Critical Materials: Insights from the MIT Energy Conference

lithium ingots photo

Lithium - a critical element for energy? (Courtesy of Treehugger.com)

At the MIT Energy Conference last week, the energy was palpable – literally. The event, which annually attracts hundreds of energy professionals and students (including a number of AEL fellows and authors this year), brought to the table a refreshing mix of hard-nosed analysis, technical insight and unbridled enthusiasm about the challenges and opportunities for the world’s collective energy future.

One of these future challenges lies in the question of strategic materials for energy, which a panel of experts tackled on the second day of the conference. In the process of co-organizing this panel – along with two fellow teammates from the MIT Energy Club - I have grown increasingly aware of the issue of strategic materials and the important role they play in clean energy technologies.

The highlight of the panel was an introduction by MIT professor Robert L. Jaffe to the policy report on Critical Elements for Energy that was recently released jointly by the American Physical Society and the Materials Research Society. As the report describes, rare earth minerals, such as helium and lithium, are becoming increasingly relevant for energy solutions in the 21st century:

“A number of chemical elements that were once laboratory curiosities now figure prominently in new technologies like wind turbines, solar energy collectors, and electric cars. If widely deployed, such inventions have the capacity to transform the way we produce, transmit, store, or conserve energy.”

However, these materials are extremely scarce, unevenly distributed around the globe, and they rarely benefit from stable supply chains:

“The production complexities of elements primarily obtained as by-products create a difficult environment for planning and investment in these elements, as well as in the new technologies that require the unique attributes of the elements themselves. Large fluctuations in price can occur after joint-production options are saturated and before new supplies hit the market.”

The serious economic, environmental, and security-related challenges of these critical elements have yet to be met. In addition to stronger coordination within the US federal government and better information dissemination under the auspices of the US Geological Survey, Dr. Jaffe also advocated for a greater role for R&D:

“A focused federal research and development (R&D) program would enable the United States to both expand the availability of and reduce its dependence on ECEs [energy critical elements]. This federal R&D would be particularly critical to the competitiveness of small U.S. companies that are unable to engage in their own ECE basic research programs.”

Dr. Jaffe’s insights came alongside comments from Diana Bauer, who described the policy role of the US federal government from the perspective of the Department of Energy, as well as Terence Stewart, a trade law specialist who addressed the role of the WTO and international trade in managing critical elements. Finally, Alastair Neill, an executive from the private-sector firm Dacha Strategic Metals, explored the importance of rare earth elements and stressed the role of the private sector in addressing these issues in the long run.

As Bauer, Stewart and Neill shared their own perspectives on the topic, the utter complexity of the critical materials issue came into full view. In particular, the speakers reached a curious disagreement about China’s recent restrictions on rare earth exports, with Neill suggesting that China may actually have done the world a favor while Stewart criticized Beijing for going against its WTO obligations. And as Bauer described the conclusions from a recent DOE report on critical energy materials that she was recently involved in, it became clear that the proper role of the US government in tackling critical materials will turn out to be equally complex in the long run.

The panel at the MIT Energy Conference came as a stark reminder that the US cannot meet the emerging challenge of critical elements for energy without sustained involvement from the private sector, international organizations and the federal government. Much is at stake: our high-performance gas turbines, our hybrid cars, our wind turbines and our energy R&D laboratories all depend crucially on critical elements. This is not an issue we can afford to take lightly.

For more about the MIT Energy Conference, readers can also check out the AEL coverage by my colleague Daniel Goldfarb as well as the post by Tom Zeller on NYT’s DotEarth blog.

__

David Cohen-Tanugi is a Policy Fellow in AEL’s New Energy Leaders Project.

As President Obama emphasized earlier this week in his State of the Union address, U.S. clean energy innovation has a crucial role to play in tackling climate change and ensuring the future vitality of the United States economy. However, at least two other factors – creating a demand “pull” for clean energy sources and shifting towards more sustainable lifestyles – are also crucially important and should not disappear from our policy discussions.

As my colleague Teryn Norris has argued here, the Obama Administration’s commitment to U.S. innovation – especially in the clean energy field – is a wise decision, and we can only hope that legislative victories follow. But while energy innovation can indeed boost U.S. economic leadership, it won’t be enough if we also hope to address the further problems of energy independence and climate change. In other words, technological innovation shouldn’t become the only focus of our energy discussion.

With repeated disappointments in climate and energy policy in recent years, it is indeed tempting to give up on conventional policy mechanisms and hope that a new technology will solve the problem. Some thinkers, such as Time magazine’s Bryan Walsh have argued recently that “putting a price tag on pollution isn’t solving our climate-change woes. It’s time to invest our muscle—and money—in breakthrough innovation.” Although I would be the last person to question the benefits of technological breakthroughs, I believe we shouldn’t overlook how policy, economics and human behavior ultimately determine how much we’re able to take advantage of these breakthroughs.

