Taken together, the Biden administration’s initiatives and Congressional legislation have put the US squarely in a position of leadership around carbon management.

Julio

As one of&mdash;if not the&mdash;most pressing global challenges of our time, climate change requires bold and decisive action from leaders across the world. The Major Economies Forum (MEF), which includes the US, China, India, Brazil, Japan, and the European Union among others, is a critical platform for such action. Established in 2009 as a way to facilitate international cooperation on climate change, the MEF has played a significant role in shaping global climate policy, including laying the foundation for the Paris Agreement in 2015.
In that context, President Biden&rsquo;s&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/04/20/fact-sheet-president-biden-to-catalyze-global-climate-action-through-the-major-economies-forum-on-energy-and-climate/">comments&nbsp;</a>to the MEF on April 20 in support of innovation and investment in carbon management and direct air capture mark a significant milestone in the fight against climate change; indeed, he announced a climate counterstrike.
This year, the Biden administration focused its MEF agenda on four key areas, including industrial decarbonization and carbon management.
Carbon management is an essential component of effective climate strategy. The term carbon management refers to technologies and methodologies that directly reduce the flux of CO2 into the air and oceans, as well as remove CO2 from the atmosphere using a variety of approaches. It includes CO2 capture and major emissions sources, recycling of CO2 into products, and the removal of CO2 through natural and engineered pathways, i.e., planting new forests or direct air capture (DAC). The global scientific community has long recognized the critical role of carbon management in abating or removing all emissions everywhere, most recently affirmed in the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.carbon-direct.com/insights/ipcc-report-carbon-removal-is-now-required-to-meet-climate-mitigation-targets">IPCC&rsquo;s summary report</a>.
The President&rsquo;s full statement also emphasized the need for carbon management across all sectors of the economy. This includes reducing emissions from power generation, transportation, and industrial processes, as well as promoting the use of carbon capture and storage technologies. Carbon management will be crucial to decarbonization of key sectors including cement, steel, chemicals, glass, aviation, and maritime shipping in the US and around the world. It&rsquo;s an excellent point of potential cooperation among the MEF nations, even those with whom the US actively competes.
<blockquote>
&ldquo;Direct air capture is a critical tool in the fight against climate change, and we need to invest in its development and deployment."
</blockquote>
says President Joseph R. Biden.
The President&rsquo;s endorsement of carbon management in general and of direct air capture is both important and noteworthy. Despite the scientific and expert consensus on the needs and merits of carbon management for reductions and removals &ndash; especially for hard-to-abate sectors &ndash; and on the excellent track record of geological storage of CO2, some groups continue to sow doubts about the viability, value, or necessity of these technologies. Thankfully, perspectives as varied as Bill McKibben, John Kerry, Olufemi Taiwo, and Prince William have advocated for the critical role carbon removals must play immediately and into the future to achieve key climate goals, complementing other GHG emissions reductions (including carbon capture and storage (CCS)).
The Biden Administration, and 116th and 117th Congresses, have certainly walked the walk. This includes:
<ul>
<li dir="ltr">bipartisan and bicameral support of the 2020 Energy Act amendments, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the CHIPS Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act;</li>
<li dir="ltr">specific measures, including funding for direct air capture hubs, CO2 pipeline grants and loans, demonstration projects in electric po and heavy industry, tax credits for CO2 capture and storage, innovation investments in CO2-to-products and CO2 removal technology development; and</li>
<li dir="ltr">funding to hire and train regulators.</li>
</ul>
Together, these efforts total well over $50 billion of direct support and incentives.
Within the MEF, similar measures can be found in the UK, Canada, Norway, the EU, China, Japan, Australia, and Indonesia &ndash; in large part prompted by US leadership.
Taken together, the Biden administration&rsquo;s initiatives and Congressional legislation have put the US squarely in a position of leadership around carbon management. The US is already leading in the deployment of these technologies and projects to reduce and remove global emissions, mitigating the worst effects of climate change. These actions create a virtuous cycle across the globe, with MEF nations like Japan, China, India, and Indonesia accelerating the deployment of these critical technologies through regulation, mandates, incentives, and direct investments.
For too long, carbon management has been misunderstood at best and ignored, maligned, underinvested, feared, doubted, and slandered at worst. Investment is important. So is public attention and recognition of the role of carbon management in mitigating climate change. Statements like that of President Biden at the MEF help overcome the real challenges to deployments, address concerns in frontline and fence-line communities, and create new opportunities for trade, prosperity, and environmental redress.
This article is also published on <a href="https://www.carbon-direct.com/insights/carbon-removal-gets-a-boost-from-the-biden-administration" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Carbon Direct</a>. illuminem Voices is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of leading Sustainability &amp; Energy writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.

