#net zero infrastructure

[asestimationsconsultants]

Optimizing Carbon-Neutral Infrastructure with a Cost Estimating Service

The drive toward carbon-neutral infrastructure is reshaping construction and engineering worldwide. Governments, corporations, and communities are committing to reducing carbon footprints by adopting renewable energy, low-emission materials, and sustainable design principles. However, achieving true carbon neutrality requires rigorous financial planning and careful balancing of upfront investment against long-term benefits. This is where a specialized cost estimating service becomes invaluable.

AS Estimation & Consultants plays a crucial role in helping clients optimize carbon-neutral infrastructure projects. By integrating environmental goals with financial analysis, their cost estimating service provides comprehensive insight into the true cost of sustainable construction—supporting smarter decisions that maximize ecological impact while controlling budgets.

Understanding Carbon-Neutral Infrastructure

Carbon-neutral infrastructure means building and operating assets with zero net greenhouse gas emissions. This can include energy-efficient buildings, renewable power installations, green transportation hubs, and sustainable water systems. Key strategies involve reducing embodied carbon in materials, using clean energy sources, and designing for energy efficiency and resilience.

While the environmental benefits are clear, carbon-neutral projects often involve new materials, technologies, and regulatory requirements that complicate cost estimation. Accurate budgeting must incorporate lifecycle analysis, carbon accounting, and potential incentives or penalties related to emissions.

Role of Cost Estimating in Carbon Accounting

Cost estimating services like AS Estimation & Consultants go beyond traditional budgeting by embedding carbon accounting into their methodology. They assess the embodied carbon of materials such as concrete, steel, and insulation, translating environmental impact into financial terms.

This enables clients to compare low-carbon alternatives, evaluating both cost and carbon savings. For example, switching from traditional Portland cement to low-carbon geopolymer alternatives may have a different upfront cost but significantly reduce carbon emissions. An integrated cost estimate helps reveal the net benefit.

Incorporating Renewable Energy and Efficiency Measures

Carbon-neutral infrastructure relies heavily on renewable energy integration—solar panels, wind turbines, geothermal systems—and energy-saving technologies like LED lighting, smart controls, and high-performance HVAC.

Estimating the cost of these components involves analyzing equipment pricing, installation complexity, and maintenance. AS Estimation & Consultants also factor in potential government subsidies, tax credits, and renewable energy certificates that may offset initial expenses.

By embedding these variables into cost estimates, clients understand the full financial impact and payback timeline for carbon-reduction technologies. This comprehensive view supports strategic decisions about which measures to prioritize.

Lifecycle Costing and Long-Term Savings

A true carbon-neutral approach must consider lifecycle costs—not just construction expenses but operational energy, maintenance, and eventual decommissioning or recycling. A cost estimating service integrates these long-term factors, providing clients with total cost of ownership models.

AS Estimation & Consultants use predictive analytics and historical data to forecast energy savings, equipment lifespan, and maintenance schedules. This helps quantify the economic value of carbon-neutral design choices over decades, encouraging investments that reduce emissions while improving financial performance.

Balancing Innovation with Risk Management

Carbon-neutral infrastructure often involves emerging technologies and novel construction methods that carry higher uncertainty. Cost estimating services evaluate potential risks such as technology performance, supply chain variability, and regulatory changes.

By conducting sensitivity analyses and scenario planning, AS Estimation & Consultants help clients anticipate budget fluctuations and build contingencies. This risk-aware estimating approach balances innovation with financial prudence, avoiding costly surprises.

Supporting Green Certification and Compliance

Many carbon-neutral projects seek certification under standards such as LEED, BREEAM, or the Living Building Challenge. These certifications require documentation of environmental performance and often entail additional design, construction, and verification costs.

A cost estimating service includes certification-related expenses in the project budget, such as commissioning, testing, and reporting fees. This ensures clients can plan accurately for the full scope of carbon-neutral infrastructure compliance.

Driving Stakeholder Confidence and Financing

Transparent, comprehensive cost estimates strengthen stakeholder confidence in carbon-neutral projects. Investors, government bodies, and community groups demand clear evidence that environmental goals are achievable within financial constraints.

AS Estimation & Consultants deliver detailed, data-driven estimates that combine environmental and economic metrics. This clarity facilitates project approvals, funding rounds, and partnership alignment—accelerating carbon-neutral infrastructure development.

Conclusion

Carbon-neutral infrastructure represents a vital path to a sustainable future, but its complexity demands expert cost estimating. By integrating carbon accounting, lifecycle costing, risk management, and certification compliance, a specialized cost estimating service delivers the insight needed to optimize investments and maximize impact.

AS Estimation & Consultants help clients navigate this evolving landscape with precision and foresight. Their expertise transforms carbon-neutral ambition into executable, financially sound projects—paving the way for resilient, low-carbon infrastructure worldwide.

[thoughtlessarse]

High costs, local opposition and technical issues threaten the viability of the EU’s multi-billion euro gamble on CCS to decarbonise heavy industry. The European Union is betting on carbon capture and storage (CCS) to decarbonise heavy industrial emitters. The bloc has set ambitious capacity targets to that end: 50 million tonnes of CO2 annually by 2030, rising to 280 million tonnes in 2040. But this will require a huge scaling up. CCS involves capturing CO2 from industrial emitters or power factories, liquefying it, and transporting the CO2 via pipeline, trucks or ships before storing it underground in depleted oil or gas reservoirs or saline aquifers. Today, there are only five operational CCS projects in Europe, capturing a total of2.7 million tonnes of CO2 (MtCO2) each year. Of this,1.7 MtCO2 (63 per cent of the total) is for natural gas processing in Norway, which is outside of the EU. So the strategy requires building a complex infrastructure network from scratch at significant cost. The European Commission has said Europe might need 19,000 km of CO2 pipelines by 2050 to meet this target. These plans could cost taxpayers up to €140 billion by 2050, according to the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. But a joint investigation by several European newsrooms shows that recurring problems with high costs and technical issues are already threatening the success of three major CO2 transport and storage projects receiving EU support. 

continue reading

Well, most of the infrastructure is there, but it's being used to transport gas that will eventually create more CO2. The whole CCS scheme was invented so that the fossil fuel industry could continue selling their products.

