Policy

Subterms

    Latest story

    125 Shares70 Views

    Over 1,000 MIT students inspired to work toward climate solutions

    by

    Recently, more than 1,000 MIT students stepped into the shoes of global decision-makers by trying out En-ROADS, a simulation tool developed to test climate policies, explore solutions, and envision a cleaner and safer environmental future.MIT is committed to climate action, and this year’s new student orientation showcased that commitment. For the first time ever, incoming Leaders for Global Operations (LGO), Executive MBA, Sloan Fellow MBA, MBA, and undergraduate students all explored the capabilities of En-ROADS.“The goal is for MIT to become one of the world’s most prolific, collaborative, and interdisciplinary sources of technological, behavioral, and policy solutions for the global climate challenge over the next decade,” MIT Provost Anantha P. Chandrakasan told an audience of about 300 undergraduates from the Class of 2029. “It is something we need to do urgently, and today is your opportunity to play a role in that bold mission.”Connecting passion with science for changeIn group workshop sessions, students collaborated to create a world in which global warming stays well below 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels — the goal of the 2015 Paris Agreement. Backed by the latest science, the En-ROADS simulator let them explore firsthand how policies like carbon pricing and clean energy investments affect our climate, economy, and health. Over 450 incoming MBA students even role-played as delegates at a global climate summit conference, tasked with negotiating a global agreement to address the harm caused by climate change.For first-year MBA student Allison Somuk, who played the role of President Xi Jinping of China, the workshop was not only eye-opening about climate, but also altered how she plans to approach her future work and advocacy.“Before the simulation, I didn’t have data on climate change, so I was surprised to see how close we are to catastrophic temperature increases. What surprised me most was how difficult it was to slow that trajectory. It required significant action and compromise from nearly every sector, not just a few. As someone passionate about improving maternal health care in developing nations, my view of contributing factors has broadened. I now see how maternal health may be affected by a larger system where climate policy decisions directly affect women’s health outcomes.”MIT Sloan Research Affiliate Andrew Jones, who is also executive director and co-founder of Climate Interactive and co-creator of the En-ROADS tool, presented several sessions during orientation. Looking back on the week, he found the experience personally rewarding.  “Engaging with hundreds of students, I was inspired by the powerful alignment between their passion for climate action and MIT’s increased commitment to delivering on climate goals. This is a pivotal moment for breakthroughs on our campus.”Other presenters included Jennifer Graham, MIT Sustainability Initiative senior associate director; Jason Jay, MIT Sustainability Initiative director; Krystal Noiseux, MIT Climate Pathways Project associate director; Bethany Patten, MIT Climate Policy Center executive director; and John Sterman, Jay W. Forrester Professor of Management, professor in the MIT Institute for Data, Systems, and Society, and director of the MIT System Dynamics Group.Chris Rabe, the MIT Climate Project’s Education Program director, was impressed, but not surprised, by how much students learned so quickly as they worked together to solve the problem with En-ROADS.“By integrating reflection, emotional dynamics, multi-generational perspectives, group work, and inquiry, the En-ROADS simulation provides an ideal foundation for first-year students to explore the breadth of climate and sustainability opportunities at MIT. In the process, students came to recognize the many levers and multi-solving approaches required to address the complex challenges of climate change.”Inspiring climate leadersThe En-ROADS workshops were a true team effort, made possible with the help of senior staff at MIT Sloan School of Management and the MBA program office, and members of the MIT Sloan Sustainability Initiative, Climate Pathways Project, Climate Policy Center, the Climate Project, Office of the First Year, and entire undergraduate Orientation team.“Altogether, over a thousand of the newest members of the MIT community have now had a chance to learn for themselves about the climate crisis,” says Sterman, “and what we can do to create a healthier, safer, more prosperous, and more sustainable world — and how they can get involved to bring that world into being, even as first-year undergrads and MBAs.” By the end of the workshops, the students’ spirits were buoyed. They all had successfully found ways to keep global warming to below 2 C.  When asked, “What would you love about being part of this new future you’ve created?,”  a more positive, optimistic word cloud came into view. Answers included:breathing cleaner air;giving my children a better and safer environment;my hometown would not be flooded constantly;rich marine life and protection of reefs;exciting, new clean industries;increased socioeconomic equality; andproof that we as a global community can work together to save ourselves. First-year MBA student Ruby Eisenbud sums up the sentiment many new MIT students came away with after their workshop.“Coming to Sloan, one of the questions on my mind was: How can we, as future leaders, make a positive impact related to climate change? While En-ROADS is a simulation, it felt like we experienced, in the smallest way, what it could be like to be a leader navigating the diverging interests of all stakeholders involved in mitigating the impacts of the climate crisis. While the simulation prompted us to face the difficult reality of climate change, it also reinforced my motivation to emphasize climate in my work at Sloan and beyond.” More

