Connect with us

Science

The countdown to NASA's Jupiter mission is on. This JPL engineer is helping it happen

Published

on

The countdown to NASA's Jupiter mission is on. This JPL engineer is helping it happen

Think of meticulously handcrafted objects and certain things come immediately to mind: fine art, exotic cars, luxury timepieces.

But Pasadena native Steve Barajas spends his days building a bespoke item that’s on another level entirely: NASA’s Europa Clipper.

BUSINESS

What do you do for work?

That’s the question My L.A. Workday answers. The series takes you inside a day on the job with some of the city’s most fascinating people. Interviews are edited for length and clarity.

Advertisement

The 13,000-pound behemoth, with a solar-array wingspan the length of a basketball court, is one of the agency’s most ambitious efforts. It’s on an October countdown to launch to Jupiter and its moon Europa, atop a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket, to find out if life exists in the deep ocean believed to lie beneath Europa’s icy exterior.

The central body of the $5-billion Europa Clipper arrived in June 2022 at the Pasadena campus of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory for the painstaking final assembly of components shipped from across the U.S. and Europe. That’s where Barajas comes in.

Barajas, 35, is a mechanical engineer leading a team that, in coordination with other JPL specialists, installs crucial hardware for the ambitious mission. Barajas describes some high points with a parental flair: There’s the magnetometer that could confirm whether an ocean exists beneath the Europa ice; the mass spectrometer that will analyze gases in Europa’s atmosphere; the infrared cameras that will map the moon’s surface composition, temperature and roughness; and the solar panels that will help power the spacecraft instruments.

Advertisement
A model of NASA's Europa Clipper space probe

A model of NASA’s Europa Clipper spacecraft at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

The project’s momentum to liftoff didn’t spare the Europa Clipper team when JPL in early February laid off 530 people, or about 8% of its workforce, because of uncertainties over congressional funding for NASA. Although the job cuts, the second round this year, were felt “across the NASA family,” NASA Administrator Bill Nelson said, “the Europa Clipper mission will proceed as planned.”

In his official NASA bio, the UC Berkeley graduate recalls his childhood fascination with space. “As a kid, I remember passing the sign along the 210 Freeway that read ‘NASA-JPL Next Exit,’ thinking it was so cool that NASA was so close.”

Barajas, who joined JPL in 2016 from Aerojet Rocketdyne, said his work has taught him the art of delayed gratification. If the Europa Clipper launches on schedule from the Kennedy Space Center, Barajas will have to wait 5½ years for it to arrive at Europa, about 488 million miles from Earth, where it will perform dozens of flybys of the moon to collect data.

Advertisement

“I’m working on a spacecraft that will hopefully find something profound in the future, and working with people who share the same passion,” he said.

When JPL finishes the buildout, Barajas will be part of the team that flies to Florida in May for launch preparations, with liftoff scheduled for as early as Oct. 10 from Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral.

The Times spent a day with Barajas on the job late last year. The interview was edited for length and clarity.

5 a.m.

Barajas starts his day studying a pile of activity reports from the previous day’s work to create a tactical schedule for the mechanical engineers on his team.

Advertisement

Today is a big day for the Europa Clipper team. They’ll be testing the craft’s thermal pumping system, the last major addition to the spacecraft’s vault, a thick-walled aluminum alloy box that holds the spacecraft’s “brain”: its electronics and computers.

Inside look at NASA's Europa Clipper spacecraft's wires and tubes

An inside look at NASA’s Europa Clipper spacecraft.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

“The thermal pump is the heart of the spacecraft,” pumping fluid through tubing to control the craft’s temperature, Barajas said. The daylong effort is hazardous because of the high pressure used to test the system with helium, a nonflammable gas.

Mechanical engineer Steve Barajas

Mechanical engineer Steve Barajas in a conference room discussing plans with colleagues for the day’s work.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

7 a.m.

The Europa Clipper’s tall silvery core stands in JPL’s Space Assembly Facility in High Bay 1 clean room, surrounded by temporary scaffolding. In a nearby conference room, Barajas represents the mechanical engineering team as he compares notes for the day ahead with colleagues from the electrical engineering and systems teams.