[britishbusinessonline]

This Tiny Electric Van Means BIG Business!

We’ve seen many prototype and experimental vehicles over the years and as I’m sure you’re very well aware, 99% of them just disappear into the ether, but I still think it’s worth reporting on new developments in this area. because every now and then some aspect of these vehicles will make its way into the mainstream and also every now and then a company that we’ve never heard of that becomes a…

[creativemedianews]

Ofgem approves Britain's largest grid investment for 'electricity super highway'

Ofgem approves Britain's largest grid investment for 'electricity super highway' #climatetargets #EasternGreenTwo

[boggart23]

The Truth Is Out, Net Zero Will Bakrupt The World

A study by the National Infrastructure Commission (NIC), published on Tuesday 18 October, estimates in its advice to government that if the UK is to hit its 2050 target for achieving ‘Net Zero’, taxpayers will have to find roughly double the amount of money the nation would have had to spend on renewing and updating energy and transport infrastructure over the next 27 years to £2 trillion, the…

[batboyblog]

Things the Biden-Harris Administration Did This Week #38

Oct 11-18 2024

President Biden announced that this Administration had forgiven the student loan debt of 1 million public sector workers. The cancellation of the student loan debts of 60,000 teachers, firefighters, EMTs, nurses and other public sector workers brings the total number of people who's debts have been erased by the Biden-Harris Administration using the Public Service Loan Forgiveness to 1 million. the PSLF was passed in 2007 but before President Biden took office only 7,000 people had ever had their debts forgiven through it. The Biden-Harris team have through different programs managed to bring debt relief to 5 million Americans and counting despite on going legal fights against Republican state Attorneys General.

The Federal Trade Commission finalizes its "one-click to cancel" rule. The new rule requires businesses to make it as easy to cancel a subscription as it was to sign up for it. It also requires more up front information to be shared before offering billing information.

The Department of Transportation announced that since the start of the Biden-Harris Administration there are 1.7 million more construction and manufacturing jobs and 700,000 more jobs in the transportation sector. There are now 400,000 more union workers than in 2021. 60,000 Infrastructure projects across the nation have been funded by the Biden-Harris Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Under this Administration 16 million jobs have been added, including 1.7 construction and manufacturing jobs, construction employment is the highest ever recorded since records started in 1939. 172,000 manufacturing jobs were lost during the Trump administration.

The Department of Energy announced $2 billion to protect the U.S. power grid against growing threats of extreme weather. This money will go to 38 projects across 42 states and Washington DC. It'll upgrade nearly 1,000 miles worth of transmission lines. The upgrades will allow 7.5 gigawatts of new grid capacity while also generating new union jobs across the country.

The EPA announced $125 million to help upgrade older diesel engines to low or zero-emission solutions. The EPA has selected 70 projects to use the funds on. They range from replacing school buses, to port equipment, to construction equipment. More than half of the selected projects will be replacing equipment with zero-emissions, such as all electric school buses.

The Department of The Interior and State of California broke ground on the Salton Sea Species Conservation Habitat Project. The Salton Sea is California's largest lake at over 300 miles of Surface area. An earlier project worked to conserve and restore shallow water habitats in over 4,000 acres on the southern end of the lake, this week over 700 acres were added bring the total to 5,000 acres of protected land. The Biden-Harris Administration is investing $250 million in the project along side California's $500 million. Part of the Administration's effort to restore wild life habitat and protect water resources.

The Department of Energy announced $900 Million in investment in next generation nuclear power. The money will help the development of Generation III+ Light-Water Small Modular Reactors, smaller lighter reactors which in theory should be easier to deploy. DoE estimates the U.S. will need approximately 700-900 GW of additional clean, firm power generation capacity to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. Currently half of America's clean energy comes from nuclear power, so lengthening the life space of current nuclear reactors and exploring the next generation is key to fighting climate change.

The federal government took two big steps to increase the rights of Alaska natives. The Departments of The Interior and Agricultural finalized an agreement to strengthen Alaska Tribal representation on the Federal Subsistence Board. The FSB oversees fish and wildlife resources for subsistence purposes on federal lands and waters in Alaska. The changes add 3 new members to the board appointed by the Alaska Native Tribes, as well as requiring the board's chair to have experience with Alaska rural subsistence. The Department of The Interior also signed 3 landmark co-stewardship agreements with Alaska Native Tribes.

The Department of Energy announced $860 million to help support solar energy in Puerto Rico. The project will remove 2.7 million tons of CO2 per year, or about the same as taking 533,000 cars off the road. It serves as an important step on the path to getting Puerto Rico to 100% renewable by 2050.

The Department of the Interior announced a major step forward in geothermal energy on public lands. The DoI announced it had approved the Fervo Cape Geothermal Power Project in Beaver County, Utah. When finished it'll generate 2 gigawatts of power, enough for 2 million homes. The BLM has now green lit 32 gigawatts of clean energy projects on public lands. A major step toward the Biden-Harris Administration's goal of a carbon pollution-free power sector by 2035.

Bonus: President Biden meets with a Kindergarten Teacher who's student loans were forgiven this week

[reasonsforhope]

"In the Canary Islands, in Barcelona, and in Chile, a unique fog catcher design is sustaining dry forests with water without emissions, or even infrastructure.

Replicating how pine needles catch water, the structure need only be brought on-site and set up, without roads, powerlines, or irrigation channels.

Fog catching is an ancient practice—renamed “cloud milking” by an EU-funded ecology project on the Canary Islands known as LIFE Nieblas (nieblas means fog).

“In recent years, the Canaries have undergone a severe process of desertification and we’ve lost a lot of forest through agriculture. And then in 2007 and 2009, as a result of climate change, there were major fires in forested areas that are normally wet,” said Gustavo Viera, the technical director of the publicly-funded project in the Canaries.