    More stories

    • 113 Shares130 Views

      in Security

      Optimizing food subsidies: Applying digital platforms to maximize nutrition

      by

      Oct. 16 is World Food Day, a global campaign to celebrate the founding of the Food and Agriculture Organization 80 years ago, and to work toward a healthy, sustainable, food-secure future. More than 670 million people in the world are facing hunger. Millions of others are facing rising obesity rates and struggle to get healthy food for proper nutrition. World Food Day calls on not only world governments, but business, academia, the media, and even the youth to take action to promote resilient food systems and combat hunger. This year, the Abdul Latif Jameel Water and Food Systems Laboratory (J-WAFS) is spotlighting an MIT researcher who is working toward this goal by studying food and water systems in the Global South.J-WAFS seed grants provide funding to early-stage research projects that are unique to prior work. In an 11th round of seed grant funding in 2025, 10 MIT faculty members received support to carry out their cutting-edge water and food research. Ali Aouad PhD ’17, assistant professor of operations management at the MIT Sloan School of Management, was one of those grantees. “I had searched before joining MIT what kind of research centers and initiatives were available that tried to coalesce research on food systems,” Aouad says. “And so, I was very excited about J-WAFS.” Aouad gathered more information about J-WAFS at the new faculty orientation session in August 2024, where he spoke to J-WAFS staff and learned about the program’s grant opportunities for water and food research. Later that fall semester, he attended a few J-WAFS seminars on agricultural economics and water resource management. That’s when Aouad knew that his project was perfectly aligned with the J-WAFS mission of securing humankind’s water and food.Aouad’s seed project focuses on food subsidies. With a background in operations research and an interest in digital platforms, much of his work has centered on aligning supply-side operations with heterogeneous customer preferences. Past projects include ones on retail and matching systems. “I started thinking that these types of demand-driven approaches may be also very relevant to important social challenges, particularly as they relate to food security,” Aouad says. Before starting his PhD at MIT, Aouad worked on projects that looked at subsidies for smallholder farmers in low- and middle-income countries. “I think in the back of my mind, I’ve always been fascinated by trying to solve these issues,” he noted.His seed grant project, Optimal subsidy design: Application to food assistance programs, aims to leverage data on preferences and purchasing habits from local grocery stores in India to inform food assistance policy and optimize the design of subsidies. Typical data collection systems, like point-of-sales, are not as readily available in India’s local groceries, making this type of data hard to come by for low-income individuals. “Mom-and-pop stores are extremely important last-mile operators when it comes to nutrition,” he explains. For this project, the research team gave local grocers point-of-sale scanners to track purchasing habits. “We aim to develop an algorithm that converts these transactions into some sort of ‘revelation’ of the individuals’ latent preferences,” says Aouad. “As such, we can model and optimize the food assistance programs — how much variety and flexibility is offered, taking into account the expected demand uptake.” He continues, “now, of course, our ability to answer detailed design questions [across various products and prices] depends on the quality of our inference from  the data, and so this is where we need more sophisticated and robust algorithms.”Following the data collection and model development, the ultimate goal of this research is to inform policy surrounding food assistance programs through an “optimization approach.” Aouad describes the complexities of using optimization to guide policy. “Policies are often informed by domain expertise, legacy systems, or political deliberation. A lot of researchers build rigorous evidence to inform food policy, but it’s fair to say that the kind of approach that I’m proposing in this research is not something that is commonly used. I see an opportunity for bringing a new approach and methodological tradition to a problem that has been central for policy for many decades.” The overall health of consumers is the reason food assistance programs exist, yet measuring long-term nutritional impacts and shifts in purchase behavior is difficult. In past research, Aouad notes that the short-term effects of food assistance interventions can be significant. However, these effects are often short-lived. “This is a fascinating question that I don’t think we will be able to address within the space of interventions that we will be considering. However, I think it is something I would like to capture in the research, and maybe develop hypotheses for future work around how we can shift nutrition-related behaviors in the long run.”While his project develops a new methodology to calibrate food assistance programs, large-scale applications are not promised. “A lot of what drives subsidy mechanisms and food assistance programs is also, quite frankly, how easy it is and how cost-effective it is to implement these policies in the first place,” comments Aouad. Cost and infrastructure barriers are unavoidable to this kind of policy research, as well as sustaining these programs. Aouad’s effort will provide insights into customer preferences and subsidy optimization in a pilot setup, but replicating this approach on a real scale may be costly. Aouad hopes to be able to gather proxy information from customers that would both feed into the model and provide insight into a more cost-effective way to collect data for large-scale implementation.There is still much work to be done to ensure food security for all, whether it’s advances in agriculture, food-assistance programs, or ways to boost adequate nutrition. As the 2026 seed grant deadline approaches, J-WAFS will continue its mission of supporting MIT faculty as they pursue innovative projects that have practical and real impacts on water and food system challenges. More