“Some of what we are discussing are small details. It usually isn’t a massive revamp of the plan,” Barajas said. “It’s trying to get everything organized so that we can provide very clear direction when we meet with the rest of the teams at 7:30.”

Mechanical engineer Steve Barajas dons protective coveralls

Mechanical engineer Steve Barajas dons a gown to protect against contamination in preparation to enter the High Bay Clean Room harboring NASA’s Europa Clipper space probe at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

9 a.m.

Before any work on the spacecraft begins, Barajas and his colleagues have to don the white protective coveralls known as bunny suits. Barajas will have to repeat the procedure three times before the day ends.

Collegial chatter abounds because some people entering the clean room for the first time need help with the process.

Mechanical engineer Steve Barajas leans over to close the leg of his clean room outfit

Mechanical engineer Steve Barajas leans over to close the leg of his clean room coveralls. Next, the opening will be taped shut.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

“Every time we enter the clean room, we have to first put on the bunny suit, which is a very ugly one-piece jumper,” Barajas said. “Empty your pockets; no phones or watches. Shoe covers go on your feet, then there are boots that go on top of those. If you have a beard; there’s a mask to wear for that. Then there’s a face mask and a hood that’s like a fabric helmet goes over that. Then you put on the bunny suit without letting it touch the ground. Then there’s tape on all of the separate parts, joining the legs to the shoes, gloves to the sleeves, etc.”

The process must be repeated after a worker leaves the clean room for lunch or a bathroom break — “It’s one of the daily downsides of the job” — so veterans know, “you’re not able to hydrate as you would normally.”

Next, there is something that looks like a shower stall, buts it’s dry air being blasted at the occupant, hard enough to feel like a wind storm.

On one wall of the clean room hang plaques commemorating missions that date back 63 years, to the Ranger 1 moon mission, when engineers worked on spacecraft in street clothes. But this is not 1961, a time when earthlings weren’t concerned about spreading their biological junk off planet.

Advertisement

“Planetary protection has evolved,” Barajas said of the strict work requirements he has to follow every day. “No one wants to be the person responsible when extra-terrestrial life is finally found and it turns out to be something we brought there from earth.”

Engineers and technicians work on the Europa Clipper spacecraft, which is surrounded by scaffolding.

Engineers and technicians work on the Europa Clipper, which is surrounded by temporary scaffolding.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

9:30 a.m.

Inside the clean room, engineers and technicians are making sure all of the fittings on the thermal pump are sufficiently tight.

Advertisement

There is no chatter, no small talk. Everyone is looking intently at the work being done, a level of scrutiny that continues during the testing process. Barajas is there to ensure that members of the thermal team conducting the test have everything they need and the work is going smoothly.

“We have detectors here on the clean room floor that will read whether anything is seeping out. We do this with helium,” Barajas said. It has to be below a certain rate loss. “There will always be some seepage but as long as it’s not too much, we’re OK.”

A JPL employee inspects the Europa Clipper spacecraft

A JPL employee inspects the Europa Clipper spacecraft during testing of its thermal pumping system.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

10:30 a.m.

Advertisement

There are two thresholds for success. One is a vacuum test using a wand spraying helium to see if it it is being sucked into the system. The other is the high-pressure test in which helium is pumped through the system to see if gas leaks out.

Any significant leaks will interrupt the tight choreography of the spacecraft’s assembly and testing schedule, less than a year away from launch time.

“We are physically putting the spacecraft together. We are the end of the line,” Barajas said, trying to explain the serious atmosphere in the room. “It’s up to us to verify that the parts we have been sent are working the way they should. Humans aren’t infallible. We’re always looking over each other’s shoulder to make sure we’re doing the job right.”

“I think that’s where the stress comes from, right? That we feel the pressure and the burden of building this vehicle that has been the life’s work of some and years of work for many others.”

"High Bay Bob," a bunny suit-clad mannequin in the High Bay Clean Room harboring the Europa Clipper

The atmosphere is serious during the potentially hazardous thermal pump pressure test, except for “High Bay Bob,” a bunny suit-clad mannequin in the High Bay Clean Room.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

1 p.m.