The Canaries routinely experience blankets of fog that cloak the islands’ slopes and forests, but strong winds made fog-catching nets an unfeasible solution. In regions such as the Atacama Desert in Chile or the Atlas Mountains of North Africa, erecting nets that capture moisture particles out of passing currents of fog is a traditional practice.

LIFE Nieblas needed a solution that could resist powerful winds, and to that end designed wind chime-like rows of artificial pine needles, which are also great at plucking moisture from the air. However, unlike nets or palms, they efficiently let the wind pass through them.

The water is discharged without any electricity. There are no irrigation channels, and no machinery is needed to transport the structures. The natural course of streams and creeks need not be altered, nor is there a need to drill down to create wells. The solution is completely carbon-free.

WATER IN THE DESERTS: 

China Announces Completion of a 1,800-Mile Green Belt Around the World’s Most-Hostile Desert

Billions of People Could Benefit from This Breakthrough in Desalination That Ensures Freshwater for the World

Scientists Perfecting New Way to Turn Desert Air into Water at Much Higher Yields

Sahara Desert Is Turning Green Amid Unusual Rains in Parts of North Africa

Indian Engineers Tackle Water Shortages with Star Wars Tech in Kerala

In the ravine of Andén in Gran Canaria, a 35.8-hectare (96 acres) mixture of native laurel trees irrigated by the fog catchers enjoys a survival rate of 86%, double the figure of traditional reforestation.

“The Canaries are the perfect laboratory to develop these techniques,” said Vicenç Carabassa, the project’s head scientist, who works for the Center for Ecological Research and Forestry Applications at the University of Barcelona. “But there are other areas where the conditions are optimal and where there is a tradition of water capture from fog, such as Chile and Morocco.”

In Chile’s Coquimbo province, the town of Chungungo is collecting around 250 gallons a day from a combination of locally-made fog catchers and LIFE Nieblas’ pine needle design, the Guardian reports."

-via Good News Network, December 30, 2024

[rederiswrites]

Read this one. Read it carefully. Read it thoroughly. Yes, it's long. Take the time.

Heather Cox Richardson 

March 9, 2025 (Sunday)

Lately, political writers have called attention to the tendency of billionaire Elon Musk to refer to his political opponents as “NPCs.” This term comes from the gaming world and refers to a nonplayer character that follows a scripted path and cannot think or act on its own, and is there only to populate the world of the game for the actual players. Amanda Marcotte of Salon notes that Musk calls anyone with whom he disagrees an NPC, but that construction comes from the larger environment of the online right wing, whose members refer to anyone who opposes Donald Trump’s agenda as an NPC.

In The Cross Section, Paul Waldman notes that the point of the right wing’s dehumanization of political opponents is to dismiss the pain they are inflicting. If the majority of Americans are not really human, toying with their lives isn’t important—maybe it’s even LOL funny to pretend to take a chainsaw to the programs on which people depend. “We are ants, or even less,” Waldman writes, “bits of programming to be moved around at Elon’s whim. Only he and the people who aspire to be like him are actors, decision-makers, molding the world to conform to their bold interplanetary vision.”

Waldman correctly ties this division of the world into the actors and the supporting cast to the modern-day Republican Party’s longstanding attack on government programs. After World War II, large majorities of both parties believed that the government must work for ordinary Americans by regulating business, providing a basic social safety net like Social Security, promoting infrastructure projects like the interstate highway system, and protecting civil rights that guaranteed all Americans would be treated equally before the law. But a radical faction worked to undermine this “liberal consensus” by claiming that such a system was a form of socialism that would ultimately make the United States a communist state.

By 2012, Republicans were saying, as Representative Paul Ryan did in 2010, that “60 Percent of Americans are ‘takers,’ not ‘makers.’” In 2012, Ryan had been tapped as the Republican vice presidential candidate. As Waldman recalls, in that year, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney told a group of rich donors that 47% of Americans would vote for a Democrat “no matter what.” They were moochers who “are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it.”

As Waldman notes, Musk and his team of tech bros at the Department of Government Efficiency are not actually promoting efficiency: if they were, they would have brought auditors and would be working with the inspectors general that Trump fired and the Government Accountability Office that is already in place to streamline government. Rather than looking for efficiency, they are simply working to zero out the government that works for ordinary people, turning it instead to enabling them to consolidate wealth and power.

Today’s attempt to destroy a federal government that promotes stability, equality, and opportunity for all Americans is just the latest iteration of that impulse in the United States.

The men who wrote the Declaration of Independence took a revolutionary stand against monarchy, the idea that some people were better than others and had a right to rule. They asserted as “self-evident” that all people are created equal and that God and the laws of nature have given them certain fundamental rights. Those include—but are not limited to—life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The role of government was to make sure people enjoyed these rights, they said, and thus a government is legitimate only if people consent to that government. For all that the founders excluded Indigenous Americans, Black colonists, and all women from their vision of government, the idea that the government should work for ordinary people rather than nobles and kings was revolutionary.

From the beginning, though, there were plenty of Americans who clung to the idea of human hierarchies in which a few superior men should rule the rest. They argued that the Constitution was designed simply to protect property and that as a few men accumulated wealth, they should run things. Permitting those without property to have a say in their government would allow them to demand that the government provide things that might infringe on the rights of property owners.

By the 1850s, elite southerners, whose fortunes rested on the production of raw materials by enslaved Black Americans, worked to take over the government and to get rid of the principles in the Declaration of Independence. As Senator James Henry Hammond of South Carolina put it: “I repudiate, as ridiculously absurd, that much lauded but nowhere accredited dogma of Mr. Jefferson that ‘all men are born equal.’”

“We do not agree with the authors of the Declaration of Independence, that governments ‘derive their just powers from the consent of the governed,’” enslaver George Fitzhugh of Virginia wrote in 1857. “All governments must originate in force, and be continued by force.” There were 18,000 people in his county and only 1,200 could vote, he said, “[b]ut we twelve hundred…never asked and never intend to ask the consent of the sixteen thousand eight hundred whom we govern.”

