Skip to main content

No Snow for Skiing, The Greenest Aluminum

alm2001_7SHigh-tn We’ve sometimes said that even if government locks up in its efforts to combat climate change that industry will do so – it can see what is happening in other countries and knows that, while it may be on the trailing edge of government action, that will not always be the case. It has also proven to be good business, as customers respond well to green initiatives.

What we hadn’t considered is that certain industries might not be able to do much in this direction, but will certainly suffer if weather patterns shift away from them. Mother Jones’ Clive Thompson looks at the issue from this angle:

But any serious industrialist who's facing "climate exposure"—as it's now called by money managers—cannot afford to engage in that sort of self-delusion. Spend a couple of hours wandering through the websites of various industrial associations—aluminum manufacturers, real-estate agents, wineries, agribusinesses, take your pick—and you'll find straightforward statements about the grim reality of climate change that wouldn't seem out of place coming from Greenpeace.

Thompson uses the example of a Colorado ski resort, which strikes us as going a little too small scale – it’d be interesting to hear more from those aluminum manufacturers – but we take his point.

---

Actually, two points: one is that some industries will cease to exist if climate change wreaks havoc in particular ways; and the second is that industries are recognizing a need to change their manufacturing processes whether or not government is making rules about it.

Of the second point, here is the Aluminum Association (you knew we had to look):

The aluminum industry’s Voluntary Aluminum Industrial Partnership has focused efforts on reducing two potent PFCs, tetrafluoromethane (CF4) and hexafluoroethane (C2F6)—and has achieved great success toward this goal. … Their actions reduced PFC emissions from U.S. primary aluminum smelting by 45 percent—equivalent to 2.2 million metric tons of carbon-dioxide annually.

And the industry has more in the works to reduce its footprint further.

Those are two good points and they lead to a third: global warming has fully entered the cultural consciousness and is motivating change throughout society. We cannot pretend to know whether these efforts will have a measureable impact, and do think government will have to take a role in industries where change implies large expense, but these efforts to reduce emissions in various industries set a table at which it will be hard for larger entities not to sit.

---

Did you know Alaska had a moratorium on nuclear energy? Us, either – there are no plants there, though Alaska’s Senator Lisa Murkowski has always been favorably inclined to it. It just didn’t occur to us there was such a thing.

In any event, the moratorium is gone. Nuclear energy has been included in the just passed Alaska Sustainable Energy Act. This story doesn’t talk about nuclear much, but includes this:

The bill rewrites state oversight of proposed nuclear projects, partly by making nuclear investment eligible for aid from the state Power Project Fund.

Now, someone just has to want build a plant there.

This story goes into some of the statehouse actions taken around the country regarding nuclear energy. There’s been some failures but more successes and where a ban may have been allowed to stand, well, there’s always next year. The edifice of state bans and moratoria is rapidly crumbling.

“The conversion of Kitimat Works to AP technology will make it the greenest aluminum smelter in the world when the new capacity comes on stream. The new Kitimat smelter will be among the three lowest-cost aluminum smelters in the world.  Production will increase by as much as 40%, even as greenhouse gas emissions are reduced by a similar amount.” Kitimat is in British Columbia. See here for more.

Comments

DocForesight said…
"Now, someone just has to want build a plant there." Doesn't Toshiba want to build their 4S unit for Galena, AK? In fact, that story was one of the first that I read about a year ago following an insightful broadcast on KSFO 530 AM radio on the energy density of different fuels. Rabbi Daniel Lapin was the host.

Considering how many other SMR's are in various stages of development, there are literally millions of towns to be served by these modular systems.

BTW, it seems that the UN IPCC is in a bit of a bother over its future usefulness.
Anonymous said…
Re: The caption of the photo. When you are describing the comparative efficiencies of the new vs. old technology, from a nomenclature perspective would you say that you are dealing with a smelter delta?

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

Why Nuclear Plant Closures Are a Crisis for Small Town USA

Nuclear plants occupy an unusual spot in the towns where they operate: integral but so much in the background that they may seem almost invisible. But when they close, it can be like the earth shifting underfoot.

Lohud.com, the Gannett newspaper that covers the Lower Hudson Valley in New York, took a look around at the experience of towns where reactors have closed, because the Indian Point reactors in Buchanan are scheduled to be shut down under an agreement with Gov. Mario Cuomo.


From sea to shining sea, it was dismal. It wasn’t just the plant employees who were hurt. The losses of hundreds of jobs, tens of millions of dollars in payrolls and millions in property taxes depressed whole towns and surrounding areas. For example:

Vernon, Vermont, home to Vermont Yankee for more than 40 years, had to cut its municipal budget in half. The town closed its police department and let the county take over; the youth sports teams lost their volunteer coaches, and Vernon Elementary School lost th…