Alberta's last coal plant went offline on June 16, marking the end of coal-fired electricity in the province. "So, for the first time in 150 years, coal is no longer part of Alberta's electricity mix," writes Chris Severson-Baker in an opinion piece for The Globe and Mail. "It is important to celebrate and reflect on these milestones, while recognizing there is no time to rest before redoubling our efforts and looking to what's next." From the report: Many organizations contributed to this successful campaign through advocacy and research. The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, the Lung Association and the Asthma Society of Canada were instrumental in highlighting the health impacts associated with air pollution from coal-fired electricity. The Pembina Institute, an Alberta-based clean-energy think tank, first intervened in a coal plant regulatory process in the late 1990s and, in 2009, published the first major proposal that showed the province could move to an unabated coal-free grid by 2030. Our research was ahead of its time and criticized as idealistic.

Coal accounted for 80 per cent of Alberta's electricity grid in the early 2000s and it still amounted to 60 per cent just 10 years ago. When phasing out coal was just an idea being batted around, many said it couldn't be done. This is not dissimilar to the rhetoric today around decarbonizing the grid. But Alberta's experience phasing out coal shows environmental progress of this magnitude is possible. [...] Phasing out coal in Alberta was supported by good policy design driven by carbon pricing and regulations with clear targets that offered necessary certainty to the industry and stakeholders. Rapidly growing, low-cost renewable energy further supported the phase-out, along with companies investing in gas-fired electricity. All these actions accelerated the transition away from coal at a faster rate than anticipated. Chris Severson-Baker is the executive director of the Pembina Institute, a Canadian non-profit think tank focused on advancing clean energy solutions and sustainable environmental practices through research, advocacy, and collaboration.

Further reading: Air Pollution Can Decrease Odds of Live Birth After IVF By 38%, Study Finds

An anonymous reader writes: Per a report from DruckerChannel, HP has finally been forced to discontinue its cheaper e-series LaserJet printers due to customers experiencing problems with their online-only and always tied to HP+ subscription requirements. Among other things, HP+ requires a permanent Internet connection, and customers only use HP-original ink and toners, not allowing for third-party alternatives to be used at all. There are benefits to HP+, including cloud printing and an extra year's warranty, but the forced online requirement for a cheaper printer left a bad taste in the mouths of many consumers.

In any case, it's important to clarify that this discontinuation of HP printers will only impact HP LaserJet printers that have an "e" added to the end of their model name to denote the alternative business model. So, the HP Laserjet M110w is unaffected by this, but the HP LaserJet M110we and M209dwe, two cheaper always-online alternatives, will no longer be produced or sold by HP. Another critical point of clarification is that the existing HP e-series LaserJet printer models in the wild will still function exactly as they did when they were purchased. No software updates are forthcoming to unlock the true potential of the hardware, so existing customers will have to deal with it and HP+ until they can replace their printers entirely. At least they'll still get HP+ benefits, but after such backlash, it'd be nice if HP acknowledged its mistake enough to remove some of the restrictions on e-series printer users.

Remember those researchers who spent years training AI tools to analyze the reviews drivers left on the smartphone apps where they pay for EV charging?

There was one more unexpected finding. "Rideshare drivers who work for companies such as Uber are increasingly turning to electric vehicles to reduce fuel costs." That trend is boosting demand for conveniently located, publicly accessible EV chargers... "They are mostly relying on public chargers for their daily Uber needs, usually every day or every couple of days, which dramatically increases electric vehicle miles traveled," [climate fellow Omar Asensio told the Institute's blog], explaining that many drivers live in apartments that lack garages or space for a residential EV charger. Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi considers the issue so pressing he urged U.S. policymakers to accelerate plans to improve the nation's EV charging infrastructure in a Fast Co. op-ed in January — during the World Economic Forum in Davos, when media messaging can influence policymakers.

Independent Uber drivers, Khosrowshahi said, are converting to electric vehicles seven times faster than the general public and they tend to be disproportionately from low- and middle-income households that need access to public charging stations. "Charging infrastructure must be more equitable," Khosrowshahi wrote. "Many drivers don't have driveways or garages, so access to nearby overnight charging is essential. Yet our data shows us that Uber drivers often live in neighborhoods lacking this infrastructure. These 'charging deserts' hold countless people back from making the switch."