Northerners, who had a mixed economy that needed educated workers and thus widely shared economic and political power, opposed the spread of the South’s hierarchical system. When Congress, under extraordinary pressure from the pro-southern administration, passed the 1854 Kansas-Nebraska Act that would permit enslavement to spread into the West and from there, working in concert with southern slave states, make enslavement national, northerners of all parties woke up to the looming loss of their democratic government.

A railroad lawyer from Illinois, Abraham Lincoln, remembered how northerners were “thunderstruck and stunned; and we reeled and fell in utter confusion. But we rose each fighting, grasping whatever he could first reach—a scythe—a pitchfork—a chopping axe, or a butcher’s cleaver” to push back against the rising oligarchy. And while they came from different parties, he said, they were “still Americans; no less devoted to the continued Union and prosperity of the country than heretofore.” Across the North, people came together in meetings to protest the Slave Power’s takeover of the government, and marched in parades to support political candidates who would stand against the elite enslavers.

Apologists for enslavement denigrated Black Americans and urged white voters not to see them as human. Lincoln, in contrast, urged Americans to come together to protect the Declaration of Independence. “I should like to know if taking this old Declaration of Independence, which declares that all men are equal upon principle and making exceptions to it where will it stop?... If that declaration is not the truth, let us get the Statute book, in which we find it and tear it out!”

Northerners put Lincoln into the White House, and once in office, he reached back to the Declaration—written “four score and seven years ago”—and charged Americans to “resolve that…this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

The victory of the United States in the Civil War ended the power of enslavers in the government, but new crises in the future would revive the conflict between the idea of equality and a nation in which a few should rule.

In the 1890s the rise of industry led to the concentration of wealth at the top of the economy, and once again, wealthy leaders began to abandon equality for the idea that some people were better than others. Steel baron Andrew Carnegie celebrated the “contrast between the palace of the millionaire and the cottage of the laborer,” for although industrialization created “castes,” it created “wonderful material development,” and “while the law may be sometimes hard for the individual, it is best for the race, because it insures the survival of the fittest in every department.”

Those at the top were there because of their “special ability,” Carnegie wrote, and anyone seeking a fairer distribution of wealth was a “Socialist or Anarchist…attacking the foundation upon which civilization rests.” Instead, he said, society worked best when a few wealthy men ran the world, for “wealth, passing through the hands of the few, can be made a much more potent force for the elevation of our race than if it had been distributed in small sums to the people themselves.”

As industrialists gathered the power of the government into their own hands, people of all political parties once again came together to reclaim American democracy. Although Democrat Grover Cleveland was the first to complain that “[c]orporations, which should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of the people, are fast becoming the people's masters,” it was Republican Theodore Roosevelt who is now popularly associated with the development of a government that took power back for the people.

Roosevelt complained that the “absence of effective…restraint upon unfair money-getting has tended to create a small class of enormously wealthy and economically powerful men, whose chief object is to hold and increase their power. The prime need is to change the conditions which enable these men to accumulate power which it is not for the general welfare that they should hold or exercise.” Roosevelt ushered in the Progressive Era with government regulation of business to protect the ability of individuals to participate in American society as equals.

The rise of a global economy in the twentieth century repeated this pattern. After socialists took control of Russia in 1917, American men of property insisted that any restrictions on their control of resources or the government were a form of “Bolshevism.” But a worldwide depression in the 1930s brought voters of all parties in the U.S. behind President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s “New Deal for the American people.”

He and the Democrats created a government that regulated business, provided a basic social safety net, and promoted infrastructure in the 1930s. Then, after Black and Brown veterans coming home from World War II demanded equality, that New Deal government, under Democratic president Harry Truman and then under Republican president Dwight D. Eisenhower, worked to end racial and, later, gender hierarchies in American society.

That is the world that Elon Musk and Donald Trump are dismantling. They are destroying the government that works for all Americans in favor of using the government to concentrate their own wealth and power.

And, once again, Americans are protesting the idea that the role of government is not to protect equality and democracy, but rather to concentrate wealth and power at the top of society. Americans are turning out to demand Republican representatives stop the cuts to the government and, when those representatives refuse to hold town halls, are turning out by the thousands to talk to Democratic representatives.

Thousands of researchers and their supporters turned out across the country in more than 150 Stand Up for Science protests on Friday. On Saturday, International Women’s Day, 300 demonstrations were organized around the country to protest different administration policies. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is drawing crowds across the country with the "Fighting Oligarchy: Where We Go From Here” tour, on which he has been joined by Shawn Fain, president of the United Auto Workers.

“Nobody voted for Elon Musk,” protestors chanted at a Tesla dealership in Manhattan yesterday in one of the many protests at the dealerships associated with Musk’s cars. “Oligarchs out, democracy in.”

[probablyasocialecologist]

Consider the ways oil and gas are already entwined with big tech. The foundation of the partnership between Big Tech and Big Oil is the cloud, explains Zero Cool, a software expert who went to Kazakhstan to do work for Chevron and chronicled this in Logic magazine. “For Amazon, Google, and Microsoft, as well as a few smaller cloud competitors like Oracle and IBM, winning the IT spend of the Fortune 500 is where most of the money in the public cloud market will be made”—and out of the biggest ten companies in the world by revenue, six are in the business of oil production. What are oil companies going to do with the cloud? Apparently, Chevron—which signed a seven-year cloud contract with Microsoft—generates a terabyte of data per day per sensor and has thousands of wells with these sensors. They can’t even use all that data because of the scale of computation required. “Big Tech doesn’t just supply the infrastructures that enable oil companies to crunch their data,” explains Zero Cool; they also provide analytic tools, and machine learning can help discover patterns to run their operations more efficiently. This is another reason why Big Oils need Big Tech; they have the edge when it comes to artificial intelligence/machine learning. “Why go through the effort of using clean energy to power your data centers when those same data centers are being used by companies like Chevron to produce more oil?” Zero Cool asks, also noting that one of the main reasons oil companies are interested in technology is to surveil workers.

Holly Jean Buck, Ending Fossil Fuels: Why Net Zero is Not Enough

[mariacallous]

AI’s energy use already represents as much as 20 percent of global data-center power demand, research published Thursday in the journal Joule shows. That demand from AI, the research states, could double by the end of this year, comprising nearly half of all total data-center electricity consumption worldwide, excluding the electricity used for bitcoin mining.

The new research is published in a commentary by Alex de Vries-Gao, the founder of Digiconomist, a research company that evaluates the environmental impact of technology. De Vries-Gao started Digiconomist in the late 2010s to explore the impact of bitcoin mining, another extremely energy-intensive activity, would have on the environment. Looking at AI, he says, has grown more urgent over the past few years because of the widespread adoption of ChatGPT and other large language models that use massive amounts of energy. According to his research, worldwide AI energy demand is now set to surpass demand from bitcoin mining by the end of this year.

“The money that bitcoin miners had to get to where they are today is peanuts compared to the money that Google and Microsoft and all these big tech companies are pouring in [to AI],” he says. “This is just escalating a lot faster, and it’s a much bigger threat.”

The development of AI is already having an impact on Big Tech’s climate goals. Tech giants have acknowledged in recent sustainability reports that AI is largely responsible for driving up their energy use. Google’s greenhouse gas emissions, for instance, have increased 48 percent since 2019, complicating the company’s goals of reaching net zero by 2030.

“As we further integrate AI into our products, reducing emissions may be challenging due to increasing energy demands from the greater intensity of AI compute,” Google’s 2024 sustainability report reads.

Last month, the International Energy Agency released a report finding that data centers made up 1.5 percent of global energy use in 2024—around 415 terrawatt-hours, a little less than the yearly energy demand of Saudi Arabia. This number is only set to get bigger: Data centers’ electricity consumption has grown four times faster than overall consumption in recent years, while the amount of investment in data centers has nearly doubled since 2022, driven largely by massive expansions to account for new AI capacity. Overall, the IEA predicted that data center electricity consumption will grow to more than 900 TWh by the end of the decade.

But there’s still a lot of unknowns about the share that AI, specifically, takes up in that current configuration of electricity use by data centers. Data centers power a variety of services—like hosting cloud services and providing online infrastructure—that aren’t necessarily linked to the energy-intensive activities of AI. Tech companies, meanwhile, largely keep the energy expenditure of their software and hardware private.

Some attempts to quantify AI’s energy consumption have started from the user side: calculating the amount of electricity that goes into a single ChatGPT search, for instance. De Vries-Gao decided to look, instead, at the supply chain, starting from the production side to get a more global picture.

The high computing demands of AI, De Vries-Gao says, creates a natural “bottleneck” in the current global supply chain around AI hardware, particularly around the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), the undisputed leader in producing key hardware that can handle these needs. Companies like Nvidia outsource the production of their chips to TSMC, which also produces chips for other companies like Google and AMD. (Both TSMC and Nvidia declined to comment for this article.)

De Vries-Gao used analyst estimates, earnings call transcripts, and device details to put together an approximate estimate of TSMC’s production capacity. He then looked at publicly available electricity consumption profiles of AI hardware and estimates on utilization rates of that hardware—which can vary based on what it’s being used for—to arrive at a rough figure of just how much of global data-center demand is taken up by AI. De Vries-Gao calculates that without increased production, AI will consume up to 82 terrawatt-hours of electricity this year—roughly around the same as the annual electricity consumption of a country like Switzerland. If production capacity for AI hardware doubles this year, as analysts have projected it will, demand could increase at a similar rate, representing almost half of all data center demand by the end of the year.

Despite the amount of publicly available information used in the paper, a lot of what De Vries-Gao is doing is peering into a black box: We simply don’t know certain factors that affect AI’s energy consumption, like the utilization rates of every piece of AI hardware in the world or what machine learning activities they’re being used for, let alone how the industry might develop in the future.

Sasha Luccioni, an AI and energy researcher and the climate lead at open-source machine-learning platform Hugging Face, cautioned about leaning too hard on some of the conclusions of the new paper, given the amount of unknowns at play. Luccioni, who was not involved in this research, says that when it comes to truly calculating AI’s energy use, disclosure from tech giants is crucial.

“It’s because we don’t have the information that [researchers] have to do this,” she says. “That’s why the error bar is so huge.”

And tech companies do keep this information. In 2022, Google published a paper on machine learning and electricity use, noting that machine learning was “10%–15% of Google’s total energy use” from 2019 to 2021, and predicted that with best practices, “by 2030 total carbon emissions from training will reduce.” However, since that paper—which was released before Google Gemini’s debut in 2023—Google has not provided any more detailed information about how much electricity ML uses. (Google declined to comment for this story.)

“You really have to deep-dive into the semiconductor supply chain to be able to make any sensible statement about the energy demand of AI,” De Vries-Gao says. “If these big tech companies were just publishing the same information that Google was publishing three years ago, we would have a pretty good indicator” of AI’s energy use.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

J. Dylan Sandifer at TNR:

Two egos like Elon Musk’s and Donald Trump’s could never share the spotlight if it weren’t for the unifying force of grifter solidarity—two oligarchs teaming up to further tip the scales against everyone else. Just as Trump’s P.R. campaign as a canny dealmaker hid his multiple bankruptcies, Musk’s rogue genius performance serves as cover for the fact that he’s just another billionaire buying up others’ ideas and playing the system with enough of a safety net to repeatedly fail. His whole shtick is built on the idea that he’s a bold, self-made innovator who defies the odds, shuns government handouts, and stands for the unbridled power of the free market. In reality, his empire, built originally on an apartheid emerald mine, has been propped up by public money for years. One of its most consistent sources of income has been Tesla’s exploitation of the carbon credit market.

Tesla, the supposed future of clean energy, isn’t just making money by selling electric cars—it’s making a fortune off a regulatory loophole. In the first nine months of 2024, 43 percent of Tesla’s net income came from selling credits to other automakers that hadn’t met emissions standards. It’s not innovation that’s keeping Tesla’s finances afloat; it’s a rigged system that Musk is milking for everything it’s worth. And all the while, he’s using his newfound power as Trump’s unelected co-president to gut the very government programs that provide working people with a fraction of the support that he’s quietly pocketing. Musk loves to sneer at working-class people who rely on food stamps or unemployment benefits, claiming they’re lazy or entitled. But what’s more entitled than using regulatory credits to boost your company’s stock price and then leveraging that stock for loans to keep your cash flow steady? The hypocrisy gets even more grotesque when you look at Musk’s role in the so-called Department of Government Efficiency—the dystopian fever dream where he’s now helping Trump dismantle social programs under the guise of “cutting waste.” While he’s ensuring billionaires like himself keep their tax breaks and loopholes, he’s working to slash food assistance, disability benefits, and Social Security. The plan is clear: If you’re rich, the government will help you get richer. If you’re poor, you’re on your own. Meanwhile, Musk has strategically positioned himself to undermine public infrastructure alternatives to his products. Musk has started targeting public transit and infrastructure projects, claiming they are bloated and inefficient—while his own half-baked ideas, like the Las Vegas “Loop” (a glorified tunnel for Teslas), receive public subsidies and fizzle out into tech-world vaporware. He is claiming that government spending on social good is a waste, while positioning himself as the one true visionary who should receive those taxpayer dollars instead. Here’s how Tesla’s legalized scam works: Under California’s Zero Emission Vehicle, or ZEV, mandate and the federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, standards, carmakers are required to meet emissions targets. If they don’t, they have to buy carbon credits from companies that produce cleaner vehicles. Tesla, which only sells electric cars, racks up a surplus of these credits and sells them to gas-guzzling automakers that don’t want to invest in real change. In other words, Tesla isn’t making money because it’s selling cars efficiently—it’s making money because Ford and GM still rely on gasoline. Musk has figured out how to turn regulatory inaction into a billion-dollar side hustle. If Tesla’s carbon credit well ever runs dry—if regulatory standards change or if automakers finally catch up—Tesla’s bottom line takes a hit. That’s when the whole house of cards Musk has built starts to wobble.

Musk’s entire empire hinges on one thing: Tesla’s sky-high stock price. He’s leveraged Tesla shares to take out massive loans, using them as collateral to fund his lifestyle and side projects. This means that keeping Tesla’s valuation high is a matter of personal financial survival. Those carbon credits—essentially free money from the government—make Tesla’s earnings look better than they actually are, which in turn props up its stock price. But this strategy is starting to fall apart. Tesla’s stock is plummeting—down nearly 40 percent this year—due to increased competition, battery technology falling behind, and Musk’s erratic behavior scaring off investors. When a company is built on smoke and mirrors, it doesn’t take much for the illusion to shatter.

A big chunk of Elon Musk’s Tesla income comes from their regulatory credits scheme.

[darkmaga-returns]

As temperatures plummeted in January 2025, New England had to ditch its rapid decarbonization plans and rely on oil, coal, and natural gas to keep homes heated.

What happened: A severe cold snap in January 2025 pushed New England’s electricity grid to its limits, forcing the region to rely heavily on fossil fuels to meet demand.

Why it matters: The episode highlights the challenges of transitioning to renewable energy while maintaining grid reliability during extreme weather.

Key players: ISO-New England (ISO-NE), natural gas and coal-fired power plants, and imported liquefied natural gas (LNG) played critical roles in keeping the lights on.

Historical context: New England’s resistance to pipeline infrastructure and its reliance on intermittent renewables have left the region vulnerable during peak demand periods.

[rjzimmerman]

Mexico elects climate scientist as next president (Heatmap AM)

Mexico resoundingly elected Claudia Sheinbaum as its next president over the weekend. Sheinbaum, 61, is making headlines for becoming the country’s first female president, as well as its first Jewish leader, but she is also a climate scientist, and her landslide victory “could mark a turning point from the current administration’s pro-fossil fuel policies,” as Climate Home News explained. Sheinbaum studied physics and then received her doctorate in energy engineering. She spent four years at the Lawrence Berkeley Lab studying Mexico’s energy consumption, and had a brief stint on the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). She was tapped as secretary of the environment for Mexico City before being elected as the capital’s mayor in 2018. During her tenure she was an advocate for rooftop solar and better public transportation infrastructure.

On the presidential campaign trail, Sheinbaum promised to “accelerate the energy transition” by boosting wind and solar, installing new transmission lines, and improving the country’s hydropower stations. But she has also backed the “energy sovereignty” policies of her predecessor and mentor, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador. He built an oil refinery, funneled support into an indebted state oil company, and failed to set a national net zero target. Under his leadership, private investment in renewable projects has slumped. Energy policy may be on Sheinbaum’s to-do list when she takes office in October, but tackling crime is likely to be top of the agenda.

[notwiselybuttoowell]

Though domestic fossil fuel production reached record levels under Joe Biden, his policies to boost renewable energy still sparked fear among oil and gas companies, said Mark Jones, a political scientist at Rice University in Houston, Texas. “There was a threat of moving toward a net zero world … maybe not now, but there was an idea that would happen if Democrats stayed in the White House,” said Jones.

For Warren and other oil billionaires, Trump removed that fear, Jones said.

Energy Transfer Partners reported a year-over-year increase in profits in the first quarter of this year. In an earnings call last month, company top brass praised the new administration and more supportive regulatory environment.

Among Trump’s moves that have benefited the company: a day-one move to end Biden’s pause on liquefied natural gas exports, which enables Energy Transfer to proceed with a long-sought-after LNG project in Lake Charles. On 13 May, Trump’s Federal Energy Commission (Ferc) also granted a three-year extension for the LNG project, which the company said was necessary for the project to succeed.

Since that Ferc decision, Energy Transfer Partners has also secured a 20-year deal to supply a Japanese company with up to 1m metric tons of LNG a year.

Other Trump orders to “unleash American energy” and declare an energy emergency to promote fossil fuels despite already booming production, for instance, are set to benefit Energy Transfer Partners by making it easier to expand the use all kinds of fossil fuels, thereby boosting the demand for pipelines.

Also fueling that demand: the projected boom in datacenters. Energy Transfer Partners has received requests to power 70 new ones, the Guardian reported in April, marking a 75% rise since Trump took office.

In the week after the Ferc decision, Warren’s wealth rose by nearly 10%, noted Sarah Cohen, who directs the climate and wealth inequality-focused non-profit Climate Accountability Research Project (Carp).

By appointing fossil fuel-friendly officials to top positions, such as the former energy CEO Chris Wright to head the energy department and the pro-oil and -gas Doug Burgum to the interior department, Trump has also “showed his allegiance to companies like Energy Transfer Partners”, said Cohen.

“They’re really creating this environment that’s great for oil and gas,” she said. “The message is ‘We’ll give you what you want.’”

Warren ranks among the richest 500 people in the world, with Forbes placing his net worth at $7.2bn. He has long deployed his wealth to support the GOP, including by becoming the 13th-largest corporate funder to Trump’s Make America Great Again Super Pac last year with a $5m donation.

The pipeline mogul accumulated most of his wealth from Energy Transfer Partners, which owns and operates about 130,000 miles of energy infrastructure in the US. In recent months, the firm has been criticized by advocates for its successful lawsuit against the environmental non-profit Greenpeace, which in March yielded a verdict that threatens to bankrupt the organization.

Warren has long enjoyed a relationship with the president, donating generously to his first campaign and attending closed-door meetings during his first term. Though Warren is not known to have attended the infamous May 2024 meeting during which Trump asked oil bosses for $1bn and pledged to overturn environmental rules, he did co-host a fundraiser for the president in Houston weeks later.

He is one of a handful of the most powerful oil billionaires from Texas, where there are no limits on contributions to candidates and political committees.

“Texas has always been kind of a testing ground for the most extreme politics and issues that the Republicans pursue,” said Matt Angle, founder of the Lone Star Project, a Democratic Pac in the state. “In Texas, people like him are used to being able to donate to get their way.”

The reconciliation bill, which the House passed last month and the Senate is now debating, is also expected to be a boon to Energy Transfer Partners and Warren. Known as the “one big beautiful bill”, it is expected to slash Biden-era incentives for renewable energy, tamping down competition in the energy market.

A number of more esoteric provisions in the bill will also prove beneficial for the company, according to a review by Carp shared with the Guardian. One provision in the House-approved version, for instance, would allow the Department of Energy to determine that a proposed LNG export facility is in the “public interest” if the applicant pays $1m – something Energy Transfer Partners could afford to do. It’s a “pay to play” scenario, said Carp co-founder Chuck Collins.

Other provisions would expedite the build-out of LNG export infrastructure, force the government to hold lease sales for fossil fuels even when demand is low and reverse protections to allow drilling in some areas without any judicial review. Still others would stymy federal agencies’ ability to implement new climate rules by requiring that major changes obtain congressional approval, allow gas developers to pay a $10m fee to bypass permitting processes, limit who can bring lawsuits over gas infrastructure and allow firms to pay taxpayers less to use public land, Carp found.

The bill is also set to hand fossil fuel companies huge tax breaks – including by extending tax cuts in the Trump-backed 2017 reconciliation bill, from which Energy Transfer Partners reported a tax benefit of $1.81bn.

Under Trump, Energy Transfer Partners will also probably save money on pipeline safety compliance. Since the president re-entered the White House in January, enforcement from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration has dropped. Across the pipeline industry, the PHMSA opened only four enforcement actions in April, and zero in March – marking the first month since the subagency’s 2004 launch when no cases were initiated, E&E News reported.

In March, Energy Transfer Partners also sued the PHMSA, claiming that its enforcement system is “unconstitutional”. Success in the suit could mean the company is forced to pay fewer penalties.

Another Trump policy from which Energy Transfer Partners will benefit: an exemption for oil and gas from his new tariffs. The president provided the industry wide shield after a meeting with the American Petroleum Institute lobby group, of which Warren’s company is a member.

[liminalweirdo]

full text list below the cut

abortion

accessible

accessibility

activism

activists

advocacy

advocate

advocates

affirming care

affordable home

affordable housing

agricultural water

agrivoltaics

air pollution

all-inclusive

allyship

alternative energy

anti-racism

antiracist

asexual

assigned at birth

assigned female at birth

assigned male at birth

at risk

autism

aviation fuel

barrier

barriers

belong

bias

biased

biased toward

bioenergy

biofuel

biogas

biomethane

biases

biases towards

biologically female

biologically male

bipoc

bisexual

black

black and latinx

breastfeed · people

breastfeed · person

cancer moonshot

carbon emissions mitigation

carbon footprint

carbon markets

carbon pricing

carbon sequestation

CEC

changing climate

chestfeed · people

chestfeed · person

clean energy

clean fuel

clean power

clean water

climate

climate accoutability

climate chage

climage-change

climate crisis

climate consulting

climate models

climate model

climate resilience

climate risk

climate science

climatesmart

climate smart agriculture

climate smart forestry

climate variability

commercial sex worker

community

community diversity

community equity

confirmation bias

contaminants of environmental concern

continuum

covid-19

cultural competence

cultural differences

cultural heritage

cultural relevance

cultural sensitivity

culturally appropriate

culturally resonsive

definition

DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion)

DEIA (diversity, equity, inclusion, accessibility)

DEIAB (diversity, equity, inclusion, accessibility, belonging)

