Issue #11: January 22, 2025
Ready to tackle climate change?
Dive into the world of Carbon Capture with insights from
Prof. Kevin Whitty at the University of Utah
What’s Inside This Issue?
- Concepts and Terminology: Discover concepts and terminology introduced in the featured article.
- Featured Article: Join us as we explore the amazing world of carbon with Prof. Whitty and discover how these technologies will change our lives.
- About the Interviewee: Discover how Prof. Whitty’s journey is helping impact the world.
- Hands-On Activities: Engage in a fun activity to learn more about carbon in your life.
- Carbon Reduction and Environmental Equity and Sustainability: Discover how reducing carbon in our air can help create a cleaner, greener, and fairer world for everyone.
- Setting the Stage for Your Future: Learn about high school courses, college degrees, and specialized programs that can turn your interest in carbon capture into a rewarding career!
- Glossary: Recap key concepts and terminology from the featured article.
1. Concepts and Terminology
- Carbon dioxide – A naturally occurring gas in Earth’s atmosphere. It is a minor but critical component of the air for life. Though it is not toxic, it also plays a significant role as a greenhouse gas, trapping heat and influencing the planet’s climate even at low concentrations.
- Concentration – The amount of something in a mixture of many things. It’s often expressed as a percentage of the total amount you’re considering, whether the total is as little as a small container, or as big as all the air surrounding Earth.
- Efficiency – This is a number, usually expressed as a decimal number from 0 to 1, or equivalently as a percentage, showing how much you get out of a certain process compared to how much you put into it. Higher is better and means “more efficient.”
- Chemical reactor – A machine that causes two or more ingredients (“reactants”) to join together chemically to make new substances (“products”).
2. Featured Article
All Hands on Deck! Managing Carbon in Our Lives!
Dr. Paul Dennig, Writer
With Insights from Prof. Kevin Whitty of the University of Utah
You’ve probably been hearing a lot about greenhouse gases (GHGs) lately. Carbon dioxide, a molecule in the air we breathe, is one of the most common ones. Do you know there’s a link between it and our wild weather and forest fires? In this article, we interview Prof. Kevin Whitty, a leading expert in the field of carbon dioxide capture. He’s going to tell us about an exciting method he and his colleagues are working on to grab carbon out of the air and store it safely, all while making the heat and electricity we need. Let’s see how we can improve our future!
What’s Up with Carbon?
Let’s first set the stage for our interview with Prof. Whitty. Here’s a lightning round of a few questions and answers!
💡 Where do we find carbon?
✅ All living creatures on Earth are carbon based. You are nearly 20% carbon atoms! On the other hand, carbon is relatively scarce in the sky, ground, and sea, except for where it’s found concentrated in certain areas underground.
💡 How much carbon is in the air, and how does it get there?
✅ Carbon is a light and versatile element, and makes its way into gases in our air. Some gas comes from decaying plant matter and forest fires. More comes from humans burning fuels: solids (like wood or coal), liquids (like gasoline or jet fuel), and gases (like natural gas or propane). That’s how we get much of our heat, electric power, and vehicle mobility. The most common gas released by burning is carbon dioxide, CO2. It’s very dilute in the air, and it’s concentration is slowly rising. In a million molecules of air today, roughly 420 of them would be CO2.[1]
💡 Then why do we care about such a small amount of CO2 in the air?
✅ Carbon dioxide is amazingly good at trapping heat like a blanket, close to the Earth’s surface. It’s not the only greenhouse gas (GHG), but it is the most prevalent. For most of human history, there has been a teeny amount in the air, around 0.03%, and that has helped regulate Earth’s temperatures, so that we don’t all freeze! But today we have more than that, and the extra CO2 makes a big difference. The gas mixes in, floats, and spreads out in the air over Earth, each molecule of it lasting for more than a human lifetime. Since we’re making it faster than it decays, it accumulates. The concentration level is like a thermostat control for Earth. Dial the concentration of CO2 up and the whole place gets hotter. Dial it down and the world gets cooler. The present level causes topsy-turvy weather, more forest fires, more hurricanes and winds, more rain and drought, melting of ice near the north and south poles, rising sea levels, and big migrations of animals (including humans). This is why we all should want to do something about it.