    • 100 Shares189 Views

      in Environment

      3 Questions: Addressing the world’s most pressing challenges

      by

      The Center for International Studies (CIS) empowers students, faculty, and scholars to bring MIT’s interdisciplinary style of research and scholarship to address complex global challenges. In this Q&A, Mihaela Papa, the center’s director of research and a principal research scientist at MIT, describes her role as well as research within the BRICS Lab at MIT — a reference to the BRICS intergovernmental organization, which comprises the nations of Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates. She also discusses the ongoing mission of CIS to tackle the world’s most complex challenges in new and creative ways.Q: What is your role at CIS, and some of your key accomplishments since joining the center just over a year ago?A: I serve as director of research and principal research scientist at CIS, a role that bridges management and scholarship. I oversee grant and fellowship programs, spearhead new research initiatives, build research communities across our center’s area programs and MIT schools, and mentor the next generation of scholars. My academic expertise is in international relations, and I publish on global governance and sustainable development, particularly through my new BRICS Lab. This past year, I focused on building collaborative platforms that highlight CIS’ role as an interdisciplinary hub and expand its research reach. With Evan Lieberman, the director of CIS, I launched the CIS Global Research and Policy Seminar series to address current challenges in global development and governance, foster cross-disciplinary dialogue, and connect theoretical insights to policy solutions. We also convened a Climate Adaptation Workshop, which examined promising strategies for financing adaptation and advancing policy innovation. We documented the outcomes in a workshop report that outlines a broader research agenda contributing to MIT’s larger climate mission.In parallel, I have been reviewing CIS’ grant-making programs to improve how we serve our community, while also supporting regional initiatives such as research planning related to Ukraine. Together with the center’s MIT-Brazil faculty director Brad Olsen, I secured a MITHIC [MIT Human Insight Collaboration] Connectivity grant to build an MIT Amazonia research community that connects MIT scholars with regional partners and strengthens collaboration across the Amazon. Finally, I launched the BRICS Lab to analyze transformations in global governance and have ongoing research on BRICS and food security and data centers in BRICS. Q: Tell us more about the BRICS Lab.A: The BRICS countries comprise the majority of the world’s population and an expanding share of the global economy. [Originally comprising Brazil, Russia, India, and China, BRICS currently includes 11 nations.] As a group, they carry the collective weight to shape international rules, influence global markets, and redefine norms — yet the question remains: Will they use this power effectively? The BRICS Lab explores the implications of the bloc’s rise for international cooperation and its role in reshaping global politics. Our work focuses on three areas: the design and strategic use of informal groups like BRICS in world affairs; the coalition’s potential to address major challenges such as food security, climate change, and artificial intelligence; and the implications of U.S. policy toward BRICS for the future of multilateralism.Q: What are the center’s biggest research priorities right now?A: Our center was founded in response to rising geopolitical tensions and the urgent need for policy rooted in rigorous, evidence-based research. Since then, we have grown into a hub that combines interdisciplinary scholarship and actively engages with policymakers and the public. Today, as in our early years, the center brings together exceptional researchers with the ambition to address the world’s most pressing challenges in new and creative ways.Our core focus spans security, development, and human dignity. Security studies have been a priority for the center, and our new nuclear security programming advances this work while training the next generation of scholars in this critical field. On the development front, our work has explored how societies manage diverse populations, navigate international migration, as well as engage with human rights and the changing patterns of regime dynamics.We are pursuing new research in three areas. First, on climate change, we seek to understand how societies confront environmental risks and harms, from insurance to water and food security in the international context. Second, we examine shifting patterns of global governance as rising powers set new agendas and take on greater responsibilities in the international system. Finally, we are initiating research on the impact of AI — how it reshapes governance across international relations, what is the role of AI corporations, and how AI-related risks can be managed.As we approach our 75th anniversary in 2026, we are excited to bring researchers together to spark bold ideas that open new possibilities for the future. More

    • 200 Shares139 Views

      in Energy

      Climate Action Learning Lab helps state and local leaders identify and implement effective climate mitigation strategies

      by

      This spring, J-PAL North America — a regional office of MIT’s Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL) — launched its first ever Learning Lab, centered on climate action. The Learning Lab convened a cohort of government leaders who are enacting a broad range of policies and programs to support the transition to a low-carbon economy. Through the Learning Lab, participants explored how to embed randomized evaluation into promising solutions to determine how to maximize changes in behavior — a strategy that can help advance decarbonization in the most cost-effective ways to benefit all communities. The inaugural cohort included more than 25 participants from state agencies and cities, including the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center, the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, and the cities of Lincoln, Nebraska; Newport News, Virginia; Orlando, Florida; and Philadelphia.“State and local governments have demonstrated tremendous leadership in designing and implementing decarbonization policies and climate action plans over the past few years,” said Peter Christensen, scientific advisor of the J-PAL North America Environment, Energy, and Climate Change Sector. “And while these are informed by scientific projections on which programs and technologies may effectively and equitably reduce emissions, the projection methods involve a lot of assumptions. It can be challenging for governments to determine whether their programs are actually achieving the expected level of emissions reductions that we desperately need. The Climate Action Learning Lab was designed to support state and local governments in addressing this need — helping them to rigorously evaluate their programs to detect their true impact.”From May to July, the Learning Lab offered a suite of resources for participants to leverage rigorous evaluation to identify effective and equitable climate mitigation solutions. Offerings included training lectures, one-on-one strategy sessions, peer learning engagements, and researcher collaboration. State and local leaders built skills and knowledge in evidence generation and use, reviewed and applied research insights to their own programmatic areas, and identified priority research questions to guide evidence-building and decision-making practices. Programs prioritized for evaluation covered topics such as compliance with building energy benchmarking policies, take-up rates of energy-efficient home improvement programs such as heat pumps and Solar for All, and scoring criteria for affordable housing development programs.“We appreciated the chance to learn about randomized evaluation methodology, and how this impact assessment tool could be utilized in our ongoing climate action planning. With so many potential initiatives to pursue, this approach will help us prioritize our time and resources on the most effective solutions,” said Anna Shugoll, program manager at the City of Philadelphia’s Office of Sustainability.This phase of the Learning Lab was possible thanks to grant funding from J-PAL North America’s longtime supporter and collaborator Arnold Ventures. The work culminated in an in-person summit in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on July 23, where Learning Lab participants delivered a presentation on their jurisdiction’s priority research questions and strategic evaluation plans. They also connected with researchers in the J-PAL network to further explore impact evaluation opportunities for promising decarbonization programs.“The Climate Action Learning Lab has helped us identify research questions for some of the City of Orlando’s deep decarbonization goals. J-PAL staff, along with researchers in the J-PAL network, worked hard to bridge the gap between behavior change theory and the applied, tangible benefits that we achieve through rigorous evaluation of our programs,” said Brittany Sellers, assistant director for sustainability, resilience and future-ready for Orlando. “Whether we’re discussing an energy-efficiency policy for some of the biggest buildings in the City of Orlando or expanding [electric vehicle] adoption across the city, it’s been very easy to communicate some of these high-level research concepts and what they can help us do to actually pursue our decarbonization goals.”The next phase of the Climate Action Learning Lab will center on building partnerships between jurisdictions and researchers in the J-PAL network to explore the launch of randomized evaluations, deepening the community of practice among current cohort members, and cultivating a broad culture of evidence building and use in the climate space. “The Climate Action Learning Lab provided a critical space for our city to collaborate with other cities and states seeking to implement similar decarbonization programs, as well as with researchers in the J-PAL network to help rigorously evaluate these programs,” said Daniel Collins, innovation team director at the City of Newport News. “We look forward to further collaboration and opportunities to learn from evaluations of our mitigation efforts so we, as a city, can better allocate resources to the most effective solutions.”The Climate Action Learning Lab is one of several offerings under the J-PAL North America Evidence for Climate Action Project. The project’s goal is to convene an influential network of researchers, policymakers, and practitioners to generate rigorous evidence to identify and advance equitable, high-impact policy solutions to climate change in the United States. In addition to the Learning Lab, J-PAL North America will launch a climate special topic request for proposals this fall to fund research on climate mitigation and adaptation initiatives. J-PAL will welcome applications from both research partnerships formed through the Learning Lab as well as other eligible applicants.Local government leaders, researchers, potential partners, or funders committed to advancing climate solutions that work, and who want to learn more about the Evidence for Climate Action Project, may email na_eecc@povertyactionlab.org or subscribe to the J-PAL North America Climate Action newsletter. More

