80% less carbon dioxide compared to traditional plastic at commercial scale. The manufacturing process can use existing pulp mill machinery to make rolls of plastic.”

Read the full article here.

This startup just raised funding to turn wood pulp into sustainable, biodegradable plastics

Source

Jeff St. John of Canary Media reports on the clean energy backlog.

The C3 Take
  • While investors and companies are embracing clean energy, regulatory bottlenecks have prevented these power sources from reaching the grid.
  • As of December 2023 there were more than 2,600 gigawatts worth of clean power projects undergoing the lengthy and onerous permitting process to connect to the grid (which takes years to complete).
  • To alleviate the bottlenecks, the U.S. must pass meaningful reforms to the permitting process to make it easier to build transmission lines and all other energy projects.

T”o get a better sense of how much clean energy and battery capacity might be ready to meet grid needs in the near future, LBNL’s report examined where projects stood in terms of timing and status. Rand noted that nearly half the projects now in interconnection queues have proposed to come online by the end of 2026, adding up to nearly 1,300 gigawatts of capacity — an amount equivalent to the entire existing U.S. grid.”

Read more here.

The growing clean energy backlog, in five charts

Source

This article was originally published by ClearPath.

The electric grid is on the cusp of a huge expansion. With a massive amount of new energy demand on the horizon, grid operators are already bracing for huge amounts of growth. The sudden increase in 5-year load growth expectations is driven by a surge in new data centers supercharged by artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency, increased American manufacturing and industrial activity, and new projections for hydrogen fuel plants, batteries and electrified transportation. 

>>>READ: California’s Rail Regulation Is Bad Economic and Environmental Policy

The U.S. will need to build as many as 13,800 new energy projects by 2030 — an average of 7 projects per day — to provide enough clean, reliable, and affordable energy. Given the need to build more energy infrastructure of all types, it is right to question why the Biden Administration’s Phase II National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) rulemaking is filled with new requirements that make it more difficult to get projects permitted. The U.S. needs to deploy more clean energy infrastructure projects, not fewer, at a faster pace and scale than the status quo.

Instead of revising the proposed rule to account for challenges ahead, the Biden Administration’s final NEPA permitting rule increases uncertainty, adds new requirements to permitting reviews that move the process in the wrong direction and ultimately increases emissions through permitting delays. The Biden Administration’s voluntary actions prioritize a political agenda rather than build upon the newly enacted changes to NEPA.

The economy or the climate? Why not both?

Subscribe for ideas that support the environment and the people. 

The most favorable parts of the rulemaking actions to implement permitting reforms championed by House Republicans, including key provisions passed in H.R.1, the Lower Energy Costs Act and codified on a bipartisan basis in the Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA). But beyond those new reforms that Congress mandated, the Administration is actively self-sabotaging its climate goals in this proposed rule. 

Among the reforms championed by House Republicans are new standards to keep reviews on track, including deadlines and page limits. Federal agencies have begun to use a new provision from the FRA allowing them to adopt categorical exclusions from other agencies, as the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) recently did for geothermal exploration activities on federal lands. Beyond BLM, a broad range of agencies from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and NASA to the Department of Energy (DOE) have also used these new authorities to adopt categorical exclusions to accelerate reviews for high-impact projects.

>>>READ: A Welcome Step to Ease Geothermal Permitting on Federal Land

CEQ notes that it received many comments opposing this new categorical exclusion authority, with at least one going as far as to call it a “disastrous policy.” While CEQ was obligated to enforce the law enacted by Congress, CEQ still managed to limit its scope to exclude categorical exclusions that were enacted legislatively rather than through an administrative process. CEQ should have sought to maximize these new bipartisan provisions, not undermine them. 

Failing to maximize new authorities will only increase delays in the years ahead as more energy projects enter the queue. Absent change, these permitting delays are bound to get worse under the status quo as clean energy projects face the same delay tactics and legal risks that can jeopardize financing. 

When the proposed rule was released last August, ClearPath identified five additional missteps from CEQ’s NEPA guidance that actually make the Administration’s emissions reduction goals more difficult. These five issues remain in the final rule announced this week. 

  1. Defaults to the status quo that is making permitting worse 
  2. Creates more confusion and uncertainty for project developers
  3. Allows agencies to base project reviews on unrelated alternatives
  4. Increases bureaucracy and red tape by removing jurisdictional boundaries
  5. Invites more litigation to oppose project permits

Unfortunately, there is little in the final rule focused on fast approvals for projects with limited environmental impacts, reducing litigation risks after permits have been issued, or fundamentally getting more projects built without bureaucratic delay. If anything, the final rule invites more legal challenges to projects before they can even get off the ground.