What Can We Do to Reduce Carbon Dioxide?
Fixing the problem of increasing CO2 concentration is truly an “all-hands-on-deck situation.”[2] It has taken humans over 200 years of burning fossil fuels to reach our present CO2 level. Therefore, it is a situation that will take us all working together for a while to get back to a sustainable level.
There are several “all-hands-on-deck” approaches to CO2 reduction. For example, we can:
🧩Reduce consumption: This is something we can all do, which is to release less carbon by buying fewer goods (reduce), reuse others, and recycle what’s left over. Work from home, when possible. Live in a smaller home. Using mass transit, like a bus or subway line can help reduce your carbon emissions, as well as carpooling with people you know. Walk or ride a bike to your destination.
🧩Improve energy and carbon efficiencies: Scientists and engineers can improve the processes that generate and release carbon to increase their efficiency, or use processes that don’t generate carbon in the first place. An example would be to build longer-lasting solar/wind/battery-power equipment or make small modular nuclear reactors, to reduce our “carbon footprint.” Develop better ways to make concrete using less carbon. We can help by seeking these approaches out, speaking up to advocate for them, and using them.
🧩Motivate people and companies not to emit: We can encourage companies to reduce the amount of CO2 they release. We can let them pay less tax if they reduce the amount of CO2 they emit, or make them pay for each ton[3] of CO2 that they release into the air. People can be motivated by a “carrot” (reward) or a “stick” (penalty). Paying them to be responsible is a carrot, making them pay if they emit carbon is a stick. Some groups[4] think that the cost should be as high as U.S.$200 per metric ton of CO2 emitted into the air. It’s sometimes called the “Social Cost of Carbon.”
🧩Capture carbon from the air and store it: Capture carbon dioxide from the air and use it to grow plants, create new materials, or store it underground. This must be done on a very large scale to make a difference, since CO2 in the air is very dilute.
🧩Capture carbon at the source and prevent it from entering the atmosphere: If you are clever, then you can capture carbon dioxide produced by industrial processes, where it is concentrated in the gas byproducts, and permanently store it underground or use it to create new products. Try not to add more carbon to the air and oceans. This is an active area of research for STEM specialists.
Capture carbon at the source and prevent it from entering the atmosphere: “Carbon dioxide is captured from a point source, such as an ethanol plant. It is usually transported via pipelines and then either used to extract oil or stored in a dedicated geologic formation.”
Source and Image Credit: Congressional Budget Office, U.S. Federal Government.
All in all, we need to work together, using methods like these to urgently limit the accumulation of carbon dioxide and other GHGs in the air. This is how our story ties back to Prof. Whitty and the work he and his team, along with Prof. JoAnn Lighty at Boise State University, are doing to bring us new solutions to problems like these.
Prof. Kevin Whitty of the University of Utah and His Team
Much has been written about the CO2 reduction strategies in the list above, but we tend not to hear as much about the last item: “Capture carbon at the source and prevent it from entering the atmosphere.” We now turn to focus on this topic. It is one typically addressed today by specially-trained people doing this STEM research. We heard directly about it by interviewing Prof. Whitty, and we summarized what we’ve learned in the following discussion. His technique is called “Chemical Looping Combustion” (CLC). It is an intriguing method. We won’t be able to describe it in full detail, but summarize it first by saying that it is a very practical and useful technique for both the near term and long term, to generate heat and electricity. What distinguishes it is that it captures the CO2 made as a byproduct, so that it does not go into the atmosphere. The professor, his graduate students, full-time researchers, and colleagues both within and outside his university are working together on this.
What is Carbon Capture, and How Does it Work?
Let’s start at the beginning. Prof. Whitty serves as the Director of the Advanced Energy Systems Research Facility at the University of Utah. His group is joined by other groups at the facility that are working on somewhat related solar-thermal energy storage (storing heat in a liquid), hydrogen production, and all sorts of things that should help our environment.
Prof. Whitty explained to us that many people, even some decision makers, do not understand the basics of carbon use. He said that we humans, for roughly the past 150 years, have taken substances containing carbon from under the Earth’s surface where they safely stayed. Things like coal, petroleum, or natural gas, all of which are 75 to 90% by weight of carbon, were extracted and burned as fuels in our vehicles, jet planes, and power plants. Through all of that, those dense forms of carbon that were pulled out of the ground got converted largely to CO2 gas, and spread out into the air, from which it’s difficult to gather the CO2, since it’s dilute.