    • 88 Shares189 Views

      in Energy

      Decarbonizing steel is as tough as steel

      by

      The long-term aspirational goal of the Paris Agreement on climate change is to cap global warming at 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels, and thereby reduce the frequency and severity of floods, droughts, wildfires, and other extreme weather events. Achieving that goal will require a massive reduction in global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions across all economic sectors. A major roadblock, however, could be the industrial sector, which accounts for roughly 25 percent of global energy- and process-related CO2 emissions — particularly within the iron and steel sector, industry’s largest emitter of CO2.Iron and steel production now relies heavily on fossil fuels (coal or natural gas) for heat, converting iron ore to iron, and making steel strong. Steelmaking could be decarbonized by a combination of several methods, including carbon capture technology, the use of low- or zero-carbon fuels, and increased use of recycled steel. Now a new study in the Journal of Cleaner Production systematically explores the viability of different iron-and-steel decarbonization strategies.Today’s strategy menu includes improving energy efficiency, switching fuels and technologies, using more scrap steel, and reducing demand. Using the MIT Economic Projection and Policy Analysis model, a multi-sector, multi-region model of the world economy, researchers at MIT, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and ExxonMobil Technology and Engineering Co. evaluate the decarbonization potential of replacing coal-based production processes with electric arc furnaces (EAF), along with either scrap steel or “direct reduced iron” (DRI), which is fueled by natural gas with carbon capture and storage (NG CCS DRI-EAF) or by hydrogen (H2 DRI-EAF).Under a global climate mitigation scenario aligned with the 1.5 C climate goal, these advanced steelmaking technologies could result in deep decarbonization of the iron and steel sector by 2050, as long as technology costs are low enough to enable large-scale deployment. Higher costs would favor the replacement of coal with electricity and natural gas, greater use of scrap steel, and reduced demand, resulting in a more-than-50-percent reduction in emissions relative to current levels. Lower technology costs would enable massive deployment of NG CCS DRI-EAF or H2 DRI-EAF, reducing emissions by up to 75 percent.Even without adoption of these advanced technologies, the iron-and-steel sector could significantly reduce its CO2 emissions intensity (how much CO2 is released per unit of production) with existing steelmaking technologies, primarily by replacing coal with gas and electricity (especially if it is generated by renewable energy sources), using more scrap steel, and implementing energy efficiency measures.“The iron and steel industry needs to combine several strategies to substantially reduce its emissions by mid-century, including an increase in recycling, but investing in cost reductions in hydrogen pathways and carbon capture and sequestration will enable even deeper emissions mitigation in the sector,” says study supervising author Sergey Paltsev, deputy director of the MIT Center for Sustainability Science and Strategy (MIT CS3) and a senior research scientist at the MIT Energy Initiative (MITEI).This study was supported by MIT CS3 and ExxonMobil through its membership in MITEI. More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Energy

      “Each of us holds a piece of the solution”

      by

      MIT has an unparalleled history of bringing together interdisciplinary teams to solve pressing problems — think of the development of radar during World War II, or leading the international coalition that cracked the code of the human genome — but the challenge of climate change could demand a scale of collaboration unlike any that’s come before at MIT.“Solving climate change is not just about new technologies or better models. It’s about forging new partnerships across campus and beyond — between scientists and economists, between architects and data scientists, between policymakers and physicists, between anthropologists and engineers, and more,” MIT Vice President for Energy and Climate Evelyn Wang told an energetic crowd of faculty, students, and staff on May 6. “Each of us holds a piece of the solution — but only together can we see the whole.”Undeterred by heavy rain, approximately 300 campus community members filled the atrium in the Tina and Hamid Moghadam Building (Building 55) for a spring gathering hosted by Wang and the Climate Project at MIT. The initiative seeks to direct the full strength of MIT to address climate change, which Wang described as one of the defining challenges of this moment in history — and one of its greatest opportunities.“It calls on us to rethink how we power our world, how we build, how we live — and how we work together,” Wang said. “And there is no better place than MIT to lead this kind of bold, integrated effort. Our culture of curiosity, rigor, and relentless experimentation makes us uniquely suited to cross boundaries — to break down silos and build something new.”The Climate Project is organized around six missions, thematic areas in which MIT aims to make significant impact, ranging from decarbonizing industry to new policy approaches to designing resilient cities. The faculty leaders of these missions posed challenges to the crowd before circulating among the crowd to share their perspectives and to discuss community questions and ideas.Wang and the Climate Project team were joined by a number of research groups, startups, and MIT offices conducting relevant work today on issues related to energy and climate. For example, the MIT Office of Sustainability showcased efforts to use the MIT campus as a living laboratory; MIT spinouts such as Forma Systems, which is developing high-performance, low-carbon building systems, and Addis Energy, which envisions using the earth as a reactor to produce clean ammonia, presented their technologies; and visitors learned about current projects in MIT labs, including DebunkBot, an artificial intelligence-powered chatbot that can persuade people to shift their attitudes about conspiracies, developed by David Rand, the Erwin H. Schell Professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management.Benedetto Marelli, an associate professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering who leads the Wild Cards Mission, said the energy and enthusiasm that filled the room was inspiring — but that the individual conversations were equally valuable.“I was especially pleased to see so many students come out. I also spoke with other faculty, talked to staff from across the Institute, and met representatives of external companies interested in collaborating with MIT,” Marelli said. “You could see connections being made all around the room, which is exactly what we need as we build momentum for the Climate Project.” More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Energy