Harvard Business School has an "Institute for Business in Global Society" that explores the societal impacts of business. And they've recently published some new AI-powered research about EV charging infrastructure, according to the Institute's blog, conducted by climate fellow Omar Asensio.

"Asensio and his team, supported by Microsoft and National Science Foundation awards, spent years building models and training AI tools to extract insights and make predictions," using the reviews drivers left (in more than 72 languages) on the smartphone apps drivers use to pay for charging. And ultimately this research identified "a significant obstacle to increasing electric vehicle (EV) sales and decreasing carbon emissions in the United States: owners' deep frustration with the state of charging infrastructure, including unreliability, erratic pricing, and lack of charging locations..." [C]harging stations in the U.S. have an average reliability score of only 78%, meaning that about one in five don't work. They are, on average, less reliable than regular gas stations, Asensio said. "Imagine if you go to a traditional gas station and two out of 10 times the pumps are out of order," he said. "Consumers would revolt...." EV drivers often find broken equipment, making charging unreliable at best and simply not as easy as the old way of topping off a tank of gas. The reason? "No one's maintaining these stations," Asensio said.
One problem? Another blog post by the Institute notes that America's approach to public charging has differed sharply from those in other countries: In Europe and Asia, governments started making major investments in public charging infrastructure years ago. In America, the initial thinking was that private companies would fill the public's need by spending money to install charging stations at hotels, shopping malls and other public venues. But that decentralized approach failed to meet demand and the Biden administration is now investing heavily to grow the charging network and facilitate EV sales... "No single market actor has sufficient incentive to build out a national charging network at a pace that meets our climate goals," the report declared. Citing research and the experience of other countries, it noted that "policies that increase access to charging stations may be among the best policies to increase EV sales." But the U.S. is far behind other countries.
Thanks to Slashdot reader NoWayNoShapeNoForm for sharing the article.

John Timmer reports via Ars Technica: On Tuesday, the people managing the ITER experimental fusion reactor announced (PDF) that a combination of delays and altered priorities meant that its first-of-its-kind hardware wouldn't see plasma until 2036, with the full-energy deuterium-tritium fusion pushed back to 2039. The latter represents a four-year delay relative to the previous roadmap. While the former is also a delay, it's due in part to changing priorities.

ITER is an attempt to build a fusion reactor that's capable of sustaining plasmas that allow it to operate well beyond the break-even point, where the energy released by fusion reactions significantly exceeds the energy required to create the conditions that enable those reactions. It's meant to hit that milestone by scaling up a well-understood design called a tokamak. But the problem has been plagued by delays and cost overruns nearly from its start. At early stages, many of these stemmed from changes in designs necessitated by a better and improved understanding of plasmas held at extreme pressures and temperatures due to better modeling capabilities and a better understanding of the behavior of plasmas in smaller reactions.

The latest delays are due to more prosaic reasons. One of them is the product of the international nature of the collaboration, which sees individual components built by different partner organizations before assembly at the reactor site in France. The pandemic, unsurprisingly, severely disrupted the production of a lot of these components, and the project's structure meant that alternate suppliers couldn't be used (assuming alternate suppliers of one-of-a-kind hardware existed in the first place). The second problem relates to the location of the reactor in France. The country's nuclear safety regulator had concerns about the assembly of some of the components and halted construction on the reactor.

Longtime Slashdot reader theodp writes: "If Einstein paved the way for a new era in physics," explains auction house Christie's in a promotion piece for its upcoming offering of 150+ "objects of scientific and historical importance" from the Paul G. Allen Collection (including items from the shuttered Living Computers Museum), "Mr. Allen and his collaborators ushered in a new era of computing. Starting with MS-DOS in 1981, Microsoft then went on to revolutionize personal computing with the launch of Windows in 1985."