Some of Prof. Whitty’s interests include improving the efficiency of the paper making process from two perspectives: (1) maximizing materials and energy production while (2) minimizing greenhouse gas emissions. He told us that newer paper mills in places like Scandinavia and Malaysia actually generate their own power and may even have surplus power to export, in contrast to many U.S. paper mills, which tend to be older and less efficient. This electric power is made by burning the parts of the trees not used for making paper, leftovers typically called “biomass,” which refers to organic material from plants or animals used as a renewable energy source. That fuel is classified as renewable. In other technologies with different processing streams, we could use agricultural waste or even some of our municipal solid waste as biomass, he said.
When trees and other plants grow, they use up CO2 from the air to do that. Carbon becomes part of the plants. If the tree biomass is later used to harvest or make energy, and you put the resulting CO2 released from that into a place deep underground where the pressure is high, then that keeps the CO2 out of harm’s way as a liquid, and you are reducing the CO2 in the air. Prof. Whitty explained that there is little chance the CO2 underground will escape back into the air. It could even mineralize and become something like limestone underground. People working in this area like to call the whole process of using biomass to create energy and storing the resultant CO2 underground “carbon-negative energy production,” meaning they subtract CO2 from the total amount of carbon above the Earth’s surface. That’s good!
Prof Whitty told us, if we want to capture the CO2, there are two main places to do that. The first is at a power plant, right where the gas is made but before it goes out of the smokestack. It’s where CO2 is most concentrated, at much higher levels than in the atmosphere. For coal plants, the concentration of CO2 in the exhaust gas is around 15 – 17%. The second place to grab CO2 is from the atmosphere anywhere on Earth (“direct air capture”), where the CO2 has already mixed into the air. Remember that we said earlier that we find CO2 mixed into the open air at a concentration of 0.042 %, so it’s very, very dilute? From which of those two places do you think we have the best chance to spend the least money to capture the most CO2, before the smokestack or in the open air? The answer is: before the smokestack! (Note that trees and plants don’t have much of a choice – they have to get CO2 from the dilute amount in the air. Glad that they’re really good at it!)
Let’s take a look at one type of equipment that Prof. Whitty and his colleagues are investigating. It’s called a “Chemical Looping Combustion (CLC)” reactor, and it holds the promise of both generating power and trimming CO2.
Block Diagram Showing Example of Chemical Looping Combustion (CLC).
Image Credit: Prof. Kevin Whitty’s website: Chemical looping combustion
See the CO2 gas at the outlet shown above on the upper right of this multi-stage chemical reactor? It may be collected and put underground, used for other industrial processes, or fed back into the reactor to be used again (see lower right input). The “Looping” part of the name comes from the closed loops of chemicals that can go round and round, such as the loop indicated by the green arrow for the metal particles. Both Prof. Whitty/Utah’s and Prof. JoAnn Lighty/Boise State’s teams are among those groups working on these topics.
To get the CO2, you could use fuels like those shown in the diagram above (“CxHy”). Or, in a different modified apparatus, say, near a lumber mill, Prof. Whitty said that you could use the roots, twigs, bark, and other bio-matter that normally goes to waste, bring that all to one location, and instead generate ‘green’ (clean) heat and/or electricity and capture CO2. If near farms, you could instead take the agricultural waste, like corn husks and the like, which is more than half the plant, and use that as fuel instead. He explained, “it’s actually from CO2 that’s in the atmosphere that goes into the plants or the trees. We harvest the energy from that, and the CO2 … we put it underground, so you end up actually with what they call carbon negative energy production. So, you actually are removing CO2 from the atmosphere.”