      How can India decarbonize its coal-dependent electric power system?

      by

      As the world struggles to reduce climate-warming carbon emissions, India has pledged to do its part, and its success is critical: In 2023, India was the third-largest carbon emitter worldwide. The Indian government has committed to having net-zero carbon emissions by 2070.To fulfill that promise, India will need to decarbonize its electric power system, and that will be a challenge: Fully 60 percent of India’s electricity comes from coal-burning power plants that are extremely inefficient. To make matters worse, the demand for electricity in India is projected to more than double in the coming decade due to population growth and increased use of air conditioning, electric cars, and so on.Despite having set an ambitious target, the Indian government has not proposed a plan for getting there. Indeed, as in other countries, in India the government continues to permit new coal-fired power plants to be built, and aging plants to be renovated and their retirement postponed.To help India define an effective — and realistic — plan for decarbonizing its power system, key questions must be addressed. For example, India is already rapidly developing carbon-free solar and wind power generators. What opportunities remain for further deployment of renewable generation? Are there ways to retrofit or repurpose India’s existing coal plants that can substantially and affordably reduce their greenhouse gas emissions? And do the responses to those questions differ by region?With funding from IHI Corp. through the MIT Energy Initiative (MITEI), Yifu Ding, a postdoc at MITEI, and her colleagues set out to answer those questions by first using machine learning to determine the efficiency of each of India’s current 806 coal plants, and then investigating the impacts that different decarbonization approaches would have on the mix of power plants and the price of electricity in 2035 under increasingly stringent caps on emissions.First step: Develop the needed datasetAn important challenge in developing a decarbonization plan for India has been the lack of a complete dataset describing the current power plants in India. While other studies have generated plans, they haven’t taken into account the wide variation in the coal-fired power plants in different regions of the country. “So, we first needed to create a dataset covering and characterizing all of the operating coal plants in India. Such a dataset was not available in the existing literature,” says Ding.Making a cost-effective plan for expanding the capacity of a power system requires knowing the efficiencies of all the power plants operating in the system. For this study, the researchers used as their metric the “station heat rate,” a standard measurement of the overall fuel efficiency of a given power plant. The station heat rate of each plant is needed in order to calculate the fuel consumption and power output of that plant as plans for capacity expansion are being developed.Some of the Indian coal plants’ efficiencies were recorded before 2022, so Ding and her team used machine-learning models to predict the efficiencies of all the Indian coal plants operating now. In 2024, they created and posted online the first comprehensive, open-sourced dataset for all 806 power plants in 30 regions of India. The work won the 2024 MIT Open Data Prize. This dataset includes each plant’s power capacity, efficiency, age, load factor (a measure indicating how much of the time it operates), water stress, and more.In addition, they categorized each plant according to its boiler design. A “supercritical” plant operates at a relatively high temperature and pressure, which makes it thermodynamically efficient, so it produces a lot of electricity for each unit of heat in the fuel. A “subcritical” plant runs at a lower temperature and pressure, so it’s less thermodynamically efficient. Most of the Indian coal plants are still subcritical plants running at low efficiency.Next step: Investigate decarbonization optionsEquipped with their detailed dataset covering all the coal power plants in India, the researchers were ready to investigate options for responding to tightening limits on carbon emissions. For that analysis, they turned to GenX, a modeling platform that was developed at MITEI to help guide decision-makers as they make investments and other plans for the future of their power systems.Ding built a GenX model based on India’s power system in 2020, including details about each power plant and transmission network across 30 regions of the country. She also entered the coal price, potential resources for wind and solar power installations, and other attributes of each region. Based on the parameters given, the GenX model would calculate the lowest-cost combination of equipment and operating conditions that can fulfill a defined future level of demand while also meeting specified policy constraints, including limits on carbon emissions. The model and all data sources were also released as open-source tools for all viewers to use.Ding and her colleagues — Dharik Mallapragada, a former principal research scientist at MITEI who is now an assistant professor of chemical and biomolecular energy at NYU Tandon School of Engineering and a MITEI visiting scientist; and Robert J. Stoner, the founding director of the MIT Tata Center for Technology and Design and former deputy director of MITEI for science and technology — then used the model to explore options for meeting demands in 2035 under progressively tighter carbon emissions caps, taking into account region-to-region variations in the efficiencies of the coal plants, the price of coal, and other factors. They describe their methods and their findings in a paper published in the journal Energy for Sustainable Development.In separate runs, they explored plans involving various combinations of current coal plants, possible new renewable plants, and more, to see their outcome in 2035. Specifically, they assumed the following four “grid-evolution scenarios:”Baseline: The baseline scenario assumes limited onshore wind and solar photovoltaics development and excludes retrofitting options, representing a business-as-usual pathway.High renewable capacity: This scenario calls for the development of onshore wind and solar power without any supply chain constraints.Biomass co-firing: This scenario assumes the baseline limits on renewables, but here all coal plants — both subcritical and supercritical — can be retrofitted for “co-firing” with biomass, an approach in which clean-burning biomass replaces some of the coal fuel. Certain coal power plants in India already co-fire coal and biomass, so the technology is known.Carbon capture and sequestration plus biomass co-firing: This scenario is based on the same assumptions as the biomass co-firing scenario with one addition: All of the high-efficiency supercritical plants are also retrofitted for carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), a