Christie's auction and characterization of MS-DOS as an Allen and Microsoft innovation comes 30 years after the death of Gary Kildall, whose unpublished memoir, the Seattle Times reported in Kildall's July 1994 obituary, called DOS "plain and simple theft" of Kildall's CP/M OS. PC Magazine's The Rise of DOS: How Microsoft Got the IBM PC OS Contract notes that Paul Allen himself traced the genesis of MS-DOS back to a phone call Allen made to Seattle Computer Products owner Rod Brock in which Microsoft licensed Tim Paterson's CP/M-inspired QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System) for $10,000 plus a royalty of $15,000 for every company that licensed the software. A shrewd buy-low-sell-high business deal, yes, but hardly an Einstein-caliber breakthrough idea.

An anonymous reader shares a report: It resembles an enormous, malevolent robot from 1980s sci-fi but West Japan Railway's new humanoid employee was designed with nothing more sinister than a spot of painting and gardening in mind. Starting this month, the large machine with enormous arms, a crude, disproportionately small Wall-E-like head and coke-bottle eyes mounted on a truck -- which can drive on rails -- will be put to use for maintenance work on the company's network. Its operator sits in a cockpit on the truck, "seeing" through the robot's eyes via cameras and operating its powerful limbs and hands remotely. With a vertical reach of 12 metres (40ft), the machine can use various attachments for its arms to carry objects as heavy as 40kg (88lb), hold a brush to paint or use a chainsaw. For now, the robot's primary task will focus on trimming tree branches along rails and painting metal frames that hold cables above trains, the company said. The technology will help fill worker shortages in ageing Japan as well as reduce accidents such as workers falling from high places or suffering electric shocks, the company said.

Matthew Connatser reports via The Register: Utility firms American Electric Power (AEP) and Exelon have filed an official objection with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) over Talen Energy's nuclear power deal with Amazon. Back in March, Amazon bought a nuclear-powered datacenter from Talen Energy -- an operator of electricity generation and transmission facilities in the US. As part of the deal, Amazon would get 480 MW straight from the 2.7 GW Talen nuclear power plant in Susquehanna, Pennsylvania, and may even be able to upgrade to 960 MW down the line. However, that Susquehanna atomic plant also provides power to PJM Interconnection, the regional power grid operator for much of the eastern US. The two companies -- Talen and PJM -- have an interconnection service agreement (ISA) that sets the rules for how Talen should deliver power to PJM's transmission system.

To better accommodate the nuclear datacenter, Talen and PJM agreed to a new ISA, which has caught the ire of AEP and Exelon. The duo claim Talen and Amazon are basically getting a free ride that other PJM ratepayers will have to pay for, saying that even though Amazon's datacenter isn't directly connected to PJM, it still benefits from the power grid, meaning the other ratepayers are left holding the short end of the stick. Each of the station's two reactors has 1,350 MW available, and Amazon is already able to use 480 MW, and up to 960 MW in the future. If one of the reactors experiences an outage, the ISA says the datacenter is first in line for power from the other reactor, which leaves PJM with far less electricity than normal. That in turn would mean a lower energy supply for PJM's customers, who would have to pay more, at least according to the complaint's reasoning. The Talen-PJM ISA states that in this event, the nuclear datacenter will separate from the plant and get its power elsewhere, but AEP and Exelon are skeptical and want to know how exactly that would work.

The complaint argues Amazon's DC is essentially using the grid, saying the "premise" of the tweaked ISA "is that this datacenter co-located load is like load on a remote island -- one that simply has no impact on the PJM grid and would thus be properly excluded from economic and other responsibility for maintaining the PJM grid. But that storyline does not stand up to scrutiny." "They present their filing as no more than a replacement of older agreements with updated terms and 'clarifications' regarding the parties' roles and obligations," the two utility companies told [PDF] FERC, requesting a hearing over the matter. "The filing [new ISA] casts the submission as a mere housekeeping exercise, as if there is nothing to see here."