Carbon removal gets a boost from the Biden administration

Limiting global warming to 1.5 C above pre-industrial levels—a hard limit that prevents severe, difficult-to-reverse impacts of climate change—will require a sustained emissions reduction of 60% by 2035, compared to 2019 levels. These must be paired with significant increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide removal and efforts to increase the resilience and adaptability of our most vulnerable ecosystems and communities.

IPCC report: carbon removal is now required to meet climate mitigation targets

In recent talks and gatherings about climate change and carbon management, the emotion I encounter most frequently is fear.
Fear – which manifests as anger, or anxiety, or numbness. Fear, which begets hatred and disgust, or which becomes the basis for paralysis or righteousness.
In these gatherings, the most common public question I receive is “What can I do?” – in part a response to that anxiety.
I recommend an alternative question: “What can WE do.” 
“We”, not “I”, carries the antidote to fear.

In recent talks and gatherings about climate change and carbon management, the emotion I encounter most frequently is fear.
Fear – which manifests as anger, or anxiety, or numbness. Fear, which begets hatred and disgust, or which becomes the basis for paralysis or righteousness.
In these gatherings, the most common public question I receive is “What can I do?” – in part a response to that anxiety.
I recommend an alternative question: “What can WE do.”
“We”, not “I”, carries the antidote to fear.
----------
Mitigating and reversing climate change is not a personal task - it is a team sport. It requires collective action.
Scientists and businesspeople must innovate. Governments must invest and build. States and cities must change how they buy and operate. Educators and managers must train and teach. We must change steel and concrete production and how we fuel ships, planes, and every home and building.
No amount of individual action can make those changes real. The task at hand is to foster a collective narrative that is vivid, empowering and clear.
The modern world encourages individual narratives – personal stories. Some are heroic narratives: I am strong, and I can fight. Some are victim narratives: I am powerless in the face of terrible forces, evil or misguided or ignorant (ironically, social media helps boost the individual narrative. Individuals act on TikTok, Facebook, or Twitter, where they post triumphs, declare victimhood, or act snide).
A collective narrative is a stronger response than an individual one. This is extra true in the climate crisis.
We have agency.
We can act together to build and improve.
We can reduce our power plant and factory emissions through efficiency, conservation and application of new technology.
We can replace them with better versions that pollute far less.
We can innovate and deploy better energy solutions.
We can remove CO2 from the air and oceans with nature and with technology.
We can invest in infrastructure.
We can invest in people.
We are strong together. And if you’re young and start now, you’ll conclude your career witnessing that vision made real.
--------
So we need a shared story to launch our better angels. I honestly don’t know how to write one or how it might sound. So humbly I offer the first part of a shared story: It’s not that hard.
We have everything we need – time, money, natural resources and technology. The Lego-blocks are made – we just need to work together to put them into place. No miracles required. We have cheap, abundant low-carbon energy. We have the greatest wealth and knowledge in all of history. We can do this.
The second part of a shared story: It’s incredibly hard.
Make no bones about it – the tasks are incredibly difficult and will take decades to complete. We must build huge new systems for energy and food. We must create new rules for trade and commerce. We must commit unprecedented amounts of money – many trillions of dollars every year. We must change laws to accelerate some actions and block others. It will require commitment of many countries for many years. Success requires scientists and engineers, lawmakers and lawyers, investors and regulators, companies and communities – all working, and working together.
If you’re not concerned about how hard it is, you’re not paying attention.
The third part of a shared story: It’s not that hard.
