Activate’s Post

The (relatively unknown) story of 𝗖𝗹𝗮𝗶𝗿 𝗖𝗮𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗼𝗻 𝗣𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻. Or: The (even) long(er) fight against big oil. Patterson is credited with making many aware of the devastating effects of 𝙡𝙚𝙖𝙙 𝙞𝙣 𝙛𝙪𝙚𝙡𝙨. 🚗 Cars and vehicles were advancing rapidly in the 1950s. Engines were designed to be bigger and faster, and they used more octane. Adding lead to fuel improved engine performance. 👨🔬 Patterson's fight for clean air began in 1965. He knew even then that various industrial practices were harming the planet and all living things. That's why he decided to work to protect the environment. He discovered that the earth's surface was contaminated with lead to a significant degree. ☠ Lead accumulates in the body where it can have profound effects on the central nervous system. Patterson estimated that lead exposure was up to 100 times that of pre-industrial ancestors - often just below the threshold of acute toxicity. 👨🔬 He found that lead gets into everyday substances such as gasoline and food cans through a compound called 𝙩𝙚𝙩𝙧𝙖𝙚𝙩𝙝𝙮𝙡𝙥𝙡𝙖𝙣. He was also able to prove that the atmosphere contained a lot of lead. That's still the case today, because lead never disappears. About 90% of it apparently came from the tailpipes of cars. According to Patterson's findings, before 1923 the atmosphere contained almost no lead at all, and since that time the lead concentration had steadily increased to dangerous levels. 💸 From then on, he campaigned for a ban on the substance. His main opponent was 𝗘𝘁𝗵𝘆𝗹 𝗖𝗼𝗿𝗽𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻, the leading manufacturer of lead additives. But the Ethyl Corporation fought against him. The persecution was relentless. The large multinational corporations began to use all their power and influence to close all doors to the geochemist. 💸 Patterson suddenly found that he was being deprived of research funds. Leaders of the lead industry repeatedly pressured California Institute of Technology boards to either silence him or kick him out. Managers of the Ethyl Corporation reportedly offered Caltech funding for an entire chair if Patterson packed his bags. Absurd but true, in 1971 Patterson was denied participation on a National Research Council panel on atmospheric lead pollution, even though no one else in the world knew as much about the subject. 𝙃𝙚 𝙣𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙧 𝙜𝙖𝙫𝙚 𝙪𝙥, 𝙝𝙤𝙬𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙧. 🏆 His efforts eventually led to the enactment of the Clean Air Act in 1970, with stricter emissions regulations, and in 1986, the sale of leaded gasoline was completely banned in the US. As a result, the level of lead in Americans' blood dropped almost immediately by 80%. But because lead remains forever, everyone today has 625 times more of the metal in their blood than 100 years ago. 𝙃𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙧𝙮 𝙢𝙖𝙮 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙧𝙚𝙥𝙚𝙖𝙩 𝙞𝙩𝙨𝙚𝙡𝙛, 𝙗𝙪𝙩 𝙞𝙩 𝙤𝙛𝙩𝙚𝙣 𝙧𝙝𝙮𝙢𝙚𝙨. The Ethyl Corporation engaged in the same practices that the Big Oil Companies continue to do to this day.

Great summary on the state of carbon extraction from The New York Times, as the first commercial plant starts in the U.S. I tell all who address climate-related challenges in their professional or personal lives, it's an "all hands on deck" situation - not either this solution or that, but testing everything that may make sense. Carbon extraction technologies are one of them, and could eventually represent quite an opportunity for investors. #climatetech #climateaction #climatechange #climatecrisis #climateinvesting

“Study nature, love nature, stay close to nature. It will never fail you.” (Frank Lloyd Wright) For those in and around the energy industry, we know the Energy Transition is a monumental undertaking. Whether it’s investing in renewable technologies or assessing reservoirs for long-term carbon storage, we are trying to find viable technological solutions to the climate crisis, as fast as possible. To drive the Energy Transition at the rate we need, relying on new technologies won’t be enough. Another needed component of the change will be cultivating the mindsets and observers we need to get us from Point A to B. I was reminded of this in a webinar I attended on regenerative agriculture hosted by Flora Moon and the Society of Petroleum Engineers. For those new to the field, regenerative agriculture as an ecological approach focused on improving soil health, enabling the landscape to renew itself, and pulling carbon out of the air in the process. Along with discussing the regenerative agriculture approach, the speakers presented the notion of us being “carbon stewards”. If we were to change our mindset from being managers or petroleum engineers, drillers or geologists to being carbon stewards, what possibilities open up to us? Change of mindsets start by defining the narrative we want to live in. Who are we? What is our common purpose? By creating a common purpose, transformation can drive new significant action. What narrative do you want to build? Share your thoughts in the comments. #TransformationalChange #EnergyTransition #CarbonStewards