The protest adds: "The co-located load should not be allowed to operate as a free rider, making use of, and receiving the benefits of, a transmission system paid for by transmission ratepayers. We have no objection to co-location per se, but such load should pay its fair share of system use and other charges, just like other loads and customers." AEP and Exelon claim the new terms of the ISA contains a key loophole that hinges on the datacenter's co-location with the nuclear power plant, which allows its power usage to not be considered "in-network," even though the power load is synced to PJM's grid and could theoretically get power from it. [...] The end result, or so AEP and Exelon allege, is that Talen would be able to benefit from PJM's services without the associated cost. That would cost other customers between $58 million and $140 million per year overall, according to an analysis from Concentric Energy Advisors CEO Danielle Powers and chairman John Reed included with the filing. AEP and Exelon asked FERC to either hold a hearing to answer questions it feels are unresolved or to reject the new ISA outright. For its part, Talen claims the complaint's narrative is "demonstrably false" and that "transmission is not implicated."

The FTC has issued warnings to several tech firms, including PC manufacturers ASRock, Gigabyte, and Zotac, regarding potential violations of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. The agency expressed concerns that the companies' warranty and repair policies may be infringing on consumer rights. PCWorld adds: While the specific concerns vary by company, the FTC reminded the three companies that they can't, for example, place stickers on a laptop that caution consumers that opening or repairing the laptop violates warranty policies.

Neither can they state or imply that their products can only be repaired via an authorized service from the company. In the letter sent to Gigabyte (PDF), the FTC said that its staff is "concerned" by the Gigabyte written warranty, which includes the phrase: "If the manufacturing sticker inside the product was removed or damaged, it would no longer be covered by the warranty."

An anonymous reader shares a report: Sony plans to eventually stop producing consumer-grade recordable Blu-ray discs, but commercial products such as game and film Blu-rays will still be produced. Sony Group will lay off 250 employees at a division that produces recordable media discs, and start winding down the production of specific Blu-ray products, sources have told Japanese newspaper Mainichi.

However, contrary to recent reports, this decision will not affect Blu-ray discs that contain games, TV shows, or films. The staff reduction is happening to the Sony Sendai Technology Center, which produces recordable disc formats like CD-R, DVD-R, BD-R and archival discs for the Japanese region. Standard Blu-rays, 4K UHD discs, and PlayStation 4, PlayStation 5, and Xbox Blu-ray discs--which are made at Sony's separate DADC (Digital Audio Disc Corporation) facility--will still be manufactured, shipped, and sold worldwide. In other words, physical media will not go anywhere anytime soon, despite the prevalence and growth of streaming and/or digital media.

Astro is leaving its job to spend more time with family. From a report: Amazon informed customers and employees Wednesday morning that it plans to discontinue its Astro for Business program, less than a year after launching the robot security guard for small- and medium-sized businesses. The decision will help the company focus on its home version of Astro, according to an internal email. Astro for Business robots will stop working Sept. 25, the company said in a separate email to customers, encouraging them to recycle the devices.

Businesses will receive full refunds for the original cost of the device, plus a $300 credit "to help support a replacement solution for your workplace," the email said. They will also receive refunds for unused, pre-paid Astro Secure subscription fees. Announced in November 2023, the business version of Amazon's rolling robot used an HD periscope and night vision technology to autonomously patrol and map up to 5,000 square feet of space. It followed preprogrammed routes and routines, and could be controlled manually and remotely via the Amazon Astro app.

Tech companies scouring the country for electricity supplies have zeroed in on a key target: America's nuclear-power plants. From a report: The owners of roughly a third of U.S. nuclear-power plants are in talks with tech companies to provide electricity to new data centers needed to meet the demands of an artificial-intelligence boom. Among them, Amazon Web Services is nearing a deal for electricity supplied directly from a nuclear plant on the East Coast with Constellation Energy, the largest owner of U.S. nuclear-power plants, according to people familiar with the matter. In a separate deal in March, the Amazon subsidiary purchased a nuclear-powered data center in Pennsylvania for $650 million.