A chemical looping combustion process development unit
Image Credit: Prof. Kevin Whitty’s website: Chemical looping combustion
On a related topic, he explained that many communities around the world actually distribute energy through the town buildings to heat them, such as by pumping hot water around. Prof. Whitty said this is called “district heating,” and it can work over distances up to 30 miles (48 km), from his experience in Scandinavia. So, if you set up one of these green CLC plants near town, you could heat the town, supply electricity to it, or both! What’s even better is, you would not need natural gas to do that. Plus, you’re sitting there before the smokestack just waiting to capture more CO2. You could gather the CO2, compress it, and put it underground, or use it for another turn through the reactor, or use it to make some other material we use, making a circular pathway. If it is not convenient to store the CO2 where it is captured, then it could possibly be put into a pipeline (and many pipelines exist already) to take it to natural places where it can be easily placed underground. Some companies are looking at turning the use of coal into a carbon-neutral resource using these techniques.[5] With biomass instead, though, you can actually make the whole process carbon negative.
Getting back to Prof. Whitty, here’s a summary diagram from him of four different ways that energy and CO2 production can go. Note that “carbon positive” means that you’re releasing CO2, “carbon neutral” means there is no net release of CO2, and carbon negative (Prof. Whitty’s favorite) means you’re taking CO2 out of the air.
Implementations of Carbon Capture. Carbon pathways for four different types of energy production. CCS = carbon capture and storage. The version on the far left, “carbon positive” shows what happens when we take carbon from below ground in the form of coal, petroleum and natural gas, and how we put all the CO2 into the air!. Note that the biomass process on the far right can be carbon negative, meaning more CO2 is taken out of circulation and stored underground than is released into the air.
Image Credit: Prof. Kevin Whitty’s website: Carbon Capture
Here’s a chart that Prof. Whitty particularly likes, called the “prism chart.” It illustrates the promise that various technologies bring to reducing CO2 in the air, in this case just for electricity production. This further shows the “all-hands-on-deck” principle. Each color slice represents another technology, and shows how much the atmospheric CO2 level can be reduced by using that technology. If we use all of them, then we’re left with just the gray curve and by 2030, we will be releasing less than we did in 1990. Use no new technologies and the CO2 level just keeps increasing from 1990 to 2030 (see the top of the blue slice). Note the strong contribution from “CCS,” the research topic of Prof.’s Whitty and Lighty and colleagues.
The EPRI “Prism” Diagram. An oldie-but-goodie, this colorful chart is nicknamed the “prism diagram,”from the way it seemingly makes a rainbow from a prism. The top level above all the colored curves shows the emission of CO2 just from the U.S electric power industry, over the years, drawn in 2007, forecast beyond 2007 as if we do nothing new. However, each color wedge you see illustrates the potential amount of CO2 emissions that could be reduced by using that technology.
Image Credit: Adapted from Electric Power Research Institute, 2007.
Prof. Whitty mentioned a big difference between coal and petroleum, with respect to carbon dioxide. Coal may be burned in large amounts on a given day, but the released gases come out of one or a few smokestacks at each particular location. In contrast, CO2 from petroleum comes out of millions and millions of vehicle tailpipes daily. We need to ask ourselves which exhaust type is easier to work with – it would be the one from coal.
Prof. Whitty highlighted how the landline telephone industry was “leapfrogged” in many developing countries. These countries, with less established telecommunications infrastructure, bypassed the need for extensive landline networks. Instead of investing heavily in building a vast network of copper wires, they directly adopted cellular technology. This “leapfrogging” allowed them to quickly access modern communication services without the significant upfront costs and infrastructure demands associated with traditional landline systems. Prof. Whitty believes a similar phenomenon could occur with renewable energy technologies, particularly solar power. Developing countries, with less reliance on existing fossil fuel-based energy grids, may be able to directly adopt and integrate solar power solutions, bypassing the need to invest heavily in traditional, carbon-intensive power plants.
He mentioned that not only do fossil fuels such as coal, petroleum, and natural gas emit CO2, but they are also limited in quantity. These resources are finite – they won’t give us fuel forever. Said another way, there may be more fuels underground, but at some point, it will simply be too expensive to mine them.
Lastly, Prof. Whitty advises people to not waste time blaming the people who came before us, but rather, to look ahead for new solutions. Even if some of his own research doesn’t pan out, he’s still encouraging students to give things a try. What he’s working on is not just a fad. We will still need clean, reliable energy generations from now.
Mongolian Yurt with Solar Panel.