The fossil fuel industry pitches the same myths over decades. Successful lobbying for ineffective solutions, unsubstantiated climate action costs and ignoring the expense/consequences of inaction are common to portraits offered by the O&G sector. One favorite myth is that fossil fuels are essential for energy security. To the contrary, the European Union response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine war is to accelerate the transition to energy independence with clean tech by 2027. The just-in-time EU crisis response was initially importing substitute gas (LNG) from the U.S. But now the EU is headed for peak gas consumption by 2025, and there was a 20% drop in EU gas consumption in 2023. The U.S. gas sector interpreted the war in Ukraine all wrong, as an exclusively fossil fuel energy security issue for the #1 gas exporter to the EU. Hence, the U.S. gas sector has plans for adding 4.600 km of pipelines and 20 new LNG export terminals. Biden has called for a pause on new gas projects. Dependence on fossil fuels contributes to energy insecurity, specifically relying on imports from limited numbers of geographic sources, while benefitting on wars. A persistent myth is there is a conflict between developing the economy and environmental solutions. Consequently, jobs, prosperity and the good things in life in a modern world are linked to increasing fossil fuel production while adding renewables and clean tech concurrently. This logic defines consumers who want products with fossil fuel content are the problem. Another longstanding fossil fuel sector myth is that voluntary actions work better than government legislation and policies. Industry preferences are for CCUS, biofuels, methane-based hydrogen, and advanced recycling for plastic production. On the latter, advanced recycling constitutes fake news, but the industry gets away with this line because it is off the radar screen of most. The advanced recycling process creates marginal quantities of new plastic while using excessively energy intensive applications which generate toxic products, high emissions and hazardous waste. Nevertheless, some U.S. states have deregulated chemical recycling. Advanced recycling technologies include pyrolysis, converting plastics into fuel. The final myth is that the fossil fuel sector plays an important role in sponsoring noble projects like sports and museums, etc., support society cannot live without. No thought is given to how a green economy can come up with new stakeholders that can do the same. https://lnkd.in/eY5d2FJZ

Last week, I participated in a speaker series on the topic of ecological overshoot. My presentation focused on a topic that will be familiar to readers: the new frontiers of resource extraction driven by growth in renewable energy, electric vehicles, and energy storage, and the resulting increase in demand for raw materials like lithium and nickel. But since this talk was building on the foundational work done by two previous speakers (Dr. William Rees, creator of the “ecological footprint” concept, who gave a presentation entitled 'Ecological Overshoot: Economic Growth, Energy, and the Population Conundrum,' and Dr. Jeremy Jimenez, whose talk was titled 'Trees Can’t Sequester Mercury: Why Climate is the Wrong Focus' — both well worth watching), I wanted to offer something more than a simple articulation of the problems we face. Thus, this talk focuses mainly on my study of resistance movements: how they function, when they are effective vs. ineffective, and what lessons can be learned for this new era in which greenwashing and false solutions proliferate while our problems worsen. Link: https://lnkd.in/dq2zgW4P

How much sustainable capture shall we achieve with $1 Bn in mangroves or any other high biomass production ( high CO2 capture) , while Re-greening, cooling and rain making????? Seems that simple practical wisdom is overruled by corporate interests

It's truly disheartening to witness our generation focusing predominantly on CO2, while often neglecting the pressing impact of methane and other gases that, in some cases, have a greenhouse effect 20 times more potent than CO2. We seem to be adopting short-term solutions, passing on larger issues to our descendants. Yet, it's important to remember that every action taken today is digitally archived, ensuring future generations will have a clear record of which entities were responsible for either exacerbating or mitigating our environmental issues. Heroes like Ramveer Tanwar (PondMan) , known as 'PondMan', are setting a benchmark. Their commendable efforts produce such a positive environmental impact that they stand out, even in an age of technological advances. I believe it's time we realign our priorities and take a broader, more informed stance on environmental issues. https://lnkd.in/dXCs_sfz

BASF at National hearing on Transition Pathway. Jesper Bjerregaard, BASF Commercial Director for Nordic and Baltics, attended the IKEM National hearing last week on the Transition Pathway for a Climate Neutral Chemical Industry. Our innovations and products are used in all sorts of manufacturing. This means what we and the Chemical industry do to reach fossile free products, have a huge impact downstream. Watch the video where Jesper Bjerregaard explains more. #Hållbarhet #Färdplan #Svenskindustri IKEM – Institute for Climate Protection, Energy and Mobility

Our Latest Research Paper is Now Published in the Greenhouse Gases Science and Technology. 📝 Buğra Arda Zincir, Assoc.Prof.Dr.Hasan Bora USLUER, Yasin Arslanoğlu Thrilled to share our paper titled "Environmental impact investigation of combined CCS and SCR on a ship by a case study" in the Greenhouse Gases Science and Technology. 🔗 Access the full paper here: https://lnkd.in/dXSfTZHh #carboncapturesystem #selectivecatalyticreduction #casestudy

Excited to share insights from our latest study on Direct Air Capture (DAC) and CO2-based fuels ✈, published in IOP Publishing Environmental Research Letters. In our study, Johan Lilliestam, Christian Moretti, Anthony Patt, Katrin S. and I explore short-term pathways to get a promising climate technology, Direct Air Capture, to get off the ground. Full paper 📃 at https://lnkd.in/ewKJcaA4 Key Findings: 🔍 Comparing DAC deployment for synthetic fuel production versus carbon removal, we find that prioritizing DAC-based fuels offers significant market and governance advantages over conventional carbon removal strategies. It however comes at higher costs and resource use. 💡 While neither pathway is definitively better, focusing on DAC for synthetic fuels can leverage existing markets and circumvent short-term regulatory barriers, accelerating DAC deployment in the very initial phase of its diffusion. Implications for Climate Policy: 🏛 Policymakers can strategically prioritize DAC-based synthetic fuels in the short term, tapping into net-zero emission products for readily accessible markets while addressing immediate governance challenges. Read more about our study here and feel free to reach out for a deeper dive into our research! 📩 #SyntheticFuels #DirectAirCapture #CarbonRemoval #TechnologyDiffusion