The discussions have the potential to remove stable power generation from the grid while reliability concerns are rising across much of the U.S. and new kinds of electricity users -- including AI, manufacturing and transportation -- are significantly increasing the demand for electricity in pockets of the country. Nuclear-powered data centers would match the grid's highest-reliability workhorse with a wealthy customer that wants 24-7 carbon-free power, likely speeding the addition of data centers needed in the global AI race. But instead of adding new green energy to meet their soaring power needs, tech companies would be effectively diverting existing electricity resources. That could raise prices for other customers and hold back emission-cutting goals.

Longtime Slashdot reader fahrbot-bot shares a report from CNN, written by Olesya Dmitracova: Nyobolt, based in Cambridge, has developed a new 35kWh lithium-ion battery that was charged from 10% to 80% in just over four and a half minutes in its first live demonstration last week. [...] Nyobolt's technology builds on a decade of research led by University of Cambridge battery scientist Clare Grey and Cambridge-educated Shivareddy, the company said. Key to its batteries' ability to be charged super-fast without a big impact on their longevity is a design that means they generate less heat. It also makes them safer as overheating can cause a lithium-ion battery to catch fire and explode. In addition, the materials used to make the batteries' anodes allow for a faster transfer of electrons. Nyobolt is currently in talks to sell its batteries to eight electric car manufacturers. At 35 kWh, the battery is much smaller than the 85 kWh in a more typical American electric vehicle (EV). Yet the technology may be used in larger battery packs in the future.

Independent testing of Nyobolt's batteries by what it called a leading global manufacturer found that they can achieve over 4,000 fast-charge cycles, equivalent to 600,000 miles (965,600 kilometers), while retaining more than 80% of capacity, Nyobolt said in its Friday statement. William Kephart, an e-mobility specialist at consultancy P3 Group and a former engineer, said EV batteries of the kind Nyobolt has developed could "theoretically" be charged as fast as the firm is promising, but the challenge was manufacturing such batteries on an industrial scale. A crucial chemical element in Nyobolt's batteries is niobium but, as Kephart pointed out, last year only an estimated 83,000 tons (94,500 tons) was mined worldwide. Compare that with graphite, commonly used as anode material in lithium-ion batteries: an estimated 1.6 million tons (1.8 million tons) was produced in 2023. In addition, there are currently "a lot of unknowns" with the niobium battery technology, he told CNN. "The industry will work it out (but) it's not seen by the industry as a scalable technology just yet," he added.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from the Financial Times: Google's greenhouse gas emissions have surged 48 percent in the past five years due to the expansion of its data centers that underpin artificial intelligence systems, leaving its commitment to get to "net zero" by 2030 in doubt. The Silicon Valley company's pollution amounted to 14.3 million tons of carbon equivalent in 2023, a 48 percent increase from its 2019 baseline and a 13 percent rise since last year, Google said in its annual environmental report on Tuesday. Google said the jump highlighted "the challenge of reducing emissions" at the same time as it invests in the build-out of large language models and their associated applications and infrastructure, admitting that "the future environmental impact of AI" was "complex and difficult to predict."

Chief sustainability officer Kate Brandt said the company remained committed to the 2030 target but stressed the "extremely ambitious" nature of the goal. "We do still expect our emissions to continue to rise before dropping towards our goal," said Brandt. She added that Google was "working very hard" on reducing its emissions, including by signing deals for clean energy. There was also a "tremendous opportunity for climate solutions that are enabled by AI," said Brandt. [...] In Tuesday's report, Google said its 2023 energy-related emissions -- which come primarily from data center electricity consumption -- rose 37 percent year on year, and overall represented a quarter of its total greenhouse gas emissions. Google's supply chain emissions -- its largest chunk, representing 75 percent of its total emissions -- also rose 8 percent. Google said they would "continue to rise in the near term" as a result in part of the build-out of the infrastructure needed to run AI systems.

Google has pledged to achieve net zero across its direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, and to run on carbon-free energy during every hour of every day within each grid it operates by the same date. However, the company warned in Tuesday's report that the "termination" of some clean energy projects during 2023 had pushed down the amount of renewables it had access to. Meanwhile, the company's data centre electricity consumption had "outpaced" Google's ability to bring more clean power projects online in the US and Asia-Pacific regions. Google's data centre electricity consumption increased 17 percent in 2023, and amounted to approximately 7-10 percent of global data center electricity consumption, the company estimated.Its data centers also consumed 17 percent more water in 2023 than during the previous year, Google said.