It’s lunchtime. You might think that the pressure of tight deadlines would cause Barajas and others on the project to push through to stay on schedule. Bad idea, Barajas said.

“We always make time for lunch,” he said. “What we don’t want is to have hungry people on the floor. Sometimes we cycle people in and out so that the work can continue. Other times we just take a 45-minute break, so the folks can stay focused on the floor when we are having a long day like this.”

Children look through a window into the clean room where JPL where the Europa Clipper spacecraft is assembled.

Children look through a window into the clean room at JPL where the Europa Clipper spacecraft is assembled.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

2 p.m.

Barajas steps out of the clean room to catch up with phone calls and email.

“In my particular role, the brunt of the day is a lot of behind-the-scenes work,” Barajas said. “To keep things moving, looking ahead to the next job.”

There’s the occasional startling interruption of tour guides speaking in the hall outside his office as they lead groups through JPL’s Spacecraft Assembly Facility. The main attraction is the window into the clean room, where tours can see the spacecraft itself.

Advertisement

“There’s a constant stream of tours during the day. It’s like working in a fishbowl,” Barajas laughs.

3 p.m.

The work day comes to the 3 p.m. change of shift. But Barajas isn’t knocking off; he’s back to the clean room as testing continues. Barajas needs to make sure that the second shift is able to pick up where the first shift left off.

Engineers and technicians under a high gain antenna work on NASA's Europa Clipper

Engineers and technicians under a high gain antenna work on the Europa Clipper.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

4 p.m.

The tests are done and the teams determine that there were no leaks. But there isn’t even the briefest of celebrations for this achievement.

“We’ve got so much still to do. Interim steps don’t really get much of a response from us,” Barajas said.

Barajas and colleagues turn their focus to the next few days, when they will fill the system with freon and then close the spacecraft’s aluminum vault for good.

“That will be a milestone, not just for us, but for the whole project,” he said.

Advertisement

That might even get a high-five.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Science

Pink Fire Retardant, a Dramatic Wildfire Weapon, Poses Its Own Dangers

Published

on

Pink Fire Retardant, a Dramatic Wildfire Weapon, Poses Its Own Dangers

From above the raging flames, these planes can unleash immense tankfuls of bright pink fire retardant in just 20 seconds. They have long been considered vital in the battle against wildfires.

But emerging research has shown that the millions of gallons of retardant sprayed on the landscape to tame wildfires each year come with a toxic burden, because they contain heavy metals and other chemicals that are harmful to human health and the environment.

The toxicity presents a stark dilemma. These tankers and their cargo are a powerful tool for taming deadly blazes. Yet as wildfires intensify and become more frequent in an era of climate change, firefighters are using them more often, and in the process releasing more harmful chemicals into the environment.

Some environmental groups have questioned the retardants’ effectiveness and potential for harm. The efficiency of fire retardant has been hard to measure, because it’s one of a barrage of firefighting tactics deployed in a major fire. After the flames are doused, it’s difficult to assign credit.

The frequency and severity of wildfires has grown in recent years, particularly in the western United States. Scientists have also found that fires across the region have become faster moving in recent decades.

Advertisement

There are also the longer-term health effects of exposure to wildfire smoke, which can penetrate the lungs and heart, causing disease. A recent global survey of the health effects of air pollution caused by wildfires found that in the United States, exposure to wildfire smoke had increased by 77 percent since 2002. Globally, wildfire smoke has been estimated to be responsible for up to 675,000 premature deaths per year.

Fire retardants add to those health and environmental burdens because they present “a really, really thorny trade-off,” said Daniel McCurry, an assistant professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of Southern California, who led the recent research on their heavy-metal content.

The United States Forest Service said on Thursday that nine large retardant-spraying planes, as well as 20 water-dropping helicopters, were being deployed to fight the Southern California fires, which have displaced tens of thousands of people. Several “water scooper” amphibious planes, capable of skimming the surface of the sea or other body of water to fill their tanks, are also being used.

Two large DC-10 aircraft, dubbed “Very Large Airtankers” and capable of delivering up to 9,400 gallons of retardant, were also set to join the fleet imminently, said Stanton Florea, a spokesman for the National Interagency Fire Center in Boise, Idaho, which coordinates national wildland firefighting efforts across the West.