We’ve accomplished extraordinary things in the past – even the recent past. One example: the reunification of Germany, which cost more than <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/how-much-did-reunification-cost/av-18749903">$2 trillion</a>. Reunification money healed a horrible wound that spanned generations and half of Europe. Some of that money was well spent upgrading infrastructure, investing in energy efficiency and modernization, and accelerating the astonishing cost reductions in wind and solar. Some was invested in people – education, better and more efficient homes – and some was invested in communities, including environmental redress.
That impossible, incredible commitment now powers the economy of Europe. It made it possible to <a href="https://www.politico.eu/article/angela-merkel-refugee-pledge-we-can-manage-it/">accept millions of refugees</a> between 2015-2020. It created a platform for greater justice and equity, featuring an east German woman serving 16 years as Chancellor.
When asked how Germany could handle the flood of refugees, Ms. Merkel responded “We can manage it”.
We reached the moon and mapped the ocean floor. We dodged the bullet of nuclear annihilation and destroyed thousands of warheads. We created COVID vaccines in one year – 2020!! India brought electricity to 300 million people – over <a href="https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.ELC.ACCS.ZS?locations=IN">97% of it’s population</a> now has access. And together 193 nations <a href="https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/paris-agreement">ratified the Paris Agreement.</a>​ 
One common thread in these stories? Generosity.
Generosity of spirit, merged with imagination, built on a shared vision, with no mission to punish.
-------
I think back to the Greatest Generation, who survived the Depression and deprivation to liberate nations from tyranny. They helped create a generous, open economy. That generation also helped deliver civil rights together, including Dr. King, Malcolm X, and John Lewis. They helped restore the economies of Europe together through the Marshall Plan. They preserved nature through civilian conservation corps and built clean power across America in powerlines &amp; dams.
The core of their World War Two triumphs was a tale of the allied forces, of the Band of Brothers and women working together in factories – teams working together for a shared version of a better worlds. That collective vision made a group narrative possible – what we do together for our children, our communities, our nation, our allies.
And within 5 years of the War’s end, the US gave the equivalent of $140 billion to those nations we fought – an unparalleled gift of generosity built on shared values and driven by a shared story as well as concern over a potential, terrible outcome.
This is another moment for stories of heroic groups. Teamwork – literally working in teams - is the antidote to fear, because you are not alone. It’s not YOUR job to solve climate change – it’s OUR job.
------
So what can we do together?
<ul><li>We can share our anxieties and hopes to others.</li></ul>
<ul><li>We can engage experts in science, business, and government.</li></ul>
<ul><li>We can learn together and generate ideas together.</li></ul>
<ul><li>We can be generous with those who mean well but disagree with us.</li></ul>
<ul><li>We can overcome the objections of those who do not mean us well.</li></ul>
<ul><li>We can include communities, especially those at risk or with equities at stake.</li></ul>
What should we NOT do together?
<ul><li>We should not seek to punish – that’s someone else’s job.</li></ul>
<ul><li>We should not seek to condemn – that reduces our strength and divides our attention.</li></ul>
<ul><li>We should not exclude those who can contribute.</li></ul>
Our stories are interwoven, and our fates interconnected. Working together builds confidence, strength, and knowledge. It also sustains the time, money, and commitment needed to succeed.
If we wish to save ourselves, that’s the task. It’s time to dream and to dream together.
This article is also published on the <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/come-together-julio-friedmann/">author&#x27;s blog</a>. Illuminem Voices is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of leading Energy &amp; Sustainability writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.

Come Together

A commonly asked question with respect to climate change: What should we do? A better question to ask: What can we do? All proposed solutions face challenges — economic, technical, operational, political, and cultural. These challenges should not limit ambition or prevent action. Still, making progress requires respecting these challenges to surmount them. So what’s possible right now is a good place to start.