To stop their smartphone battery from swelling, long-time Slashdot reader shanen bought a Samsung Galaxy with a "restrictive charging option." But what setting should they use? The way this battery protection option worked was to stop charging the phone at 85%. That left me enough charge for my normal daily travels, which rarely took the phone below 50%, and the battery remained unswollen after a year, which included a month of quite heavy tethering, too. Unfortunately... After a recent upgrade, now my Galaxy has three options for the battery where it had two. The 85% option is still there, but it has been lowered to 80%. I've been using that for now and it still seems good enough. However my main concern is with the best option to maximize the overall lifespan of the smartphone...

The other old option says something about using AI to control the battery charging, but I don't trust it and think it is just the old approach that causes phones to die quickly... The new third option is the one that is interesting me. This seems to be a kind of flutter charge where the phone will charge to 100% and then stop until it has dropped to 95% before charging again, even if it remains plugged in. This sounds attractive and would give me more battery insurance when I'm traveling, but maybe it reduces the overall lifetime of the phone?
They tried getting answers from Samsung, but "I think I have been flagged as a low-profit customer." And of course, this raises several other questions? (Are other smartphones better? Have iPhones solved the battery-swelling issue?) And most importantly: is there a way to charge batteries without reducing their lifespan?

Share your own thoughts and experiences in the comments.

What's the best way to charge your smartphone battery?

Bloomberg and The Washington Post "claim AI power usage is dire," writes Slashdot reader NoWayNoShapeNoForm. But Ars Technica "begs to disagree with those speculations."

From Ars Technica's article: The high-profile pieces lean heavily on recent projections from Goldman Sachs and the International Energy Agency (IEA) to cast AI's "insatiable" demand for energy as an almost apocalyptic threat to our power infrastructure. The Post piece even cites anonymous "some [people]" in reporting that "some worry whether there will be enough electricity to meet [the power demands] from any source." Digging into the best available numbers and projections available, though, it's hard to see AI's current and near-future environmental impact in such a dire light... While the headline focus of both Bloomberg and The Washington Post's recent pieces is on artificial intelligence, the actual numbers and projections cited in both pieces overwhelmingly focus on the energy used by Internet "data centers" as a whole...

Bloomberg asks one source directly "why data centers were suddenly sucking up so much power" and gets back a blunt answer: "It's AI... It's 10 to 15 times the amount of electricity." Unfortunately for Bloomberg, that quote is followed almost immediately by a chart that heavily undercuts the AI alarmism. That chart shows worldwide data center energy usage growing at a remarkably steady pace from about 100 TWh in 2012 to around 350 TWh in 2024. The vast majority of that energy usage growth came before 2022, when the launch of tools like Dall-E and ChatGPT largely set off the industry's current mania for generative AI. If you squint at Bloomberg's graph, you can almost see the growth in energy usage slowing down a bit since that momentous year for generative AI.
Ars Technica first cites Dutch researcher Alex de Vries's estimate that in a few years the AI sector could use between 85 and 134 TWh of power. But another study estimated in 2018 that PC gaming already accounted for 75 TWh of electricity use per year, while "the IEA estimates crypto mining ate up 110 TWh of electricity in 2022." More to the point, de Vries' AI energy estimates are only a small fraction of the 620 to 1,050 TWh that data centers as a whole are projected to use by 2026, according to the IEA's recent report. The vast majority of all that data center power will still be going to more mundane Internet infrastructure that we all take for granted (and which is not nearly as sexy of a headline bogeyman as "AI").
The future is also hard to predict, the article concludes. "If customers don't respond to the hype by actually spending significant money on generative AI at some point, the tech-marketing machine will largely move on, as it did very recently with the metaverse and NFTs..."

What if across the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean, six high-voltage power cables stretched — each over 2,000 miles long.