Sprayed ahead of the fire, the retardants coat vegetation and prevent oxygen from allowing it to burn, Mr. Florea said. (Red dye is added so firefighters can see the retardant against the landscape.) And the retardant, typically made of salts like ammonium polyphosphate, “lasts longer. It doesn’t evaporate, like dropping water,” he said.

Advertisement

The new research from Dr. McCurry and his colleagues found, however, that at least four different types of heavy metals in a common type of retardant used by firefighters exceeded California’s requirements for hazardous waste.

Federal data shows that more than 440 million gallons of retardant were applied to federal, state, and private land between 2009 and 2021. Using that figure, the researchers estimated that between 2009 and 2021, more than 400 tons of heavy metals were released into the environment from fire suppression, a third of that in Southern California.

Both the federal government and the retardant’s manufacturer, Perimeter Solutions, have disputed that analysis, saying the researchers had evaluated a different version of the retardant. Dan Green, a spokesman for Perimeter, said retardants used for aerial firefighting had passed “extensive testing to confirm they meet strict standards for aquatic and mammalian safety.”

Still, the findings help explain why concentrations of heavy metals tend to surge in rivers and streams after wildfires, sometimes by hundreds of times. And as scrutiny of fire suppressants has grown, the Forestry Service has set buffer zones surrounding lakes and rivers, though its own data shows retardant still inadvertently drifts into those waters.

In 2022, the environmental nonprofit Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics sued the government in federal court in Montana, demanding that the Forest Service obtain a permit under the Clean Water Act to cover accidental spraying into waterways.

Advertisement

The judge ruled that the agency did indeed need to obtain a permit. But it allowed retardant use to continue to protect lives and property.

Continue Reading

Science

2024 Brought the World to a Dangerous Warming Threshold. Now What?

Published

on

2024 Brought the World to a Dangerous Warming Threshold. Now What?

Source: Copernicus/ECMWF

Note: Temperature anomalies relative to 1850-1900 averages.

At the stroke of midnight on Dec. 31, Earth finished up its hottest year in recorded history, scientists said on Friday. The previous hottest year was 2023. And the next one will be upon us before long: By continuing to burn huge amounts of coal, oil and gas, humankind has all but guaranteed it.

The planet’s record-high average temperature last year reflected the weekslong, 104-degree-Fahrenheit spring heat waves that shuttered schools in Bangladesh and India. It reflected the effects of the bathtub-warm ocean waters that supercharged hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and cyclones in the Philippines. And it reflected the roasting summer and fall conditions that primed Los Angeles this week for the most destructive wildfires in its history.

Advertisement

“We are facing a very new climate and new challenges, challenges that our society is not prepared for,” said Carlo Buontempo, director of the Copernicus Climate Change Service, the European Union monitoring agency.

But even within this progression of warmer years and ever-intensifying risks to homes, communities and the environment, 2024 stood out in another unwelcome way. According to Copernicus, it was the first year in which global temperatures averaged more than 1.5 degrees Celsius, or 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, above those the planet experienced at the start of the industrial age.

For the past decade, the world has sought to avoid crossing this dangerous threshold. Nations enshrined the goal in the 2015 Paris agreement to fight climate change. “Keep 1.5 alive” was the mantra at United Nations summits.

Yet here we are. Global temperatures will fluctuate somewhat, as they always do, which is why scientists often look at warming averaged over longer periods, not just a single year.

But even by that standard, staying below 1.5 degrees looks increasingly unattainable, according to researchers who have run the numbers. Globally, despite hundreds of billions of dollars invested in clean-energy technologies, carbon dioxide emissions hit a record in 2024 and show no signs of dropping.

Advertisement

One recent study published in the journal Nature concluded that the absolute best humanity can now hope for is around 1.6 degrees of warming. To achieve it, nations would need to start slashing emissions at a pace that would strain political, social and economic feasibility.

But what if we’d started earlier?

“It was guaranteed we’d get to this point where the gap between reality and the trajectory we needed for 1.5 degrees was so big it was ridiculous,” said David Victor, a professor of public policy at the University of California, San Diego.

The question now is what, if anything, should replace 1.5 as a lodestar for nations’ climate aspirations.