(more…)

Jerry BrownWith gridlock likely in the 112th Congress and the Administration’s mandate accordingly tempered, those interested in America’s energy policy and 21st century competitiveness should look West.  As newly-elected California Governor Jerry Brown’s ambitious state budget undergoes the scrutiny of multiple media cycles, other elements of the senior statesman’s agenda may easily go unnoticed – including what impact Governor Brown part deux may have in renewing an American innovation economy.

California’s GDP weighs in as the eighth largest in the world, and the state accounted for 60% of all North American venture capital investment in the clean tech sector in 2009.  After making headlines with its seminal 2006 climate legislation (AB 32), adopting the first Low Carbon Fuel Standard, and establishing the second most aggressive state Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), what’s next for California?

In Mr. Browns campaign literature, one of the objectives that dominates his energy and environmental platform is a rapid and expanded deployment of localized electricity generation.  To be precise, he calls on California to produce 20,000 new megawatts (MW) of renewable electricity by 2020, of which 12,000 megawatts would consist of “onsite or small energy systems located close to where energy is consumed that can be constructed quickly (without new transmission lines) and typically without any environmental impact.”  To fulfill this goal, he envisions solar systems up to 2 megawatts being installed on the roofs of parking lot structures, schools, warehouses, industrial parks, and other attractive sites while larger solar projects up to 20 megawatts in size would be accommodated on large public and private lands.  Candidate Brown even proposed the state’s first “Solar Highway” by placing PV panels alongside swaths of state roads.

To facilitate this deployment, he has singled out a new feed-in tariff mechanism and ensured that having the legislature or the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) authorize such renewable power payments would be an administration priority. All-too-keenly acquainted with the Governor Moonbeammoniker that has shadowed him throughout his political career, Mr. Brown went to great lengths during the campaign to emphasize that any feed-in-tariff system will not be a quixotic quest at the expense of consumers and has stated explicitly that “holding down rates must be part of the design.”  Brown’s clearly-articulated goals can also be seen against the backdrop the UK’s young feed-in tariff and its early impacts on energy markets across the pond.

(more…)

Tagged with:
 

The term ‘energy efficiency’ usually brings to mind better-insulated homes and smart power meters. But emerging thermoelectric technology could give energy efficiency a whole new meaning by tackling the huge energy waste that happens before the watts even reach our homes.  Yet, to reach market, thermoelectics will have to overcome a number of technological and policy related barriers.

The Promise

Thermoelectric devices, which enable the conversion of heat into electricity, are still at an early stage in the energy innovation chain, but the principle behind how they work can help to highlight a crucial aspect of energy waste across the world that is often ignored in the policy realm.

You may have heard that homes in developed countries waste 25-35 percent of their energy due to insulation problems and inefficient devices. But the lion’s share of energy waste actually comes at the early stages when the electric power is generated in power plants and carried across transmission lines.

(more…)

Deficit Reduction and Clean Energy

A 'Wall Stats' visualization of government spending in 2011

Obama’s freeze on federal employee salaries and Republican efforts to eliminate earmarks are two of the tangible signs that deficit reduction has, and will continue to be a hot topic in the near future. The 112th Congress will almost surely take up the issue, making it crucial to understand what impact serious deficit reduction plans may have on the nation’s clean energy industry. An apt starting point for this investigation is the ever-increasing array of deficit-cutting plans that aim to shape the national dialogue surrounding this issue.

Perhaps the most prominent deficit reduction plan released recently has been The Moment of Truth by the President’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. The commission proposes two major reforms that would directly impact clean energy: cuts to discretionary spending and tax reforms. The discretionary spending cuts amount to an immediate $50 billion and a further $150 billion by 2015, divided evenly between security and non-security spending. The commission specifically proposes eliminating the Department of Energy’s applied research on fossil fuels, saving approximately $0.9 billion; reducing research, development, testing, and evaluation by the Department of Defense by 10%, which could lower the DoD’s ability to procure and develop alternative energy sources; and instituting a 15-cent per gallon gas tax, which would go toward transportation funding but could be a boon for hybrid and electric vehicles.

(more…)

On Monday, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu warned that in the global clean energy race, “America still has the opportunity to lead” — but “time is running out.” While our nation seems to be standing still, countries like China, South Korea and Germany have been speeding ahead to develop and deploy new technologies — and reap the economic benefits.

Chu’s speech also marked the release of a new report by the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST).  This report joins a growing call for increased federal investment in RDD&D to around $16 billion per year.  The most compelling of the recommendations is one to create a Quadrennial Energy Review—modeled after the Pentagon’s Quadrennial Defense Review—that could provide increased long term planning and coordination for the federal government’s energy policy.

As reported by CNET, during his speech at the National Press Club, Chu “suggested that the U.S. is reaching a ‘Sputnik moment’ where political leaders and the general population will realize how the U.S. has fallen behind other countries in science and technology.” In response, the U.S. must “fund research in clean-energy technologies in order to stay apace and take advantage of the economic opportunity that cleaner energy technologies represent globally.”