Image Credit: United Nations: Sustainable Development
3. About the Interviewee
Prof. Kevin J. Whitty is a leading expert in turning waste and renewable resources into energy. For over 30 years, he has researched cutting-edge technologies like gasification, chemical looping, and oxy-fuel combustion, all while developing innovative ways to capture carbon dioxide. Growing up in Oregon, amidst the beauty of the natural world – surrounded by horses and enjoying the thrill of fishing – Prof. Whitty developed a deep appreciation for the environment and the importance of sustainable practices. He also gained firsthand experience working in local industries, including paper mills and lumber mills, which further shaped his understanding of resource management and industrial processes. His academic journey took him to Finland, where he earned his advanced degrees and even learned to speak Swedish! When he was in Sweden, he worked in the paper industry for a company and did energy-related research. He liked that and so, today, his research is done at quite an unusually large-scale for a university. He currently serves as the Director of the Advanced Energy Systems Research Facility, an off-campus facility with about 12,000 square feet of pilot-scale systems of technologies that were developed at the university. He’s been at the University of Utah for nearly 25 years, mostly as a professor of chemical engineering, but he also does a lot of research. He encourages students to explore their passions, embrace new challenges, and never limit their horizons.
4. Hands-on Activities
Here are perhaps the two most important plots that scientists have made of (i) the amount of CO2 in the air over time, and (ii) the evidence that it plays a strong part in causing the temperature to rise.
For this exercise, do your best to study each plot, then close your eyes for a moment and recall what they look like. If you can do that, and maybe generally sketch them without looking, then you’ll be ahead of many people in understanding the situation. You don’t need to be perfect. Can you memorize at least one (x, y) coordinate on each plot, say, the one pertaining to today? Pay attention to the chart titles, axes’ labels and tick mark values. You may wish to later follow the links under the captions to see the charts in more detail and read about them.
The first graph below is called the “Keeling curve.” It shows the concentration of CO2 by year, going back to 1960. We are hovering above 420 ppm concentration today. Notice that the curve bends upward. Humans release nearly 10 billion metric tons of CO2 each year,[6] which is about the same weight as 34,000 fully-loaded massive cargo container ships![7]
The Rise of CO2 Concentration: “Keeling curve,” showing CO2 in the air versus year. There are other versions that go back even further in time, 500 – 1,000 years or more. You’re encouraged to do a little research and find other versions (or jump to this one). Those plots show that CO2 levels were pretty stable until about 150 years ago, when we started using fossil fuels.
Image credit: Mauna Loa
The next graph below illustrates the strong correlation between rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations (shown on the x-axis) and increasing global average temperatures (shown on the y-axis). This warming trend has accelerated significantly since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in the mid-1800s, when human activities, primarily the burning of fossil fuels, dramatically increased the release of CO2 into the atmosphere. The red and black dashed lines represent potential future temperature forecasts, using different gas emission scenarios, starting with statistics of the data we already have.
It’s important to note that a small rise in global average (mean) temperature makes a very big difference to the climate. Even the 1.5 °C increase since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution has caused the problems we noted. There are many great resources out there to learn more.[8]
Effect of the Rise of CO2 Concentration on Temperature: Temperature vs. CO2 in the air. It demonstrates the cause and effect relationship.
Image credit: Berkeley Earth
5. Environmental Equity and Sustainability
Let’s be honest, climate change isn’t hitting everyone equally. Lower-income communities often bear the brunt of pollution and the worst impacts of a warming planet. This isn’t fair, and it’s time to do something about it.[9]
Enter Carbon Capture: This technology aims to snatch carbon dioxide out of the air or directly from industrial sources before it can wreak havoc on the climate.
How can carbon capture promote a more just and sustainable future?
- Fighting Climate Change: By reducing greenhouse gas emissions, carbon capture can help mitigate the impacts of climate change, which disproportionately affects vulnerable communities.
- Transitioning More Gradually: Instead of immediately shutting down these industries (which could lead to job losses and economic disruption), carbon capture allows them to continue operating while they gradually transition to cleaner energy sources (like renewable energy).
- Creating New Opportunities: Captured CO2 can be used to make things like fuels and chemicals, creating new industries and green jobs.