technology that captures and removes carbon from a power plant’s exhaust stream and prepares it for permanent disposal. Thus far, CCS has not been used in India. This study specifies that 90 percent of all carbon in the power plant exhaust is captured.Ding and her team investigated power system planning under each of those grid-evolution scenarios and four assumptions about carbon caps: no cap, which is the current situation; 1,000 million tons (Mt) of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, which reflects India’s announced targets for 2035; and two more-ambitious targets, namely 800 Mt and 500 Mt. For context, CO2 emissions from India’s power sector totaled about 1,100 Mt in 2021. (Note that transmission network expansion is allowed in all scenarios.)Key findingsAssuming the adoption of carbon caps under the four scenarios generated a vast array of detailed numerical results. But taken together, the results show interesting trends in the cost-optimal mix of generating capacity and the cost of electricity under the different scenarios.Even without any limits on carbon emissions, most new capacity additions will be wind and solar generators — the lowest-cost option for expanding India’s electricity-generation capacity. Indeed, this is observed to be the case now in India. However, the increasing demand for electricity will still require some new coal plants to be built. Model results show a 10 to 20 percent increase in coal plant capacity by 2035 relative to 2020.Under the baseline scenario, renewables are expanded up to the maximum allowed under the assumptions, implying that more deployment would be economical. More coal capacity is built, and as the cap on emissions tightens, there is also investment in natural gas power plants, as well as batteries to help compensate for the now-large amount of intermittent solar and wind generation. When a 500 Mt cap on carbon is imposed, the cost of electricity generation is twice as high as it was with no cap.The high renewable capacity scenario reduces the development of new coal capacity and produces the lowest electricity cost of the four scenarios. Under the most stringent cap — 500 Mt — onshore wind farms play an important role in bringing the cost down. “Otherwise, it’ll be very expensive to reach such stringent carbon constraints,” notes Ding. “Certain coal plants that remain run only a few hours per year, so are inefficient as well as financially unviable. But they still need to be there to support wind and solar.” She explains that other backup sources of electricity, such as batteries, are even more costly. The biomass co-firing scenario assumes the same capacity limit on renewables as in the baseline scenario, and the results are much the same, in part because the biomass replaces such a low fraction — just 20 percent — of the coal in the fuel feedstock. “This scenario would be most similar to the current situation in India,” says Ding. “It won’t bring down the cost of electricity, so we’re basically saying that adding this technology doesn’t contribute effectively to decarbonization.”But CCS plus biomass co-firing is a different story. It also assumes the limits on renewables development, yet it is the second-best option in terms of reducing costs. Under the 500 Mt cap on CO2 emissions, retrofitting for both CCS and biomass co-firing produces a 22 percent reduction in the cost of electricity compared to the baseline scenario. In addition, as the carbon cap tightens, this option reduces the extent of deployment of natural gas plants and significantly improves overall coal plant utilization. That increased utilization “means that coal plants have switched from just meeting the peak demand to supplying part of the baseline load, which will lower the cost of coal generation,” explains Ding.Some concernsWhile those trends are enlightening, the analyses also uncovered some concerns for India to consider, in particular, with the two approaches that yielded the lowest electricity costs.The high renewables scenario is, Ding notes, “very ideal.” It assumes that there will be little limiting the development of wind and solar capacity, so there won’t be any issues with supply chains, which is unrealistic. More importantly, the analyses showed that implementing the high renewables approach would create uneven investment in renewables across the 30 regions. Resources for onshore and offshore wind farms are mainly concentrated in a few regions in western and southern India. “So all the wind farms would be put in those regions, near where the rich cities are,” says Ding. “The poorer cities on the eastern side, where the coal power plants are, will have little renewable investment.”So the approach that’s best in terms of cost is not best in terms of social welfare, because it tends to benefit the rich regions more than the poor ones. “It’s like [the government will] need to consider the trade-off between energy justice and cost,” says Ding. Enacting state-level renewable generation targets could encourage a more even distribution of renewable capacity installation. Also, as transmission expansion is planned, coordination among power system operators and renewable energy investors in different regions could help in achieving the best outcome.CCS plus biomass co-firing — the second-best option for reducing prices — solves the equity problem posed by high renewables, and it assumes a more realistic level of renewable power adoption. However, CCS hasn’t been used in India, so there is no precedent in terms of costs. The researchers therefore based their cost estimates on the cost of CCS in China and then increased the required investment by 10 percent, the “first-of-a-kind” index developed by the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Based on those costs and other assumptions, the researchers conclude that coal plants with CCS could come into use by 2035 when the carbon cap for power generation is less than 1,000 Mt.But will CCS actually be implemented in India? While there’s been discussion about using CCS in heavy industry, the Indian government has not announced any plans for implementing the technology in coal-fired power plants. Indeed, India is currently “very conservative about CCS,” says Ding. “Some researchers say CCS won’t happen because it’s so expensive, and as long as there’s no direct use for the captured carbon, the only thing you can do is put it in the ground.” She adds, “It’s really controversial to talk about whether CCS will be implemented in India in the next 10 years.”Ding and her colleagues hope that other researchers and policymakers — especially those working in developing countries — may benefit from gaining access to their datasets and learning about their methods. Based on their findings for India, she stresses the importance of understanding the detailed geographical situation in a country in order to design plans and policies that are both realistic and equitable. More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Energy