CNN reports that a group of entrepreneurs "wants to build what would be the world's largest subsea energy interconnector between continents, linking Europe and North America...to connect places like the United Kingdom's west with eastern Canada, and potentially New York with western France...

"The Europe-US cables could send 6 gigawatts of energy in both directions at the speed of light, said Laurent Segalen, founder of the London-based Megawatt-X renewable energy firm, who is also part of the trio proposing the transatlantic interconnector. That's equivalent to what six large-scale nuclear power plants can generate, transmitted in near-real time." The interconnector would send renewable energy both east and west, taking advantage of the sun's diurnal journey across the sky. "When the sun is at its zenith, we probably have more power in Europe than we can really use," said Simon Ludlam, founder and CEO of Etchea Energy, and one of the trio of Europeans leading the project. "We've got wind and we've also got too much solar. That's a good time to send it to a demand center, like the East Coast of the United States. Five, six hours later, it's the zenith in the East Coast, and obviously, we in Europe have come back for dinner, and we get the reverse flow," he added.

The transatlantic interconnector is still a proposal, but networks of green energy cables are starting to sprawl across the world's sea beds. They are fast becoming part of a global climate solution, transmitting large amounts of renewable energy to countries struggling to make the green transition alone. But they are also forging new relations that are reshaping the geopolitical map and shifting some of the world's energy wars down to the depths of the ocean...

Already, energy cables run between several countries in Europe, most of them allied neighbors. Not all of them carry renewable power exclusively — that's sometimes determined by what makes up each country's energy grid — âbut new ones are typically being built for a green energy future. The UK, where land space for power plants is limited, is already connected with Belgium, Norway, the Netherlands and Denmark under the sea. It has signed up to a solar and wind link with Morocco to take advantage of the North African country's many hours of sunlight and strong trade winds that run across the equator. Similar proposals are popping up around the globe. A project called Sun Cable seeks to send solar power from sunny Australia, where land is abundant, to the Southeast Asian nation of Singapore, which also has plenty of sun but very little room for solar farms. India and Saudi Arabia plan to link their respective power grids via the Arabian Sea, part of a broader economic corridor plan to connect Asia, the Middle East and Europe.

It transforms water into the fuel — one of the first fuel plants in the world to do so.

The Washington Post visits a facility in Corpus Christi, Texas using renewable energy to produce "green" hydrogen. The plant feeds water through machines that pull out its hydrogen atoms... [T]he hydrogen is chemically transformed into diesel for delivery trucks. This process could represent the biggest change in how fuel for planes, ships, trains and trucks is made since the first internal combustion engine fired up in the 19th century... Turning hydrogen into liquid fuel could help slash planet-warming pollution from heavy vehicles, cutting a key source of emissions that contribute to climate change. But to fulfill that promise, companies will have to build massive numbers of wind turbines and solar panels to power the energy-hungry process. Regulators will have to make sure hydrogen production doesn't siphon green energy that could go towards cleaning up other sources of global warming gases, such as homes or factories.

Although cars and light trucks are shifting to electric motors, other forms of transport will likely rely on some kind of liquid fuel for the foreseeable future. Batteries are too heavy for planes and too bulky for ships. Extended charging times could be an obstacle for long-haul trucks, and some rail lines may be too expensive to electrify. Together, these vehicles represent roughly half of emissions from transportation, the fourth-biggest source of greenhouse gases. To wean machines off oil, companies like Infinium, the owner of this plant, are starting to churn out hydrogen-based fuels that — in the best case — produce close to net zero emissions. They could also pave the way for a new technology, hydrogen fuel cells, to power planes, ships and trucks in the second half of this century. For now, these fuels are expensive and almost no one makes them, so the U.S. government, businesses and philanthropists including Bill Gates are investing billions of dollars to build up a hydrogen industry that could cut eventually some of the most stubborn, hard-to-remove carbon pollution.