(more…)

better chinese and american flags

The National Journal has published our response to how America can remain competitive in the clean energy industry after the collapse of comprehensive climate legislation in Congress.  The article is part of a special energy expert series called “Can The U.S. Keep Up In Clean Energy Race?” including contributions from the Chairman of Sierra Club, CEO of the American Wind Energy Association, CEO of the George C. Marshall Institute, Director of Policy at the Brookings Institution, and others.

How America Can Lead the Clean Energy Race

NationalJournal.com | August 3rd, 2010

This comment was submitted by Teryn Norris, president, of Americans for Energy Leadership, and Daniel Goldfarb, program director of the organization.

U.S. economic leadership is at a crossroads. Recent outlooks suggest we may experience long-term stagnation and unemployment comparable to Japan’s lost decade. Yet while we have suffered an economic crisis produced by our own financial sector – losing millions of jobs, trillions in economic output, and further damaging our industrial base – China has largely shrugged off the global recession with high levels of growth and self-financed stimulus, all while purchasing billions of Treasury bills to finance our own deficit.

Meanwhile, as Breakthrough Institute and ITIF documented in “Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant,” China and other nations are establishing dominance in one of the largest growth industries of the century. According to World Economic Forum, the global clean energy market will reach $450 billion annually by 2012 and $600 billion by 2020. Full market potential for clean energy products is much larger, with one analysis estimating Chinese market potential alone at $500 billion to $1 trillion. No wonder President Obama declared in the State of the Union, “The nation that leads the clean-energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy.”

The United States must quickly pursue a new growth agenda, and clean energy technology offers one of our greatest opportunities. For over a decade, the primary goal of U.S. climate and clean energy advocates has been to establish a strong carbon pollution cap. This agenda is dead for the foreseeable future, and precious time has been wasted. The United States must quickly pivot from pollution regulation to an aggressive clean energy competitiveness and innovation agenda, and we can begin with new leadership in the next Congress.

(more…)

Tagged with:
 

China Reigns as Largest Energy Consumer

china_destination

This week’s energy focus is unarguably on China. The argument between China and the International Energy Agency (IEA) about China becoming the biggest energy consumer is still fresh in everyone’s mind and the energy giant continues to make more news that no one can ignore.

China Surpasses the U.S. as No.1 Energy Consumer

According to figures recently released from the International Energy Agency, China has overtaken the U.S. and is now the world’s number one energy consumer.

China’s total 2009 consumption equals approximately 2.265 billion tons of oil, compared with 2.169 billion tons used by the U.S., according to the IEA. These figures show that energy consumption in China has more than doubled over the last decade, from 1.107 billion tons in 2000, despite the fact that the U.S. still consumes five times the amount of energy that China does per capita. The staggering energy consumption increase is driven by China’s leapfrog economic development and burgeoning population growth.

(more…)

Tagged with:
 

BP’s Necessity, America’s Opportunity

gas liens

In the world of technology innovation, 86 days is the blink of an eye.  Most companies are looking months or years down the road when they invest in research and development.  But when barrels of oil began pouring into the Gulf from BP’s Deepwater Horizon, the equation changed.  Suddenly, research and development wasn’t optional, it was essential.

BP is the perfect model of what the United States should not do. The American citizen has paid the price for fossil fuel dependence for decades now and we can’t wait for another disaster to strike the US.  Eighty-six days is almost nothing when you talk about technology innovation, but when you are trying to plug an oil spill, rescue workers from a collapsed coal mine, or end an OPEC embargo, 86 days is an eternity.  We need to jump-start the clean energy R&D process now.  We need to invest like we mean it.

(more…)

Tagged with:
 

The Americans for Energy Leadership summer policy fellows, who we recently highlighted here, have three new posts at our fellows blog about energy innovation and competitiveness. Excerpts of these articles are included below, and full articles can be accessed at our AEL Fellows Blog.

Yingli Solar at the World Cup by Clifton Yin

“China did not participate in this year’s World Cup and has actually qualified for the tournament only once, in 2002. Nevertheless, 2010 saw a solar energy company – Yingli Green Energy Holding Company – become the first firm from that country to secure global marketing rights to the sporting event.”

Leading the Clean Energy Industry Requires Public Investmentby Yan Zhu

“While carbon pricing has polarized the U.S. energy and climate policy debate, the governments of some Asian nations are investing heavily to develop clean technology manufacturing and form innovation clusters. As a result the United States lags far behind its economic competitors in clean technology manufacturing.”

Understanding the Energy Innovation Lifecycle by Jeremy Cohn

“Understanding the process of energy innovation and investment is an important next step towards taking the necessary actions to ensure energy independence and security.  By recognizing the innovation gap between what is best for a firm versus what is best for all firms we can ensure that American-made products and technologies dominate the marketplace in the years to come.”

Tagged with: