#deep decarbonization

[man-and-atom]

This hourly diagram of electricity production and emissions for eleven European countries over the course of 2023 is honestly fascinating.

The lowest emissions, unsurprisingly, are found in Norway (hydro), Sweden and Switzerland (hydro plus nuclear, although Switzerland has yet to abandon its “nuclear phase-out” policy), and France (nuclear). The highest are in Poland, which burns coal very heavily. And Germany varies wildly.

But we can also see, for instance, that Poland has a very narrow range in its production of electricity. So does Denmark, perhaps suprisingly ― although, contrary to what you might expect, Denmark is not among the top 10 countries in the world by share of wind power, according to OECD-IEA. We can guess that Norway’s very broad range of output variation reflects the use of its hydro plants to follow the variations in the Danish load.

Belgian output is also in a fairly narrow band, and we can likewise guess that a part of the large variation in French output is to compensate for that. German output, on the other hand, is all over the map because of variations in supply, not correlated with load.

What inferences can you draw?

[man-and-atom]

It is certainly true that the Earth is vast and its natural systems are complex. One result is, in effect, a great number of feedback loops, some of them incorporating time–delays which are long compared to the human lifetime. Therefore, it may be difficult to discern the effects of actions we take now, because of the continuing effects of what has already happened. And not seeing immediate results tends to be extremely discouraging.

One thing that seems certain is that whatever is coming will be easier to meet with more energy, whether that be for cooling overheated housing, or desalting seawater to cope with a lack of rainfall, or pumping water out of low–lying areas…

Fission can provide vast amounts of energy with minimal environmental disturbance. Even as practiced now, inefficiently, its associated emissions are less than those for wind or solar, as recognized in IPCC reports ― and it efficaciously displaces the burning of fossil fuels, which wind and solar have persistently failed to do. It is also less affected by environmental conditions, such as changes in the patterns of wind and sunshine. The point is, a global transition to nuclear energy will give many benefits which are clearly tangible in the here–and–now, as well as helping to limit future climate risks.

DR ADAM LEVY ClimateAdam ROSEMARY MOSCO

[hope-for-the-planet]

I didn't realize carbon capture was a real thing that actually worked (outside of trees, of course!)

Hi Anon!

It is a real thing and it does work! The big caveat is that it definitely isn’t a standalone solution to climate change, but it’s a real technology that has helpful applications in mitigating the climate crisis.

A lot of carbon capture occurs at the emissions source, to capture the carbon dioxide and either pump and store it deep underground or run it through algae scrubbers or a chemical process to capture the carbon dioxide as biofuel, reusable plastic, or other materials.

The caveat here is that a lot of folks are rightfully worried that focusing too much on carbon capture will give the powers that be an excuse to drag their feet in cutting emissions and decarbonizing. Why worry about changing the status quo if a magical technology will come along to bail us out by pulling all those emissions right back out of the air?

Carbon capture also has a lot of significant limitations, such as the amount of energy required to fix a relatively small amount of carbon dioxide. This isn’t my area of expertise, but my understanding is that this technology will probably be most applicable to capture emissions for industries that will be particularly difficult to decarbonize—for example the creation of certain materials that are either exceptionally energy-intensive or inherently release carbon dioxide in their creation (like cement).

So very cool technology, but it’s not going to make a big enough impact on climate change without us also significantly reducing emissions. And it’s not going to replace planting and protecting trees, since nature’s carbon capture is still usually much more energy and resource efficient (as well as all the habitat and climate control benefits)!

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this story from Anthropocene Magazine:

U.S. states can decarbonize on their own for about the same price as a federal-led effort to reduce emissions by the same amount, according to a new study. The findings underline that a “coalition of the willing” could not bring the country to net-zero emissions on its own. But they also represent a hopeful vision of how climate action in the U.S. could continue despite Trump Administration rollbacks.

The Biden Administration pursued ambitious decarbonization policies via the Inflation Reduction Act and other initiatives, while the Trump Administration has taken a very different approach to climate policy. The situation highlights the volatility of national-level climate action in the United States, even as the American public broadly supports developing alternative energy sources, and urgent action is needed to avoid locking in fossil fuels with new infrastructure.

Enter “climate federalism,” a concept that casts U.S. states as laboratories not just of democracy but of climate action. In theory, this bottom-up approach might be more effective and durable than top-down action. In the new study, researchers sketch out what it might look like in practice.

“Ultimately the most important takeaway here is that state-led action can achieve substantial emission reductions, even without federal support, but that the world looks very different from one where there is federal coordination,” says study team member Jeremiah Johnson, an environmental engineer at North Carolina State University. “This has some important implications, not just for those states that choose to participate, but also for those who don’t.”

Johnson and his colleagues identified 23 U.S. states that are most likely to pursue net-zero emissions by 2050, based on the number of climate policies currently on the books as well as their overall political leanings. They fed publicly available energy system data into a computer model to estimate the cost of decarbonization and predict the green technologies that the states would likely turn to in their efforts.

Action by this group of states could reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by about 46% by 2050, the researchers report in the journal Nature Communications. The researchers then used the same model to explore what federally coordinated action to reduce national emissions by the same amount would look like.

Federal led climate action would be about 0.7% cheaper than state action, the researchers found. “We were surprised [the state-led] emissions reductions would be achieved at costs comparable to federal actions,” Johnson says. Since only about half of U.S. states were expected to pursue net-zero emissions, “we expected to see this considerably push up the costs of achieving deep decarbonization.”

However, the mix of green technologies that would be used in a state-led decarbonization effort would be different from the federally coordinated one. The state-led effort would lean heavily on green manufacturing technologies to decarbonize industry, while the federal approach would rely more on clean energy such as solar and wind power.

The net-zero states would likely rely on electrification to reduce emissions from transportation and industry, as well as direct air capture to neutralize residual emissions. They might also purchase more electricity from neighboring states, leading to the potential for “emissions leakage.” In the state-led scenario, “we observed substantial new electricity exports from the Great Plains states into the Upper Midwest while those exporting states increased fossil fuel-based use,” Johnson says. “This would undercut the efforts of net-zero states unless their policies are designed to address this.”

The state-led scenario also leaves some cost-effective mitigation opportunities on the table, such as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage in the Southeastern United States, where states are unlikely to pursue decarbonization without federal action. Still, if state-led action is the only option, this can lead to substantial progress on climate, the study shows.

[allthegeopolitics]

Keir Starmer has arrived in Downing Street with his new Cabinet. So what are their first priorities? Big-ticket items include decarbonizing the electricity grid by 2030, building 1.5 million homes over five years, hitting long-missed health service waiting time targets by 2029 and hiring 6,500 teachers, 5,000 tax investigators, 3,000 fully-trained police officers and 8,500 mental health staff.

Continue Reading

[bumblebeeappletree]

The shipping industry is responsible for three percent of global emissions. One of its best bets to get these down is fueling their vessels with ammonia. It releases no carbon when burnt and is cheaper than other alternative fuels like methanol. The catch: building a specialized engine is extremely difficult – and there's pretty much no green ammonia production today. So can it really fix shipping's emission problem?

#PlanetA #Ammonia #Shipping

Credits:

Reporter: Kai Steinecke

Camera & Video Editor: Neven Hillebrands

Supervising Editor: Malte Rohwer-Kahlmann, Kiyo Dörrer, Joanna Gotschalk

Factcheck: Aditi Rajagopal

Thumbnail: Em Chabridon

Special thanks to Dr. Nicole Wermuth who double checked critical parts of the video and gave background information about the engine concept as well as its current weaknesses.

Read More:

Ammonia as a fuel in shipping:

https://www.emsa.europa.eu/newsroom/l...

Role of efuels in decarbonizing transport:

https://www.iea.org/reports/the-role-...

Deep dive on ammonia as a shipping fuel:

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/sta...

The future of marine fuels:

https://maritime.lr.org/l/941163/2023...

Chapters:

00:00 Intro

00:39 Ammonia 101

01:25 How ammonia engines work

04:23 The oxides problem

07:42 False promises?

08:31 What's next for ammonia engines?

09:17 The space challenge

11:22 Green ammonia challenge

14:22 Conclusion

[allthebrazilianpolitics]

See how Brazil is benefiting from the Industrial Deep Decarbonization Initiative 

The Industrial Deep Decarbonization Initiative offers Brazil's industries a pathway for a just and equitable transition to net zero through technological innovation, capacity building and policy development.

The Initiative enables Brazil to navigate challenges in sectors such as cement, steel, aluminium and petrochemicals, while prioritizing social safety nets, community engagement and workforce reskilling.

International examples showcase successful models that balance economic growth, environmental sustainability and social fairness, this reinforces the potential impact of the Initiative on Brazil's low-carbon future.

Continue reading.

[man-and-atom]

Well, that’s at least less unreasonable than I was thinking.

It appears that the idea of large–scale carbon capture for sequestration is not something that one can say much of anything sensible about at the present time.

The economics of any kind of peaking plant, on the other hand, always have to compete with part–loading a baseload–capable power plant. This is, I hasten to observe, true because we have a zero–emissions baseload power technology available and well proven. In other words, to minimize emissions of CO₂ to the atmosphere, the much–discussed “transition to renewable energy” is not the only option.

Now, in a scenario where nuclear is allowed, the relevant cost comparison may well be, not between solar plus “Terraformer” plus gas turbine and solar plus battery, but between nuclear plus “Terraformer” plus gas turbine and part–loaded nuclear. Now, we can reasonably expect any nuclear power plant of established types, built at the present time, to operate 60 years (unless shut down by political mandate), with a major refurbishment at 30 years.

Unfortunately, the question of how much a new nuclear plant costs is hard to settle. There are not enough current projects to supply meaningful data. Suppose $60 per watt installed, which is on the high end, although not the absolute highest (thus giving a generous allowance for the mid–life refurbishment and other costs). Then straight–line depreciation for 60 years gives $1 per annual watt–year. Part–loading that plant at 50% annual load factor would only double that cost. $2 per annual watt–year is somewhat higher than the figures being advanced for the carbon–capture/gas–turbine system, and which option is really preferable probably ends up being a matter of the specific situation. At $15 per watt (at the low end for current projects, but there is good reason to think that costs could be reduced substantially from there), baseload is 25¢ per annual watt–year, 50¢ at half load, and the case for the peaker is difficult to make out.

It certainly does not appear that there is an overwhelming case that can be made for using the “Terraformer” system, as compared to equipment which is already well proven in service. And for my part, I tend to view all carbon–capture schemes, and especially schemes for compensating for the intermittency of wind and solar with combustion equipment, as ways to justify not taking rapid effective steps away from fossil fuels.

when will we see the first reverse coal baron (negacoal?) who owns vast pits that armies of filthy labourers carefully stack full of carbon bricks spat out of vast capture machines sucking in CO2 from the sky

[mariacallous]

Central banks from eight countries—Mexico, the UK, France, Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Singapore, and China—formed the Network of Central Banks and Supervisors for Greening the Financial System (NGFS) in 2017 to investigate and coordinate a response to climate change. By the end of 2022, the NGFS had over 120 members. However, among these central banks, there were considerable differences in the strategies adopted to account for and address climate change. Most strikingly, climate change has emerged as an unusual area of divergence between the European Central Bank (ECB) and the U.S. Federal Reserve (Fed), despite their historical tendency to adopt similar policy tools, frameworks, and objectives. The Fed limited its approach to climate change to basic climate policy standards or “norms” that recognized some relevance of climate change to achieving its monetary and prudential objectives but avoided any support for decarbonization. In contrast, the ECB better appreciated that climate change raised profound challenges for achieving its central banking objectives. As a result, the ECB adopted proactive climate policy norms that, for example, put in place climate-related criteria for asset purchase programs and far-reaching supervisory interventions to ensure that financial institutions accounted for climate risk.

To understand the ECB-Fed divergence on climate policy, we develop a theoretical framework that describes how new central banking norms are created and become influential in the context of domestic and international pressures. In the initial stage of climate policy norm emergence, broad support across the EU for climate action along with persuasive think tanks, researchers, and other policy entrepreneurs helped push the ECB to endorse new climate-related norms. The founding of the NGFS and the associated cascade of climate-related norms exerted significant pressure towards climate policy convergence across many central banks. However, the deeply polarized and partisan U.S. debate on climate change, stoked by an influential domestic fossil fuel industry, led the Fed to adopt only a modest version of the foundational climate norms—a stark divergence from the proactive climate stance of the ECB.

Given the deep differences in domestic political pressures, it seems unlikely that the climate policy differences between the ECB and the Fed will soon disappear. However, given the international connectedness of central banking, we expect global policy norms to provide sustained pressure towards convergence. In this context, the ECB might scale back some proactive commitments, although it seems unlikely to entirely disavow its current forward-leaning stance. The Fed may also seek a more favorable compromise, such as assuring domestic audiences of climate policy restraint, while cooperating with international peers on less overt regulatory interventions.

Download the full paper here»

[man-and-atom]

I had to send a comment in response to this piece.

Listening to this segment, I was dismayed to hear no mention of the energy source which the IPCC ranks as having the lowest life-cycle global warming potential, an energy source which supplies approximately twice the fraction of world energy that wind and solar do, an energy source which is already affordable and reliable. I mean, of course, nuclear fission. It’s all very well to say that wind and solar have fallen in price, and can be made reliable with batteries and upgraded power grids, but in most places that have tried it, the price of power has soared, and there has been very little decarbonization achieved. And that is the key consideration : a climate policy which costs too much or causes too much hardship to implement, won't be implemented. So we see that Germany, despite vast investments in wind and solar, has this past month reactivated a three-gigawatt coal-fired power station. French energy-sector greenhouse-gas emissions are half those of Germany, and electricity prices in France are about half what they are in Germany, too. Nuclear energy is such an effective competitor to fossil fuels that, in the 1970s, companies such as Gulf Oil and Exxon invested heavily in nuclear technology, in order not to be left behind. Considering how fragile power grids are across much of the USA, it’s important that nuclear power plants can be located near the cities they serve, reducing the need for (and cost of) grid upgrades. With “breeder” reactors, like the one which generated the first nuclear electricity back in 1951, the uranium and thorium already mined can provide more energy than all the fossil fuels that can ever be extracted. And, to bring us back to the subject of COP28, the UAE (which has three big power reactors in operation now, and one more under construction) and 21 other countries, including the USA, have just pledged to triple nuclear power by 2050. It’s not enough, but it looks more like real progress than any number of vague “net zero” pledges. People are hardly accustomed to hearing about nuclear, and what they do hear tends to be negative. That doesn’t reflect the reality at all. And it’s that reality that we need to talk about.

[communicationblogs]

Floating Wind Turbine market

Floating Wind Turbine market size is forecast to reach $31.5 billion by 2026, growing at a CAGR of 28.1% from 2021 to 2026.

🔗 𝐆𝐞𝐭 𝐑𝐎𝐈-𝐟𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟓-𝟐𝟎𝟑𝟏 → 𝐃𝐨𝐰𝐧𝐥𝐨𝐚𝐝 𝐍𝐨𝐰

Floating Wind Turbine Market is revolutionizing offshore wind energy by enabling wind power generation in deep waters where fixed foundations are not feasible. Using advanced floating platforms anchored to the seabed, these turbines capture stronger, more consistent winds further offshore. This technology expands renewable energy access while minimizing visual and environmental impact near coastlines.

Driven by global decarbonization goals, technological advancements, and increasing investments, the market is gaining momentum, especially in regions with deep coastal waters like Europe, Asia-Pacific, and the U.S. Floating wind offers a scalable, sustainable solution to meet rising clean energy demands worldwide.

🌬️ 𝟏. 𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐫, 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐖𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐬

Floating turbines can be placed in deeper waters, accessing high wind speeds that improve energy yield and reliability compared to near-shore or land-based turbines.

🌍 𝟐. 𝐆𝐥𝐨𝐛𝐚𝐥 𝐒𝐡𝐢𝐟𝐭 𝐓𝐨𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐝 𝐑𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐰𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐄𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐠𝐲

Governments and corporations are accelerating clean energy adoption to meet net-zero targets, with floating wind offering untapped offshore potential.

⚓ 𝟑. 𝐋𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐒𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰-𝐖𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐒𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐅𝐢𝐱𝐞𝐝 𝐓𝐮𝐫𝐛𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬

In many coastal regions, especially in countries like Japan, South Korea, and parts of the U.S., shallow-water sites are scarce, making floating solutions essential.

📈 𝟒. 𝐓𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐧𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐀𝐝𝐯𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬

Innovations in mooring systems, floating platforms (like semi-submersible and spar designs), and turbine design are reducing costs and increasing commercial viability.

💰 𝟓. 𝐆𝐫𝐨𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐏𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 & 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐈𝐧��𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭

Major energy companies and governments are funding pilot projects and large-scale developments, supporting R&D and accelerating commercialization.

𝐓𝐨𝐩 𝐊𝐞𝐲 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫𝐬:

Marine and Construction | SERIMAX | OceanSTAR Elite Group | SOLVE WIND | Anma Offshore Wind | HAILI | S.E.A Offshore Mooring Chain | Siemens Gamesa | Suzlon Group | LM Wind Power

#FloatingTurbines #DeepWaterWind #WindTech #EnergyInnovation #BlueEnergy #MarineEnergy #NextGenWind #NetZero #Decarbonization #ClimateSolutions #EnergyTransition #FutureOfEnergy #GlobalWindEnergy #OffshoreRenewables

[gis56]

Building Energy Simulation Software Market Size, Share & Growth Analysis 2034: Designing Sustainable & Smart Buildings

Building Energy Simulation Software Market is gaining momentum globally as sustainability becomes a top priority in construction and infrastructure planning. This market includes digital platforms that help model, analyze, and optimize energy consumption in buildings, with a focus on reducing carbon footprints and enhancing operational efficiency. By simulating aspects such as heating, ventilation, cooling, and lighting, these tools provide architects, engineers, and facility managers with critical insights to create energy-efficient and regulatory-compliant designs.

In 2024, the market is estimated to encompass over 620 million installations worldwide, with commercial buildings accounting for 45% of the market, followed by residential and industrial sectors. The increasing demand for green buildings and smart energy solutions continues to push the need for advanced simulation software, making this market a vital component in the global energy efficiency landscape.

Click to Request a Sample of this Report for Additional Market Insights: https://www.globalinsightservices.com/request-sample/?id=GIS26611

Market Dynamics

Key forces are shaping the growth trajectory of the Building Energy Simulation Software Market. The drive toward net-zero energy buildings and stringent building codes across major economies are compelling stakeholders to adopt simulation tools during the design and construction phases. Simultaneously, advancements in AI, machine learning, and cloud computing are revolutionizing the simulation landscape — delivering real-time analytics, predictive modeling, and enhanced user experience.

Cloud-based solutions dominate the technology segment due to their scalability and flexibility, particularly for large-scale construction and retrofit projects. On-premise deployments still hold relevance among firms requiring strict data security and internal IT infrastructure integration. Additionally, the rise of smart buildings and IoT integration is boosting the demand for software capable of managing complex systems and data inputs seamlessly.

However, high initial costs and the need for technical expertise remain challenges, particularly for small firms. Market penetration is also hampered by limited awareness of long-term energy savings and the complexity of integrating software with existing building management systems.

Key Players Analysis

Several market leaders are driving innovation in this space. Autodesk, Inc. and Bentley Systems, Inc. are pioneers, known for their robust, user-friendly platforms that integrate seamlessly with design workflows. Tools like IESVE, EnergyPlus, and DesignBuilder are widely adopted for their deep modeling capabilities and compliance with international standards.

Emerging players like Green Frame Software, Simu Build, and Eco Logic Simulations are gaining traction with agile, cost-effective solutions tailored for specific market niches, including low-income housing and small-scale commercial projects. These companies are leveraging AI, open-source platforms, and modular deployment models to attract new customers and bridge gaps in accessibility and affordability.

Regional Analysis

North America leads the global market, with the United States��setting the pace through progressive energy codes, advanced infrastructure, and high R&D investment. Canada is also ramping up its energy efficiency goals, driven by both regulatory pressure and environmental awareness.

Europe remains a stronghold for energy simulation due to robust policy frameworks like the EU Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD). Countries such as Germany and the UK are embracing simulation tools to meet decarbonization targets and drive green infrastructure initiatives.

Asia-Pacific is witnessing the fastest growth, powered by rapid urbanization and smart city developments in China, India, and South Korea. Government programs promoting sustainable construction and increased foreign investment in infrastructure are fueling demand.

The Middle East & Africa are also catching up, with nations like the UAE and Saudi Arabia incorporating simulation in mega-projects focused on sustainability. Meanwhile, Latin America, led by Brazil and Mexico, is showing increasing interest in energy modeling to curb rising energy costs and environmental impact.

Recent News & Developments

Recent developments highlight a shift towards AI-driven simulations and real-time energy analytics. Companies are integrating cloud platforms with building management systems (BMS) for dynamic energy monitoring. Tools now come with machine learning modules that predict performance anomalies and suggest optimization strategies — making simulations not only reactive but also proactive.

Autodesk’s updates to its Green Building Studio, and Bentley’s advancements in digital twin technology, are setting benchmarks for the next generation of energy modeling. Collaborations between software firms and certification bodies like LEED and BREEAM are also strengthening the ecosystem, making simulation tools indispensable for green building certification.

Browse Full Report : https://www.globalinsightservices.com/reports/building-energy-simulation-software-market/

Scope of the Report

This report provides a comprehensive overview of the Building Energy Simulation Software Market, highlighting market size, key trends, challenges, and competitive landscape. It delves into segmentation by software type, application, deployment model, technology, and end-user, offering insights on adoption patterns across sectors.

The report analyzes critical market drivers such as urbanization, regulatory compliance, cost-saving potential, and green construction trends, while also addressing restraints like software complexity and integration hurdles. Stakeholders can benefit from strategic guidance on R&D investment, market entry, and cross-regional expansion.

With simulation tools becoming a cornerstone in sustainable architecture, the market holds immense potential for innovation and disruption.

#energyefficiency #smartbuildings #greenconstruction #buildingsimulation #sustainablearchitecture #energymodeling #cloudsoftware #aiinconstruction #netzeroenergy #buildinganalytics

Discover Additional Market Insights from Global Insight Services:

Commercial Drone Market : https://www.globalinsightservices.com/reports/commercial-drone-market/

Product Analytics Market :https://www.globalinsightservices.com/reports/product-analytics-market/

Streaming Analytics Market : https://www.globalinsightservices.com/reports/streaming-analytics-market/

Cloud Native Storage Market : https://www.globalinsightservices.com/reports/cloud-native-storage-market/

Alternative Lending Platform Market : https://www.globalinsightservices.com/reports/alternative-lending-platform-market/

About Us:

Global Insight Services (GIS) is a leading multi-industry market research firm headquartered in Delaware, US. We are committed to providing our clients with highest quality data, analysis, and tools to meet all their market research needs. With GIS, you can be assured of the quality of the deliverables, robust & transparent research methodology, and superior service.

Contact Us:

Global Insight Services LLC 16192, Coastal Highway, Lewes DE 19958 E-mail: info@globalinsightservices.com Phone: +1–833–761–1700 Website: https://www.globalinsightservices.com/

[bisresearch0]

Reconfigurable Battery Systems (RBS) Market: Growth Dynamics and Technology Disruption

A reconfigurable battery system is a battery pack wherein the interconnections among individual cells can be dynamically altered during operation to form various configurations. This capability transforms a conventional passive two-terminal battery into an intelligent system that can reconfigure itself in response to specific requirements, thereby enhancing operational performance.Reconfigurable Battery Systems (RBS) are revolutionizing the energy storage landscape by offering adaptable, scalable, and efficient solutions for a wide range of applications, including electric vehicles (EVs), renewable energy integration, and backup power systems. 

The reconfigurable battery systems (RBS) market was valued at $3.06 billion in 2024 and is projected to grow at a CAGR of 14.78%, reaching $13.59 billion by 2035.

Market Segmentation

By Application:The demand for effective, large-scale energy storage to facilitate the integration of renewable energy sources is anticipated to propel the grid storage systems segment to the top of the RBS market. Grid stability becomes crucial as countries switch to solar and wind generation, which makes modular and scalable RBS perfect.

By Type: Because of its scalability, versatility, and wide range of industrial applications, modular battery packs are expected to dominate the market. Meanwhile, the growing need for operational safety, efficiency optimization, and real-time performance monitoring will propel the greatest growth in smart battery management systems (BMS).

By Region: With the help of sophisticated infrastructure, robust clean energy regulations, and significant industry participants, North America is expected to dominate the market. Demand for grid storage and integration of renewable energy is highest in the United States.

Market Demand

Integration of Renewable Energy:Efficient storage becomes crucial as countries increase their solar and wind output. In order to maintain reliable power delivery from intermittent sources, RBS provides a responsive, modular solution that guarantees energy is saved and released exactly when needed.

International Investments: In 2024 alone, the United States built 9.2 GW of battery storage capacity. By 2030, Europe wants to surpass 50 GW. Such infrastructural spending is a sign of the growing demand for sophisticated, adaptable storage systems around the world, which is driving the RBS industry.

Innovation in Batteries: RBS's commercial feasibility is growing because to advancements in energy density, cost reduction, and thermal stability. These developments are especially helpful for applications like emergency backup systems and electric cars that need dependability and small form factors.

Market Challenge

Despite the tremendous momentum, proven energy storage methods pose a serious threat to RBS technologies:

Pumped hydro storage continues to rule large-scale applications because of its affordability and track record of dependability.

Because of their established supply networks and inexpensive startup prices, lead-acid batteries are still widely used for emergency and small-scale storage.

RBS offer unparalleled system intelligence and flexibility, but their limited long-term performance data and higher upfront expenses may prevent wider implementation. It will take ongoing research and development aimed at improving energy density, system longevity, and cost competitiveness to overcome these obstacles.

Get your hands on this Sample Report to stay up-to-date on the latest developments in this Reconfigurable Battery Systems (RBS) Market. Click Here!

Gain deep information on  Advance Materials and Chemicals Vertical 

Future Outlook

As global energy systems move toward decentralization, digitization, and decarbonization, the RBS market is about to undergo a dramatic growth phase. For a variety of sectors to provide high-efficiency, dependable, and scalable power storage, these battery systems—which are designed to reconfigure on demand—will become indispensable.

As the need for resilient and clean energy systems grows, RBS will be essential to:

assisting with smart grids

Increasing the use of electric vehicles

enabling vital infrastructure backup power

It is anticipated that cross-industry cooperation, infrastructural improvements, and policy incentives would all hasten market penetration even more.

Conclusion

The paradigm for energy storage is about to be redefined by reconfigurable battery systems. RBS offers a strong substitute for outdated storage methods, supported by strong increases in renewable energy investments, quick developments in modular technology, and sophisticated battery management.

RBS is becoming more competitive in terms of cost, scalability, and performance as a result of ongoing innovation, even as older systems continue to provide challenges. RBS will be essential in creating the sophisticated, low-carbon energy systems of the future as governments and businesses around the world place a higher priority on environmental sustainability and energy security.

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this story from Canary Media:

Buildings everywhere need to get off fossil fuels in order to help the world avoid climate catastrophe. Yet owners of large commercial buildings in New York City are especially feeling the pressure: The groundbreaking Local Law 97 takes effect this year, requiring buildings of more than 25,000 square feet to meet specific emissions limits, which become more stringent in 2030, or face hefty fines.

One cutting-edge retrofit project is underway at the corner of Hudson and Charlton streets in lower Manhattan. The 17-story Art Deco office building, built in 1931, is ditching its fossil-gas boiler for uber-efficient electric heat pumps that are both heaters and air conditioners. They’re key components of a system that aims to heat and cool the building more efficiently by capturing thermal energy that would otherwise be wasted.

The state is backing the demonstration project, which could serve as a model to decarbonize the more than 6,000 high-rises that punctuate New York City’s skyline. As part of the Empire Building Challenge, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) awarded $5 million to the 345 Hudson project in 2022, which also has more than $30 million in private funding.

Project leader Benjamin Rodney estimates that once the project is complete in 2030, the building will use 25 percent less energy than a conventional design and reduce greenhouse gas pollution by 70 percent relative to 2019 levels. As the grid cleans up, he expects the figure to climb to 90 percent by 2035. The deep emissions cuts will allow the building owner, Hudson Square Properties — a joint venture of Hines, Trinity Church Wall Street, and Norges Bank Investment Management — to avoid more than $200,000 in fines annually starting in 2030.

But more importantly, it could help other building owners determine how best to eliminate emissions — a crucial task given that nearly 70 percent of the city’s carbon pollution stems from the fossil fuels used to heat and power its buildings.

[evoet]

Biogas Treatment Solutions: Technologies, Benefits & Best Practices

Biogas has emerged as a powerful renewable energy source, offering a sustainable way to manage organic waste while generating electricity and heat. However, raw biogas contains impurities that must be removed before use. This is where biogas treatment solutions come into play.

In this article, we’ll explore the key components, technologies, and benefits of biogas treatment, along with best practices for efficient system design.

What Is Biogas Treatment?

Biogas treatment refers to the process of purifying biogas to make it suitable for specific applications like electricity generation, heating, or injection into the natural gas grid. Raw biogas typically contains:

Methane (CH₄) – 50-70%

Carbon dioxide (CO₂) – 30-50%

Impurities – hydrogen sulfide (H₂S), siloxanes, ammonia, moisture, and particulates

These contaminants must be removed to improve biogas quality, efficiency, and safety.

Why Is Biogas Treatment Important?

1. Protects Equipment

Contaminants like H₂S and siloxanes can corrode engines and damage turbines, reducing lifespan and increasing maintenance costs.

2. Improves Energy Yield

High-purity methane boosts energy output and efficiency in CHP units and gas engines.

3. Enables Grid Injection

To meet pipeline standards, biogas must be upgraded to biomethane with >97% methane content.

4. Reduces Emissions

Treated biogas produces fewer pollutants, aligning with environmental compliance standards.

Key Biogas Treatment Technologies

1. H₂S Removal

Iron Sponge (Ferric Oxide)

Activated Carbon Filters

Biological Desulfurization – using microbes to oxidize H₂S

2. CO₂ Removal (Biogas Upgrading)

Water Scrubbing

Pressure Swing Adsorption (PSA)

Chemical Absorption (e.g., amine scrubbing)

Membrane Separation

3. Moisture Removal

Chillers and Condensers

Desiccant Dryers

4. Siloxane Removal

Activated Carbon

Deep Freezing (Cryogenic)

Applications of Treated Biogas

Electricity Generation – in gas engines or microturbines

Heat Production – for industrial or residential heating

Vehicle Fuel – as compressed biomethane (bio-CNG)

Grid Injection – supplying renewable natural gas (RNG)

Best Practices for Biogas Treatment Systems

Tailor the treatment system to feedstock – Agricultural waste, food waste, and wastewater sludge have different impurity profiles.

Monitor gas quality continuously – Use sensors for H₂S, CH₄, and moisture.

Ensure system scalability – Design for current needs with flexibility for expansion.

Integrate energy recovery – Capture waste heat from upgrading processes.

Follow local regulatory standards – Especially important for grid injection and bio-CNG.

Future Trends in Biogas Treatment

AI-driven monitoring and optimization

Modular treatment units for decentralized operations

Integration with carbon capture and storage (CCS)

Increased demand for RNG in decarbonization strategies

Conclusion

Investing in efficient biogas treatment solutions is crucial for maximizing the value of biogas, protecting infrastructure, and meeting regulatory standards. With the right technology and best practices, businesses and municipalities can turn organic waste into a clean, profitable, and sustainable energy source.

[harisharticles]

Wind Energy Drives the World to a Greener Tomorrow

World Wind Day is more than just a symbolic date on the calendar. It is a global reminder of the transformative potential of wind energy in reshaping how the world generates and consumes power. As the climate crisis intensifies and nations race toward net-zero targets, wind energy stands out as one of the most effective, scalable, and sustainable solutions. Recognizing why wind energy is key to a greener tomorrow is essential for both policymakers and the public, as it represents the intersection of environmental responsibility, economic opportunity, and energy independence.

Global Importance of Wind Energy: Wind energy has evolved from an alternative power source into a mainstream contributor to global electricity production. Nations across continents are investing in onshore and offshore wind farms to diversify their energy mix and meet emission targets. According to the Global Wind Energy Council, wind is now among the fastest-growing renewable energy sources worldwide. Its increasing capacity not only stabilizes national grids but also significantly offsets the carbon emissions that contribute to global warming.

Environmental Benefits of Wind Power: Unlike fossil fuels, wind power produces no air or water pollution and requires no water for cooling, making it an environmentally superior choice. Wind turbines harness the kinetic energy of wind without depleting resources or releasing greenhouse gases. As more countries transition away from coal and natural gas, the widespread adoption of wind energy can drastically reduce the environmental footprint of power generation and help restore ecological balance. Moreover, wind energy projects often coexist with agricultural and conservation activities, preserving land use while generating clean power.

Economic and Energy Security Advantages: Wind energy is not only sustainable but also economically strategic. It reduces dependence on volatile fossil fuel markets, enhances local energy resilience, and creates employment opportunities in manufacturing, installation, maintenance, and logistics. Rural communities especially benefit from wind farms through job creation, land lease revenues, and infrastructure development. Furthermore, as countries invest in domestic wind infrastructure, they bolster energy security and reduce exposure to geopolitical tensions surrounding oil and gas supplies.

Wind Energy and Technological Innovation: The success of wind energy is driven by rapid technological advancements. Modern turbines are more efficient, quieter, and capable of generating power even in low-wind conditions. Digital monitoring systems and AI-driven analytics enhance operational efficiency, predictive maintenance, and grid integration. Floating wind platforms now allow for deployment in deep-sea environments, expanding access to consistent wind resources. These innovations continue to lower the cost per megawatt-hour, making wind energy more competitive with traditional energy sources.

Challenges and Future Outlook: While wind energy has made remarkable strides, it still faces several challenges. Grid integration, intermittency, land-use conflicts, and regulatory delays can hinder deployment. However, with supportive policies, investment in energy storage, and improved infrastructure, these hurdles can be overcome. The global commitment to decarbonization, combined with public support and private sector investment, ensures that wind energy will play an ever-larger role in achieving a cleaner, more sustainable future.

For More Info: https://bi-journal.com/why-wind-energy-is-key-to-a-greener-tomorrow/

Conclusion: World Wind Day serves as a compelling opportunity to reflect on the importance of renewable power and to reaffirm that wind energy is key to a greener tomorrow. Its environmental, economic, and strategic benefits make it an indispensable part of the global clean energy transition. As technology continues to advance and global support for sustainability grows, wind power will remain at the forefront of efforts to build a more resilient and eco-friendly world.