      Reducing carbon emissions from residential heating: A pathway forward

      by

      In the race to reduce climate-warming carbon emissions, the buildings sector is falling behind. While carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in the U.S. electric power sector dropped by 34 percent between 2005 and 2021, emissions in the building sector declined by only 18 percent in that same time period. Moreover, in extremely cold locations, burning natural gas to heat houses can make up a substantial share of the emissions portfolio. Therefore, steps to electrify buildings in general, and residential heating in particular, are essential for decarbonizing the U.S. energy system.But that change will increase demand for electricity and decrease demand for natural gas. What will be the net impact of those two changes on carbon emissions and on the cost of decarbonizing? And how will the electric power and natural gas sectors handle the new challenges involved in their long-term planning for future operations and infrastructure investments?A new study by MIT researchers with support from the MIT Energy Initiative (MITEI) Future Energy Systems Center unravels the impacts of various levels of electrification of residential space heating on the joint power and natural gas systems. A specially devised modeling framework enabled them to estimate not only the added costs and emissions for the power sector to meet the new demand, but also any changes in costs and emissions that result for the natural gas sector.The analyses brought some surprising outcomes. For example, they show that — under certain conditions — switching 80 percent of homes to heating by electricity could cut carbon emissions and at the same time significantly reduce costs over the combined natural gas and electric power sectors relative to the case in which there is only modest switching. That outcome depends on two changes: Consumers must install high-efficiency heat pumps plus take steps to prevent heat losses from their homes, and planners in the power and the natural gas sectors must work together as they make long-term infrastructure and operations decisions. Based on their findings, the researchers stress the need for strong state, regional, and national policies that encourage and support the steps that homeowners and industry planners can take to help decarbonize today’s building sector.A two-part modeling approachTo analyze the impacts of electrification of residential heating on costs and emissions in the combined power and gas sectors, a team of MIT experts in building technology, power systems modeling, optimization techniques, and more developed a two-part modeling framework. Team members included Rahman Khorramfar, a senior postdoc in MITEI and the Laboratory for Information and Decision Systems (LIDS); Morgan Santoni-Colvin SM ’23, a former MITEI graduate research assistant, now an associate at Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc.; Saurabh Amin, a professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and principal investigator in LIDS; Audun Botterud, a principal research scientist in LIDS; Leslie Norford, a professor in the Department of Architecture; and Dharik Mallapragada, a former MITEI principal research scientist, now an assistant professor at New York University, who led the project. They describe their new methods and findings in a paper published in the journal Cell Reports Sustainability on Feb. 6.The first model in the framework quantifies how various levels of electrification will change end-use demand for electricity and for natural gas, and the impacts of possible energy-saving measures that homeowners can take to help. “To perform that analysis, we built a ‘bottom-up’ model — meaning that it looks at electricity and gas consumption of individual buildings and then aggregates their consumption to get an overall demand for power and for gas,” explains Khorramfar. By assuming a wide range of building “archetypes” — that is, groupings of buildings with similar physical characteristics and properties — coupled with trends in population growth, the team could explore how demand for electricity and for natural gas would change under each of five assumed electrification pathways: “business as usual” with modest electrification, medium electrification (about 60 percent of homes are electrified), high electrification (about 80 percent of homes make the change), and medium and high electrification with “envelope improvements,” such as sealing up heat leaks and adding insulation.The second part of the framework consists of a model that takes the demand results from the first model as inputs and “co-optimizes” the overall electricity and natural gas system to minimize annual investment and operating costs while adhering to any constraints, such as limits on emissions or on resource availability. The modeling framework thus enables the researchers to explore the impact of each electrification pathway on the infrastructure and operating costs of the two interacting sectors.The New England case study: A challenge for electrificationAs a case study, the researchers chose New England, a region where the weather is sometimes extremely cold and where burning natural gas to heat houses contributes significantly to overall emissions. “Critics will say that electrification is never going to happen [in New England]. It’s just too expensive,” comments Santoni-Colvin. But he notes that most studies focus on the electricity sector in isolation. The new framework considers the joint operation of the two sectors and then quantifies their respective costs and emissions. “We know that electrification will require large investments in the electricity infrastructure,” says Santoni-Colvin. “But what hasn’t been well quantified in the literature is the savings that we generate on the natural gas side by doing that — so, the system-level savings.”Using their framework, the MIT team performed model runs aimed at an 80 percent reduction in building-sector emissions relative to 1990 levels — a target consistent with regional policy goals for 2050. The researchers defined parameters including details about building archetypes, the regional electric power system, existing and potential renewable generating systems, battery storage, availability of natural gas, and other key factors describing New England.They then performed analyses assuming various scenarios with different mixes of home improvements. While most studies assume typical weather, they instead developed 20 projections of annual weather data based on historical weather patterns and adjusted for the effects of climate change through 2050. They then analyzed their five levels of electrification.Relative to business-as-usual projections, results from the framework showed that high electrification of residential heating could more than double the demand for electricity during peak periods and increase overall electricity demand by close to 60 percent. Assuming that building-envelope improvements are deployed in parallel with electrification reduces the magnitude and weather sensitivity of peak loads and creates overall efficiency gains that reduce the combined demand for electricity plus natural gas for home heating by up to 30 percent relative to the present day. Notably, a combination of high electrification and envelope improvements resulted in the lowest average cost for the overall electric power-natural gas system in 2050.Lessons learnedReplacing existing natural gas-burning furnaces and boilers with heat pumps reduces overall energy consumption. Santoni-Colvin calls it “something of an intuitive result” that could be expected because heat pumps are “just that much more efficient than old, fossil fuel-burning systems. But even so, we were surprised by the gains.”Other unexpected results include the importance of homeowners making more traditional energy efficiency improvements, such as adding insulation and sealing air leaks — steps supported by recent rebate policies. Those changes are critical to reducing costs that would otherwise be incurred for upgrading the electricity grid to accommodate the increased demand. “You can’t just go wild dropping heat pumps into everybody’s houses if you’re not also considering other ways to reduce peak loads. So it really requires an ‘all of the above’ approach to get to the most cost-effective outcome,” says Santoni-Colvin.Testing a range of weather outcomes also provided important insights. Demand for heating fuel is very weather-dependent, yet most studies are based on a limited set of weather data — often a “typical year.” The researchers found that electrification can lead to extended peak electric load events that can last for a few days during cold winters. Accordingly, the researchers conclude that there will be a continuing need for a “firm, dispatchable” source of electricity; that is, a power-generating system that can be relied on to produce power any time it’s needed — unlike solar and wind systems. As examples, they modeled some possible technologies, including power plants fired by a low-carbon fuel or by natural gas equipped with carbon capture equipment. But they point out that there’s no way of knowing what types of firm generators will be available in 2050. It could be a system that’s not yet mature, or perhaps doesn’t even exist today.In presenting their findings, the researchers note several caveats. For one thing, their analyses don’t include the estimated cost to homeowners of installing heat pumps. While that cost is widely discussed and debated, that issue is outside the scope of their current project.In addition, the study doesn’t specify what happens to existing natural gas pipelines. “Some homes are going to electrify and get off the gas system and not have to pay for it, leaving other homes with increasing rates because the gas system cost now has to be divided among fewer customers,” says Khorramfar. “That will inevitably raise equity questions that need to be addressed by policymakers.”Finally, the researchers note that policies are needed to drive residential electrification. Current financial support for installation of heat pumps and steps to make homes more thermally efficient are a good start. But such incentives must be coupled with a new approach to planning energy infrastructure investments. Traditionally, electric power planning and natural gas planning are performed separately. However, to decarbonize residential heating, the two sectors should coordinate when planning future operations and infrastructure needs. Results from the MIT analysis indicate that such cooperation could significantly reduce both emissions and costs for residential heating — a change that would yield a much-needed step toward decarbonizing the buildings sector as a whole. More