There are many opportunities to improve the permitting process. Judicial review reforms remain an unaddressed opportunity. As this rule injects new uncertainty and increases litigation risk, Congress could step in to fill the gap to provide more certainty for projects looking to move forward to meet America’s record energy demands.

Matthew Mailloux is a Program Manager of Clean Energy and Permitting at ClearPath

New NEPA Rules Will Delay Permits and Increase Emissions

Source

When Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill into law banning the sale and distribution of synthetic meat in Florida he illustrated the perils of synthetic conservatism –the notion that using state power to limit individual freedom is wrong unless it generates applause from your tribe. 

In a statement, DeSantis said, “Today, Florida is fighting back against the global elite’s plan to force the world to eat meat grown in a petri dish or bugs to achieve their authoritarian goals. Our administration will continue to focus on investing in our local farmers and ranchers, and we will save our beef.”

>>>READ: Lab Grown Algae Could Play a Pivotal Role in Reducing Global Emissions

Florida Commissioner of Agriculture Wilton Simpson amplified DeSantis’ remarks: “Lab-grown meat is a disgraceful attempt to undermine our proud traditions and prosperity, and is in direct opposition to authentic agriculture … We must protect our incredible farmers and the integrity of American agriculture.” 

As a farmer, I’m committed to protecting the integrity of American agriculture. But “coercion for me but not for thee” is not a winning strategy. In fact, this approach will make all farms less secure. 

Chef Andrew Gruel offered a wise take on X:

So, let’s start with education. In 2024, synthetic meat isn’t remotely close to threatening American agriculture or beef ranchers but some companies are indeed guilty of the sin of wanting to compete in a free market. 

The economy or the climate? Why not both?

Subscribe for ideas that support the environment and the people. 

One example is Aleph Farms, headquartered in Rehovot, Israel. CEO Didier Toubia has adopted a Tesla strategy to growth by first creating a premium product like steak to drive acceptance of synthetic meat more broadly. 

Toubia told Time Magazine, “We need to emotionally connect with consumers if we want to drive acceptance. Starting at the higher end is a way to position our product to make it more appealing.”

Toubia knows he has to win over people like me to be successful. I spent the first half of my life in Kansas City where I acquired a taste for world-class steaks and barbeque. Now that I have my own farm, I regularly cook with fire using a variety of implements, including hand-split cheery wood from fallen trees on my land (I soak it for ribs and pulled pork). I’ve also strongly criticized grilling bans and made the environmental case for cooking with fire. 

The technical challenge Toubia is tackling is the architecture of meat itself, which is exquisite and complex. Real meat flavor doesn’t come from muscle cells that can be grown in a lab but from fat, connective tissue and the vascular network. Ribeye steaks are popular because of their marbling (I recently fed six people with a 3-pound Tomahawk bone-in ribeye). Melt in your mouth pulled pork comes from collagen dissolution, and the bark on pulled pork comes from melting fat merging with caramelized sugars in barbeque sauce. Fall-off-the-bone ribs are the result of contracting meat pulling away from melting connective tissue that connects muscle to bone. Labs are a long, long way from replicating these experiences even with 3D bioprinters. 

AIeph Farms promotes their Aleph Cuts on their site and boasts of their “thin steaks with thick flavor.” Consider me impressed by Toubia’s vision and passion but not his product. So, as a citizen, I’m left with a choice. I can work to criminalize Toubia’s entrepreneurial vision, or I can opt to not buy his product. I choose the latter. 

Now, some consumers will be so racked with guilt from eating meat from real cows that they’ll settle for an inferior product. The way to reach that constituency isn’t by banning lab meat but by educating them about the merits of emissions reduction policies (like those in our Climate and Freedom Agenda) that will do vastly more to help the planet.

>>>READ: 2024: The Year of Freedom Conservatism

By embracing coercion over choice on lab meat, Florida is also weakening the right’s best arguments against climate authoritarianism and muddying other critically important fronts in the woke wars. Our arguments against top-down conformity and coercion in areas like DEI, ESG and de-banking lose their potency when we use state power to impose our preferred norms. 

Real conservatism is an uncompromising defense of classical liberalism – individual liberty and free markets – against top-down, command and control policies, and coercive conformity. Synthetic conservatism defends these principles as long as it generates tribal applause. Real conservatism welcomes competition. Synthetic conservatism bans competition. Real conservatism celebrates liberty. Synthetic conservatism rationalizes coercion. 

Other states should take note. Instead of using coercion, they should embrace choice and show guilt-ridden consumers there’s a better, smarter, and faster way to reduce emissions. 

Florida’s Lab Meat Ban and the Perils of Synthetic Conservatism

Source

This article originally appeared in the Cleveland Plain Dealer.