A commonly asked question with respect to climate change: What should we do?
A better question to ask: What can we do?
All proposed solutions face challenges — economic, technical, operational, political, and cultural. These challenges should not limit ambition or prevent action. Still, making progress requires respecting these challenges to surmount them.
So what’s possible right now is a good place to start.
One thing governments can do is buy clean. In fact, governments have extraordinary powers to make change through purchasing. Famously, Winston Churchill use procurement to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Commission_on_Fuel_and_Engines">convert the British navy</a> to run on oil as a way to <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/294224756_Naval_innovation_From_coal_to_oil_fears_of_war_caused_Winston_Churchill_to_make_a_huge_decision">diversity in fuel suppliers</a> and enhance national security. The U.S. govt. largely fed and nurtured both <a href="https://fedtechmagazine.com/article/2018/09/how-government-helped-spur-microchip-industry">Silicon Valley</a> and <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/07/spacex-and-ula-win-2022-pentagon-rocket-launch-contracts.html">SpaceX</a>, purchasing semiconductors and satellite launching contracts to assure supply.
In that spirit of action and progress, my modest proposal: the U.S. Coast Guard can be the cleanest in the world — time for the ammonia fleet.
Really. Ammonia. The entire Coast Guard could run 100% on fuel produced in the US with zero percent carbon. Ships could operate with current performance, transitioning from the current internal combustion engines to fuel cells and operate with zero local pollution from soot, ozone, nitrous oxides, or sulfur.
A bit of background on ammonia — one nitrogen and three hydrogens. Most folks know it as a cleaning fluid, but ammonia’s big market is as the primary ingredient of <a href="https://www.iea.org/reports/ammonia-technology-roadmap">fertilizer</a>. The world makes about 240 million tons/y of ammonia and ships it to over <a href="https://cen.acs.org/business/petrochemicals/ammonia-fuel-future/99/i8">120 ports</a> around the world — mostly so humans can eat.
The shipping part is noteworthy because ammonia can also serve as a fuel. It can be blended into many existing combustion engines, including on ships, up to 50% today. Alternatively, it can flow through a fuel cell and generate electricity without combustion — the only products are electricity, water, and nitrogen gas.
As a fuel that’s shipped around the world, ammonia has attracted major interest from many companies and many nations — notably <a href="https://cen.acs.org/business/petrochemicals/Japan-run-ammonia/100/i14">Japan</a>, <a href="https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/energy-transition/111721-south-korea-to-commercialize-ammonia-fueled-power-generation-by-2030">Korea</a>, and <a href="https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/305872/singapore-eyes-worlds-first-green-ammonia-bunkering/">Singapore</a>. These three nations have established, as national policy, to buy ammonia to displace other carbon-intensive fuels, specifically coal, natural gas, and oil. These nations are driving the market by creating demand, with new bilateral agreements with supplier nations.
The decision by Japanese companies and policy makers to use low-carbon ammonia as a clean fuel has launched large projects around the world. Some of these are “green ammonia” projects fueled by solar and wind power electrolysis. The <a href="https://energy-utilities.com/saudi-arabia-s-5bn-green-hydrogenbased-ammonia-news111872.html">NEOM</a> project in northwest Saudi Arabia and the goliath Australian project (<a href="https://asianrehub.com/">Asian Renewable Energy Hub</a>) plan to send their fuel to Japan. Other projects are “blue ammonia” made by new hydrogen and ammonia systems with integrated carbon capture. Saudi Arabia has <a href="https://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/blue-ammonias-role-in-the-energy-transition-of-saudi-arabia-and-japan/">already shipped blue ammonia</a> to Japan, and Qatar, the UAE, and Oman have all said they plan to do the same.
Why should Japan have all the fun? I say the U.S. should purchase ammonia for domestic fuel use, specifically to clean up our ports and the Coast Guard — a vital military and law enforcement asset. The U.S. government could drive similar investments in clean supply and use, and use fuel cells to drive the ships already on the water. New <a href="https://www.ammoniaenergy.org/articles/4-5-billion-blue-ammonia-project-in-louisiana/">low-carbon ammonia plants</a> announced in the U.S. would proceed with an eye toward international markets — sales to Japan, Korea, and Europe — while serving domestic military, environmental, and security needs.
Of course, this also could provide climate benefits as well — if done correctly. Specifically, clean ammonia must be made without generating its own carbon pollution.