- Addressing Past Injustices: Carbon capture can play a role in cleaning up the mess created by past industrial pollution, helping to address the historical injustices faced by many communities.
Let’s be transparent, too:
- Greenwashing Alert: Carbon capture shouldn’t be an excuse to keep polluting. We need to transition to renewable energy sources as quickly as possible.
- Potential Pitfalls: There are environmental risks associated with carbon capture and storage, such as leaks and potential impacts on ecosystems.
- Social Justice is Key: It’s crucial to ensure that the benefits of carbon capture are shared fairly and that communities impacted by these projects are involved in the decision-making process.
Ultimately, the success of carbon capture depends on how we choose to develop and deploy it. We need to prioritize a just transition to a clean energy future, while ensuring that these technologies are developed and deployed in a way that benefits all of society.
Now it’s your turn! Learn more about carbon capture, talk to your friends and family about climate change, and explore STEM fields that can help us create a better tomorrow. Together, we can make a difference!
6. Setting the Stage for Your Future
Undergraduate Degrees: If you’re interested in a career related to carbon capture, these engineering and science degrees will lay the foundation:
- Chemical Engineering, Chemistry: Focuses on the chemical processes involved in capturing carbon dioxide. It includes the things you’ll need to design chemical reactors.
- Mechanical Engineering: Deals with the design and operation of the equipment used for carbon capture.
- Environmental Engineering: Focuses on the environmental impact of carbon capture and storage.
- Civil Engineering: Plays a key role in the infrastructure for storing captured carbon dioxide underground.
High School Courses to Prepare: For high school students interested in technology or engineering, Prof. Whitty advises that renewable/sustainable energy, in general, is a good field. He agrees with the Foundation framework, that the best solutions begin with a good attitude – know that you can make positive contributions, and see how you can be a good Earth steward.
These high school courses are crucial for your success. Try to get them now, if you can, otherwise you’ll have to take them later:
- Math: Algebra I & II, Geometry, Trigonometry, Pre-calculus, AP Calculus AB/BC (highly recommended)
- Science: Physics (at least 2 years), Chemistry (at least 1 year), Biology (recommended), AP Physics 1, 2, or C: Mechanics, AP Chemistry, AP Environmental Science (recommended)
Key Notes:
- Math & Science are Fundamental: A strong foundation in these subjects is the bedrock of all engineering disciplines. Building a strong base in math and science will set you up for success in your engineering journey.
- Hands-on Experience: Develop practical skills and a deeper understanding by seeking out science courses with labs, participating in science clubs, and exploring science fair projects. Hands-on experience will make your learning more meaningful and prepare you for the challenges of engineering. Make things. Many universities, including the University of Utah, offer opportunities for students to participate in summer camps or internships. Check them out![10]
- Explore Interests: Investigate different engineering disciplines and their specializations. Talk to engineers, visit university engineering departments, and explore career options to discover your passion within the field of engineering.
7. Glossary
- Carbon dioxide – Also known by its chemical formula, CO2, it is one of the minor parts of our air that has a major impact on our climate, even at low concentrations. It’s the main greenhouse gas, keeping in warmth.
- Concentration – The amount of something in a mixture of many things. It’s often expressed as a percentage of the total amount you’re considering, whether the total is as little as a small container, or as big as all the air surrounding Earth.
- Efficiency – This is a number, usually expressed as a decimal number from 0 to 1, or equivalently as a percentage, showing how much you get out of a certain process compared to how much you put into it. Higher is better and means “more efficient.”
- Chemical reactor – A machine that causes two or more ingredients (“reactants”) to join together chemically to make new substances (“products”). It may release or consume heat. Reactions are governed by controlling chemical compositions and flow rates, temperature, and pressure.
- Capture – To gather and not let go back to the place from which it came. When talking about carbon capture, this generally means removing it from our air where it has a big impact on climate.
- Sequester – This word is related to ‘capture’ above. It can mean to isolate a chemical, usually a gas from the environment, then doing one of these three things with it: (i) using it to make something, thereby incorporating in something, (ii) mixing with other things to use the mixture to do something useful, or (iii) inserting the isolated chemical under pressure where it causes less harm, like underground.
- PPM – Also written “ppm” or said as “parts per million.” If you had a million objects, gas molecules for example, then how many of them are relevant to your topic of discussion? Note that “10,000 ppm” is equivalent to saying “1%.”