DEIJ (diversity, equality, inclusion, justice)

diesel

dietary guidelines

ultraprocessed foods

disability

disability

disabled

disadvantaged

discriminated

discrimination

discriminatory

discussion of federal policies

disparity

diverse

diverse backgrounds

diverse communities

diverse community

diverse group

diverse groups

diversified

diversify

diversifying

dversity

diversity and inclusion

diversity/equality efforts

EEJ

EJ

elderly

electric vehicle

energy conversion

enhance the diversity

enhancing diversity

entitlement

environmental justice

environmental quality

equal oppertunity

equality

equitable

equitableness

equity

ethanol

ethnicity

evidence-based

excluded

exclusion

expression

female

females

feminism

fetus

field drainage

fluoride

fostering inclusivity

fuel cel

GBV (gender based violence)

gay

gender

gender based

gender based violence

gender diversity

gender identity

gender ideology

gender-affirming care

gendered

genders

geothermal

GHG emission

GHG monitoring

GHG modeling

global warming

green

green infrastructure

greenhouse gas emission

groundwater pollution

gulf of mexico

h5n1/bird flu

hate

hate speech

health disparity

hispanic

hispanic minority

historically

housing affordability

housing efficiency

hydrogen vehicle

identify

ideology

imigrants

implicit bias

implicit biases

inclusion

inclusive

inclusive leadership

inclusiveness

inclusivity

increase diversity

increase the diversity

indigenous

indigenous community/people

inequalities

inequality

inequitable

inequities

injustice

institutional

integration

intersectional

intersectionality

intersex

issues concerning pending legislation

justice40

key groups

key people

key populations

latinx

lesbian

lgbt

lgbtq

low-emission vehicle

low-income housing

male dominated

marginalize

marginalized

marijuana

measles

membrane filtration

men who have sex with men

mental health

methane emissions

microplastics

migrant

minorities

minority

minority serving instuitution

most risk

msm

multicultural

mx

MSI

native american

NCI budget

net-zero

non-binary

nonbinary

noncitizen

non-conforming

nonpoint source pollution

nuclear energy

nuclear power

obesity

opioids

oppression

oppressive

orientation

pansexual

PCB

peanut allergies

people of color

people · uterus

people-centred care

person-centred care

photovoltaic

PFAS

PFOA

polarization

political

pollution

pollution abatement

pollution remediation

prefabricated housing

pregnant people

pregnant person

pregnant persons

prejudice

privilege

privileges

promote

promote diversity

promoting diversity

pronoun

pronouns

prostitute

pyrolysis

queer

QT

race

race and ethnicity

racial

racial diversity

racial identity

racial inequialty

racial justice

racially

racism

runoff

rural water

safe drinking water

science-based

sediment

remediation

segregation

self-assessed

sense of belonging

sex

sexual preferences

sexuality

social justice

social vulnerability

socio cultural

sociocultral

socio economic

socioeconomic

status

soil pollution

solar energy

solar power

special populations

stem cell or fetal tissue research

stereotype

stereotypes

subsidized housing

sustainable construction

systemic

they/them

tile drainage

topics of federal investigations

topics that have received recent attention from congress

topics that have received widespread or critical media attention

trans

transgender

transitional housing

transexal

trauma

traumatic

tribal

two-spirit

unconscious bias

under appreciated

underprivileged

under represented

underrepresentation

underrepresented

underserved

under served

understudied

undervalued

vaccines

victim

victims

vulnerable

vulnerable populations

water collection

water conservation

water distribution

water efficiency

water management

water pollution

water storage

water treatment

water quality

wind power

woman

women

women and underepresented

[batboyblog]

Things Biden and the Democrats did, this week. #5

Feb 9-16 2024

The Department of Education released the first draft for a wide ranging student loan forgiveness plan. After Biden's first attempt at student debt forgiveness was struck down at the Supreme Court in 2023, this new plan is an attempt to replace it with something that will hold up in court. The plan hopes to forgive debt for anyone facing "financial hardship" which has been as broadly defined as possible. Another part of the plan hopes to eliminate $10-20,000 in interest from all student loans, as well as a wide ranging public Information push to inform people of other forgiveness programs they qualify for but don't know about.

The House passed 1.2 Billion Dollars to combat human trafficking, including $175 million in housing assistance to human trafficking victims

The Department of Transportation announced $970 Million for improvements at 114 airports across 44 states and 3 territories. They include $40 million to O'Hare International in Chicago to improve passenger experience by reconfiguring TSA and baggage claims, and installing ADA compliant bathrooms(!). The loans will also go to connecting airports to mass transit, boosted sustainability, installing solar and wind power, and expanding service to under served committees around the country.

Medicare & Medicaid released new guidelines to allow people to pay out of pocket prescription drug coats in monthly installments rather than as a lump sum. This together with capping the price of certain drugs and penalties for drug companies that rise prices over inflation is expected to save the public millions on drug coasts and assure people don't pass on a prescription because they can't pay upfront

The EPA announced its adding 150 more communities to its Closing America's Wastewater Access Gap Community Initiative. 2.2 Million Americans do not have basic running water and indoor plumbing. Broken and unreliable wastewater infrastructure exposed many of those to dangerous raw sewage. These Americans live primarily in poor and rural communities, many predominantly Black communities in the south as well as those on tribal lands. The program is aiming to close the wastewater gap and insure all Americans have access to reliable clear water.

The White House announced deferred action for Palestinians in the US. This means any Palestinian living in the United States, no mater their legal status, can not be deported for any reason for the next 18 months.

The Department of Energy announced $60 million in investment into clean geothermal energy. The plan will hopefully lead to a 90% decrease in the coasts of geothermal. DOE estimates hold that geothermal might be able to power the hopes of 65 million Americans by 2050 making it a key step in the Biden administration plan for a carbon-free grid by 2035 and net-zero emissions by 2050.

The EPA launched $83 million to help improve air quality monitoring across America. With updated equipment local agencies will be better able to report on air quality, give more localized reports of bad air quality and the country will be better equipped to start mitigating the problem

The Department of Energy announced $63 million in investments in domestic heat-pump manufacturing. Studies have shown that heat-pumps reduce green house gases by 50% over the most efficient condensing gas boilers, as technology improves this could rise to 75% by 2030. Heat pump water heaters meanwhile are 2 to 3 times as energy efficient as conventional electric water heaters.

HHS awarded $5.1 million to organizations working with LGBTQI+ Youth and their Families. The programs focus on preventing homelessness, fighting depression and suicide, drug use and HIV prevention and treatment, as well as  family counseling and support interventions tailored for LGBTQI+ families.

The House passed two bills in support of the oppressed Uyghur minority in China. The "No Dollars To Uyghur Forced Labor" Act would prohibit the US government from spending any money on projects that source materials from Xinjiang. The Uyghur Policy Act would create a permanent post at the State Department to coordinate policy on Uyghur Issues, much like the special ambassador on antisemitism.