Lawmakers are showing they can make bipartisan agreements on foreign policy. Now, they should turn to an important bipartisan domestic issue. 

Heralded as the biggest piece of climate change legislation in history, the Inflation Reduction Act signed into law nearly two years ago included a wave of tax subsidies for clean energy. But it’s what Congress and President Biden didn’t do in 2022 that will crush innovative energy startups. 

>>>READ: Three Ways Immediate Expensing Helps the Environment

For roughly 70 years, businesses could fully and immediately deduct expenses in research and development. Under IRS Section 174, the provision allowed deductions for everything from investments in new equipment to scientists and entrepreneurs. As part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, companies must capitalize and amortize those expenses over a five-year period beginning in 2022. Cumbersome depreciation schedules create opportunities for tax accountants but serve as a tax hike for American companies – one that disproportionately penalizes small businesses and startups. 

The economy or the climate? Why not both?

Subscribe for ideas that support the environment and the people. 

If Congress fails to restore immediate expensing, it will curtail innovation, diminish American economic competitiveness, and make it more challenging to meet our growing energy needs and environmental ambitions. The projected reduction in R&D spending threatens to end America’s leadership in emerging technologies and provide a pathway for economic competitors such as China to surpass America in critical industries such as semiconductors, clean energy, advanced materials, and more.

Several of the job losses would be at Petra Power in Northeast Ohio. A manufacturer of solid oxide fuel cells, Petra Power’s novel technology converts fossil fuels to electricity with up to 90 percent greater efficiency than comparable combustion engines in a package that is significantly smaller and lighter. It hopes to be able to offer high-paying, long-lasting manufacturing jobs. Its technology can also use hydrogen and other clean fuels to produce electricity. This technology is an ideal candidate to cost competitively reduce emissions now while contributing to future deployment of clean fuels such as hydrogen.

>>>READ: Immediate Expensing Will Kickstart Innovation

Petra Power has been working on a federal project to develop its technology for the Defense Department. Yet it also has dealings with another federal bureau: the IRS. With the conclusion of the 2023 tax season, Petra Power faces significant costs in amortizing R&D expenses over five years. This creates a very large taxable income base when, in reality, Petra Power has no taxable income. Without immediate action the impacts of IRS Section 174 could threaten to nullify the efforts of Petra Power, the investments of the DoD, and the hard work of many state and regional economic development agencies in Northeast Ohio by creating an untenable tax burden on Petra Power that does not reflect the true income of the business.

This case is not unique. These changes in IRS guidance threaten to eradicate most research and development activities undertaken within the United States. Some larger companies may be able to withstand the tax burden imposed by Section 174. However for all small- and medium-sized business this guidance creates an environment that at a minimum strongly disincentivizes R&D and at most makes R&D work completely impossible.

If the United States wants to maintain its status as a world-leader in scientific discovery, innovation, and technological progress, Congress and the Biden administration must restore immediate expensing for R&D investments.  As it stands, the U.S. is now only one of two developed countries in the world to require amortization of R&D expenses. Meanwhile China’s tax policy provides a super deduction, allowing a company to immediately deduct twice its R&D spending. 

Congress and the Biden administration should make immediate expensing a permanent fixture of the tax code. Such permanence signals a commitment to fostering a culture of innovation that empowers businesses like Petra Power to invest in transformative technologies for a more prosperous and cleaner future. 

Nick Loris is the Vice President of Policy for C3 Solutions and Dr. Aaron Goodman is the Co-founder and CEO of Petra Power, LLC

R&D tax change is impeding American innovation

Source

The oceans play a crucial role in tempering the effects of climate change by serving as a critical carbon sink, absorbing vast amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2). Algae is an invaluable contributor to this process as its responsible for one-fifth of the global carbon cycle. These photosynthetic plant-like organisms are up to 50 times more efficient at trapping CO2 than terrestrial flora per unit area and grow exceptionally fast under the right conditions. These features are attracting entrepreneurs, companies, and investors who want to accelerate the plants’ natural carbon sequestration functions. 

>>>READ: Seaweed Could Change Packaging As We Know It

A key player in this market is Brilliant Planet, a UK-based climate technology company. The startup aims to harness the power of marine algae to remove emissions by the gigaton, and then sell its service within the broader carbon marketplace. Brilliant Planet relies on a mix of modern engineering coupled with the carbon-capturing capacities of some of the world’s most ancient aquatic organisms.

The startup essentially replicates the natural algal coastal blooms that sustain marine ecosystems –– albeit on land. Adam Taylor, CEO of Brilliant Planet, claims that the company has devised a method to exponentially cultivate the organisms, commencing in a laboratory beaker and culminating in 12,000-square-meter pools of locally sourced seawater. Taylor asserts that the process emulates natural algae bloom, with a single test tube of algae proliferating to occupy 16 of these extensive pools—equivalent to 77 Olympic-sized swimming pools—in just 30 days. 