The main ingredient in ammonia is hydrogen. Today, hydrogen is chiefly made from natural gas or coal without carbon controls (“gray” hydrogen). This adds ~250 million tons of CO2 to the air and oceans every year. In short, ammonia today is not low-carbon.
It could be, though. Hydrogen (and ammonia) <a href="https://www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/cgep-releases-fact-sheets-hydrogen-production-uses-policy-support-and-investments">can be produced</a> from clean sources of hydrogen (green, blue, and bio)* which would make ammonia a near-zero emission fuel. If made from green or biohydrogen, such ammonia would also be fossil-free fuel.
So why the Coast Guard? In short — duty cycles. Until low-carbon ammonia fueling centers are in ports around the world, ships powered by ammonia would need to return to the same port for fueling. Coast Guard ships largely remain within ~500 miles of their home ports and commonly return to the same ones, representing short-haul duty cycles.
The Coast Guard, although one of the five U.S. military branches, operates within the Department of Homeland security. This means that an ammonia fleet would start as a line item within the DHS budget. To avoid misspending, waste and poor outcomes, any program should begin as a set of pilots — a handful of ships in a handful of ports. Key ports, like Miami, San Francisco, Cape Cod, Honolulu, and Norfolk, could start with small fueling facilities and a range of vessels that represent the core Coast Guard operations.
Pilot programs would provide data and information on performance, cost, operations, and environmental issues. Projects could be done within the <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-room/2021/07/20/the-path-to-achieving-justice40/">Justice40</a> framework, helping ensure that disadvantaged communities receive both economic and environmental benefits from the program. If the pilots prove successful, then slowly the fleet would migrate away from diesel and gasoline to ammonia, largely underway by 2030.
Some analysis would help, too. The Coast Guard certainly understands it job and energy needs better than I do! If asked by Congress or by Administration leadership, they could assess what fraction of the fleet could function soon on ammonia and what locations might best serve the nation’s needs in terms of the performance of their duties and the opportunity to decarbonize.
The military has done this before and at scale. One very similar example was the use of biofuels for military jets. Congress mandated military biofuel procurement, which led to production of biorefineries as well as testing programs to confirm fuel and fighter performance (no one wants to void the warranty on an F-14 or a Coast Guard Cutter).
The benefits would be real — reduced pollution in ports, reduced dependence on fossil fuels, reduced greenhouse gas emissions. The risks would be small, since ammonia production already exists in the U.S. in large volume and is growing.
The cleanest fleet on earth is not just possible, it’s inevitable and can start today. The costs are modest and the opportunity grand. Let’s keep our territorial waters clean the same way we keep our kitchen floors clean — with ammonia.
* If you want to know more about clean hydrogen production, there are many good references today. These include reports on blue hydrogen (<a href="https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/resources/publications-reports-research/blue-hydrogen/">here</a> and <a href="https://www.pembina.org/pub/carbon-intensity-blue-hydrogen-production">here</a>), on green hydrogen (<a href="https://www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/research/report/green-hydrogen-circular-carbon-economy-opportunities-and-limits">there</a> and <a href="https://www.irena.org/publications/2020/Dec/Green-hydrogen-cost-reduction">there</a>) and on the potential for low-carbon bio-hydrogen (<a href="https://www.llnl.gov/news/new-lab-report-outlines-ways-california-could-reach-goal-becoming-carbon-neutral-2045">this</a> and <a href="https://www.llnl.gov/news/lawrence-livermore-shares-recommendations-microsoft-reach-carbon-negative-goal">that</a>).
This article is also published on the author&#x27;s <a href="https://carbonwrangler.medium.com/time-for-the-ammonia-coast-guard-bd9b7593428b">blog.</a> Energy Voices is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of leading Energy &amp; Sustainability writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.

Time for the Ammonia Coast Guard!

The following commentary is an analysis of the AR6 WGIII Report’s key findings and their implications for carbon management, written by Dr. Julio Friedman, Dr. Wilfried Maas, Dr. Colin McCormick and Tim Bushman.

Julio Friedmann

Julio Friedmann

Carbon removal gets a boost from the Biden administration

Recent publications

Readers also like

Want to know more about illuminem Voices?