- Dilute – Not concentrated; a small amount.
- Byproduct – Unintended (but predictable) chemicals left over after an intended and desirable chemical reaction takes place.
- Biomass – Matter of biological origin, such as the parts of plants not generally considered useful to humans. Once collected, it can become the chemical feedstock (some of the reactants) in a chemical reactor.
- Weather – The immediate state of outdoor temperature, precipitation, wind, etc. in a specific location.
- Climate – The long-term description of outdoor temperature, precipitation, wind, etc. over a broad area on Earth.
- Research, Basic and Applied – Basic research aims to understand fundamental observations in science and make basic predictions, often without paying attention to the final applications. Applied research, on the other hand, may use the results from others who have done basic research, with the aim of making an actual application of the research.
- Carbon negative – Means you’re taking CO2 out of the air.
- Prototype-scale – The size at which something, such as a chemical reactor, is built. It’s intended for an early model build to test a concept or process. It allows bugs and kinks (a description of things that don’t quite work out right) to be corrected. It also allows important measurements to be made. The scale enables a real learning experience. All of this is helpful to researchers and designers before they scale up the model in size.
- Greenhouse gas (GHG; plural GHGs) – Gaseous components of our air that trap heat close to the Earth, causing the temperature on Earth to rise. The most common gas is carbon dioxide, CO2, and is the one mainly discussed in this article. Other important ones include methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and water vapor (H2O).
Endnotes:
- Actually, today we’re around 0.042%, which is less than 1/20th of 1 percent. To see the number detail better, scientists have another way to say it, and that’s “420 parts per million” (420 ppm). If you could identify each molecule of a collection of a million molecules of air, roughly 420 of them would be CO2.
- We borrowed this phrase from sailors. At times, all of the crew members (hands) on the deck of the ship must work together to solve some life-threatening problem. Our ship is Earth, and we’re all crew members. Applying this phrase to carbon in the air, any and all carbon control solutions are worth pursuing, as long as they don’t create more problems.
- 1 metric ton = 1 ton = 1,000 kg = 2,200 U.S. pounds; whereas 1 U.S. ton = 2,000 lbs. Most of the world works with the metric ton. Unfortunately, many U.S. publications often do not say what ton they refer to, and will use the U.S. spelling “ton” to mean either one, depending on the context.
- https://energyathaas.wordpress.com/2025/01/13/can-california-afford-carbon-pricing/ . Also, see this link, courtesy of Prof. Maximilian Auffhammer of the Univ. of California / Berkeley, Energy Institute at Haas Business School: https://www.rff.org/publications/explainers/social-cost-carbon-101/ . Other references are: https://www.epa.gov/environmental-economics/scghg & https://costofcarbon.org/epa-values-for-the-social-cost-of-greenhouse-gases
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_Dam_Power_Station
- Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego, quotes 9.3 x 109 tons = 1.9 x 1013 pounds = 8.5 x 1012 kilograms) https://keelingcurve.ucsd.edu/2013/07/03/how-much-co2-can-the-oceans-take-up/ Other studies may show slightly different numbers. https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/energy-and-the-environment/where-greenhouse-gases-come-from.php
- Container ship weight: 1 such ship weighs roughly 5.6 x 108 pounds https://phongnhaexplorer.com/qna/technology/how-much-does-a-fully-loaded-container-ship-weigh.html#gsc.tab=0
- Learn more, links courtesy of Prof. Maximilian Auffhammer of the Univ. of California / Berkeley, Energy Institute at Haas Business School: https://news.mit.edu/2023/education-climate-change-0322 and https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCi6RkdaEqgRVKi3AzidF4ow
- https://earth.org/climate-changes-unequal-burden-why-do-low-income-communities-bear-the-brunt/
- For example: https://www.price.utah.edu/k12/high-school-summer-research-internship
We value your input! Have questions about this issue or want to know more about our foundation?
Feel free to reach out. We’re keen to hear your thoughts and feedback. Your voice truly matters to us!
We hope you have enjoyed this issue of our newsletter.
We look forward to preparing our next issue on a different topic.
Subscribe to the Newsletter!