Most scenarios for how the world could avoid the worst effects of climate change envision hydrogen cleaning up emissions in transportation, as well as in fertilizer production and steel and chemical refining. But if they're not made with dedicated renewable energy, hydrogen-based fuels could generate even more pollution than regular diesel, creating a wasteful boondoggle that sets the world back in the fight against climate change. Their potential comes down to the way plants like this produce them... Only about 40 percent of the power on the [Texas] electric grid is from renewables, with the rest coming from natural gas and coal, according to state data. That grid energy is what flows through the power line into the Infinium plant.
"One day, heavy transportation may shift to fuel cells that run on pure hydrogen and emit only water vapor from their tailpipes," the article points out. But to accommodate today's carbon-burning vehicles, Infinium produces "chemical copies of existing fuels made with crude oil" by combining captured carbon with green hydrogen.

"A truck running on diesel made from hydrogen using only renewable electricity would create 89 percent fewer greenhouse gas emissions over the course of its lifetime than a truck burning diesel made from petroleum, according to a 2022 analysis from the European nonprofit Transport & Environment."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: One of the most striking things about the explosion of renewable power that's happening in the U.S. is that much of it is going on in states governed by politicians who don't believe in the problem wind and solar are meant to address. Acceptance of the evidence for climate change tends to be lowest among Republicans, yet many of the states where renewable power has boomed -- wind in Wyoming and Iowa, solar in Texas -- are governed by Republicans. That's partly because, up until about 2020, there was a strong bipartisan consensus in favor of expanding wind and solar power, with support above 75 percent among both parties. Since then, however, support among Republicans has dropped dramatically, approaching 50 percent, according to polling data released this week. [...] One striking thing about the new polling data, gathered by the Pew Research Center, is how dramatically it skews with age. When given a choice between expanding fossil fuel production or expanding renewable power, Republicans under the age of 30 favored renewables by a 2-to-1 margin. Republicans over 30, in contrast, favored fossil fuels by margins that increased with age, topping out at a three-to-one margin in favor of fossil fuels among those in the 65-and-over age group. The decline in support occurred in those over 50 starting in 2020; support held steady among younger groups until 2024, when the 30-49 age group started moving in favor of fossil fuels.

Democrats, by contrast, break in favor of renewables by 75 points, with little difference across age groups and no indication of significant change over time. They're also twice as likely to think a solar farm will help the local economy than Republicans are. Similar differences were apparent when Pew asked about policies meant to encourage the sale of electric vehicles, with 83 percent of Republicans opposed to having half of cars sold be electric in 2032. By contrast, nearly two-thirds of Democrats favored this policy. There's also a rural/urban divide apparent (consistent with Republicans getting more support from rural voters). Forty percent of urban residents felt that a solar farm would improve the local economy; only 25 percent of rural residents agreed. Rural residents were also more likely to say solar farms made the landscape unattractive and take up too much space. (Suburban participants were consistently in between rural and urban participants.) What's behind these changes? The single biggest factor appears to be negative partisanship combined with the election of Joe Biden. Among Republicans, support for every single form of power started to change in 2020 -- fossil fuels, renewables, and nuclear. Among Democrats, that's largely untrue. Their high level of support for renewable power and aversion to fossil fuels remained largely unchanged. The lone exception is nuclear power, where support rose among both Democrats and Republicans (the Biden administration has adopted a number of pro-nuclear policies).

According to a report from The Information, Apple is developing a new "electrically induced adhesive debonding" technology that would make iPhone batteries easier to replace. 9to5Mac reports: Currently, replacing an iPhone battery requires using tweezers to remove the existing battery, which is held in place by adhesive strips. Then, you must use a "specialized machine and tray" to press the new battery into place. The new process uses metal instead of foil to cover the battery, as The Information explains: "The new technology --- known as electrically induced adhesive debonding -- involves encasing the battery in metal, rather than foil as it is currently. That would allow people to dislodge the battery from the chassis by administering a small jolt of electricity to the battery, the people said. Consumers still have to pry open the iPhone themselves, which is not an easy process because of the adhesives and screws that keep the iPhone's screen sealed in place."

Even with this change, however, Apple will still recommend that iPhone users visit a professional to replace their battery. If Apple's development of this new bonding technology goes according to plan, it could debut it with at least one iPhone 16 model this year. According to the report, it would then expand to all versions of the iPhone 17 next year.