    • 113 Shares169 Views

      in Energy

      Smart carbon dioxide removal yields economic and environmental benefits

      by

      Last year the Earth exceeded 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming above preindustrial times, a threshold beyond which wildfires, droughts, floods, and other climate impacts are expected to escalate in frequency, intensity, and lethality. To cap global warming at 1.5 C and avert that scenario, the nearly 200 signatory nations of the Paris Agreement on climate change will need to not only dramatically lower their greenhouse gas emissions, but also take measures to remove carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere and durably store it at or below the Earth’s surface.Past analyses of the climate mitigation potential, costs, benefits, and drawbacks of different carbon dioxide removal (CDR) options have focused primarily on three strategies: bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), in which CO2-absorbing plant matter is converted into fuels or directly burned to generate energy, with some of the plant’s carbon content captured and then stored safely and permanently; afforestation/reforestation, in which CO2-absorbing trees are planted in large numbers; and direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS), a technology that captures and separates CO2 directly from ambient air, and injects it into geological reservoirs or incorporates it into durable products. To provide a more comprehensive and actionable analysis of CDR, a new study by researchers at the MIT Center for Sustainability Science and Strategy (CS3) first expands the option set to include biochar (charcoal produced from plant matter and stored in soil) and enhanced weathering (EW) (spreading finely ground rock particles on land to accelerate storage of CO2 in soil and water). The study then evaluates portfolios of all five options — in isolation and in combination — to assess their capability to meet the 1.5 C goal, and their potential impacts on land, energy, and policy costs.The study appears in the journal Environmental Research Letters. Aided by their global multi-region, multi-sector Economic Projection and Policy Analysis (EPPA) model, the MIT CS3 researchers produce three key findings.First, the most cost-effective, low-impact strategy that policymakers can take to achieve global net-zero emissions — an essential step in meeting the 1.5 C goal — is to diversify their CDR portfolio, rather than rely on any single option. This approach minimizes overall cropland and energy consumption, and negative impacts such as increased food insecurity and decreased energy supplies.By diversifying across multiple CDR options, the highest CDR deployment of around 31.5 gigatons of CO2 per year is achieved in 2100, while also proving the most cost-effective net-zero strategy. The study identifies BECCS and biochar as most cost-competitive in removing CO2 from the atmosphere, followed by EW, with DACCS as uncompetitive due to high capital and energy requirements. While posing logistical and other challenges, biochar and EW have the potential to improve soil quality and productivity across 45 percent of all croplands by 2100.“Diversifying CDR portfolios is the most cost-effective net-zero strategy because it avoids relying on a single CDR option, thereby reducing and redistributing negative impacts on agriculture, forestry, and other land uses, as well as on the energy sector,” says Solene Chiquier, lead author of the study who was a CS3 postdoc during its preparation.The second finding: There is no optimal CDR portfolio that will work well at global and national levels. The ideal CDR portfolio for a particular region will depend on local technological, economic, and geophysical conditions. For example, afforestation and reforestation would be of great benefit in places like Brazil, Latin America, and Africa, by not only sequestering carbon in more acreage of protected forest but also helping to preserve planetary well-being and human health.“In designing a sustainable, cost-effective CDR portfolio, it is important to account for regional availability of agricultural, energy, and carbon-storage resources,” says Sergey Paltsev, CS3 deputy director, MIT Energy Initiative senior research scientist, and supervising co-author of the study. “Our study highlights the need for enhancing knowledge about local conditions that favor some CDR options over others.”Finally, the MIT CS3 researchers show that delaying large-scale deployment of CDR portfolios could be very costly, leading to considerably higher carbon prices across the globe — a development sure to deter the climate mitigation efforts needed to achieve the 1.5 C goal. They recommend near-term implementation of policy and financial incentives to help fast-track those efforts. More