The economy or the climate? Why not both?

Subscribe for ideas that support the environment and the people. 

The first step to emulating and enhancing this natural process is to grow an algal “starter” batch under highly controlled environmental conditions in the lab. In Brilliant Planet’s case, this means growing the monoculture in its seven-acre pilot site in Akhfennir, Morocco, a tranquil coastal desert town. 

After its incubation in the lab, the algae is transitioned to a semi-enclosed greenhouse, where it can grow exponentially while adapting to the local environment. The organisms are then transferred to expansive outdoor ponds, where nearly 90% of the total growth takes place.  

With the help of wind power, Brilliant Planet pumps nutrient-rich seawater into these open-air ponds, nurturing the microalgae until they reach harvest readiness.

Back to the lab. Advanced filtration technology enables Brilliant Planet to harvest a concentrated seaweed ‘slurry,’ while the filtered seawater is safely reintegrated into the ocean after undergoing de-acidification. Finally, the algae biomass is solar-dried and permanently buried underground, a process that securely locks away the carbon for millennia. Thanks to its high salt content and other properties that counteract degradation, the carbon-loaded material maintains exceptional stability over time. 

The entire process is powered by seawater and sunlight, enabling Brilliant Plant to capitalize on a highly efficient, nature-driven system with minimal input year-round. Additionally, the algae is readily verifiable and quantifiable; scientists simply weigh the biomass prior to burial and determine the amount of CO2 removed via physical sampling. Post-burial, high-tech sensors ensure there is no decay. Brilliant Planet is also working with independent verifiers like Isometric to develop a data reporting platform accessible to the public so that third-party buyers can be confident about the quality of the credits they buy. 

“Algae are the unsung heroes of carbon removal,” Taylor explains. “Algae are inherently more efficient carbon removal machines than terrestrial plants as they don’t need to waste biological resources on building a supporting infrastructure of trunks, roots and branches –– their entire surface area is dedicated to photosynthesis.”

“Seasonal algae blooms can transform thousands of square kilometers of ocean into very high productivity systems in just a few days,” Taylor notes. 

Brilliant Planet says that its facilities capture 30 times more carbon per year than an equivalent area of forest, all without encroaching on arable land (the company has pinpointed approximately 500,000 square kilometers of space around the globe where it can host its algae pools). And by allowing photosynthesis to do the hard work of carbon removal, Brilliant Planet says its energy and overhead costs are kept to a minimum. 

Compared to other carbon dioxide removal (CDR) strategies on the market like Direct Air Capture, Taylor says his company can sequester CO2 for around one-tenth of the price. 

>>>READ: Can this Green Aviation Startup Deliver Truly Clean Flying?

The sustainability startup hopes to sell its service for around $100 a ton in the voluntary carbon market. Brilliant Planet already has a few major corporate buyers looking to offset their emissions in the ranks, including global financial services firm Block. Block has commissioned Brilliant Planet to eliminate 1,500 tons of carbon by 2027 at its upcoming demonstration site in southern Morocco.

Since its founding in 2013, the algaculture firm has secured a remarkable $26.7 million in funding through high-profile rounds, with notable contributions from investors such as Toyota Ventures and  USV. In its most recent Series A round in 2022, the company successfully raised $12 million in capital. Looking ahead, additional funding is anticipated this year, coinciding with the commencement of construction for a 30-hectare demonstration facility in Morocco, scheduled to begin in the second quarter.

Buoyed by a bullish carbon market, corporate demand for high-quality carbon credits continues to surge. A global carbon removal strategy that leverages the CO2-absorbing potential of algae with the reliability and quantifiability of man-made systems could be key to solving the climate challenge.

Nathalie Voit is a freelance content creator and a graduate of the University of Florida. She is an alumni of The Heritage Foundation’s Young Leaders Program.  

Lab Grown Algae Could Play a Pivotal Role in Reducing Global Emissions

Source

C3 is a project of C3 Solutions

Phone

Email

Discover

More Information

Donate

Copyright © 2020 Conservative Coalition for Climate Solutions

Subscribe to our exclusive email designed for conservatives who care about climate.

Help us promote free market solutions for climate change.

5 Incredible Ways Economic Freedom Helps the Planet.

Sign up for our newsletter now to get the full list right in your inbox.

Thank you for signing up

Help us promote sensible solutions for both planet and prosperity.

Make a donation

Download Now

Download

The Left’s Top 10 Climate Denials

Download Now

nikola-majksner-hXNGeAFOgT4-unsplash