“These top-level goals are at best a compass,” Dr. Victor said. “They’re a reminder that if we don’t do more, we’re in for significant climate impacts.”

Advertisement

The 1.5-degree threshold was never the difference between safety and ruin, between hope and despair. It was a number negotiated by governments trying to answer a big question: What’s the highest global temperature increase — and the associated level of dangers, whether heat waves or wildfires or melting glaciers — that our societies should strive to avoid?

The result, as codified in the Paris agreement, was that nations would aspire to hold warming to “well below” 2 degrees Celsius while “pursuing efforts” to limit it to 1.5 degrees.

Even at the time, some experts called the latter goal unrealistic, because it required such deep and rapid emissions cuts. Still, the United States, the European Union and other governments adopted it as a guidepost for climate policy.

Christoph Bertram, an associate research professor at the University of Maryland’s Center for Global Sustainability, said the urgency of the 1.5 target spurred companies of all kinds — automakers, cement manufacturers, electric utilities — to start thinking hard about what it would mean to zero out their emissions by midcentury. “I do think that has led to some serious action,” Dr. Bertram said.

But the high aspiration of the 1.5 target also exposed deep fault lines among nations.

Advertisement

China and India never backed the goal, since it required them to curb their use of coal, gas and oil at a pace they said would hamstring their development. Rich countries that were struggling to cut their own emissions began choking off funding in the developing world for fossil-fuel projects that were economically beneficial. Some low-income countries felt it was deeply unfair to ask them to sacrifice for the climate given that it was wealthy nations — and not them — that had produced most of the greenhouse gases now warming the world.

“The 1.5-degree target has created a lot of tension between rich and poor countries,” said Vijaya Ramachandran, director for energy and development at the Breakthrough Institute, an environmental research organization.

Costa Samaras, an environmental-engineering professor at Carnegie Mellon University, compared the warming goals to health officials’ guidelines on, say, cholesterol. “We don’t set health targets on what’s realistic or what’s possible,” Dr. Samaras said. “We say, ‘This is what’s good for you. This is how you’re going to not get sick.’”

“If we were going to say, ‘Well, 1.5 is likely out of the question, let’s put it to 1.75,’ it gives people a false sense of assurance that 1.5 was not that important,” said Dr. Samaras, who helped shape U.S. climate policy from 2021 to 2024 in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. “It’s hugely important.”

Scientists convened by the United Nations have concluded that restricting warming to 1.5 degrees instead of 2 would spare tens of millions of people from being exposed to life-threatening heat waves, water shortages and coastal flooding. It might mean the difference between a world that has coral reefs and Arctic sea ice in the summer, and one that doesn’t.

Advertisement

Each tiny increment of additional warming, whether it’s 1.6 degrees versus 1.5, or 1.7 versus 1.6, increases the risks. “Even if the world overshoots 1.5 degrees, and the chances of this happening are increasing every day, we must keep striving” to bring emissions to zero as soon as possible, said Inger Anderson, the executive director of the United Nations Environment Program.

Officially, the sun has not yet set on the 1.5 target. The Paris agreement remains in force, even as President-elect Donald J. Trump vows to withdraw the United States from it for a second time. At U.N. climate negotiations, talk of 1.5 has become more muted compared with years past. But it has hardly gone away.

“With appropriate measures, 1.5 Celsius is still achievable,” Cedric Schuster, the minister of natural resources and environment for the Pacific island nation of Samoa, said at last year’s summit in Azerbaijan. Countries should “rise to the occasion with new, highly ambitious” policies, he said.

To Dr. Victor of U.C. San Diego, it is strange but all too predictable that governments keep speaking this way about what appears to be an unachievable aim. “No major political leader who wants to be taken seriously on climate wants to stick their neck out and say, ‘1.5 degrees isn’t feasible. Let’s talk about more realistic goals,’” he said.

Still, the world will eventually need to have that discussion, Dr. Victor said. And it’s unclear how it will go.

Advertisement

“It could be constructive, where we start asking, ‘How much warming are we really in for? And how do we deal with that?’” he said. “Or it could look very toxic, with a bunch of political finger pointing.”

Methodology

The second chart shows pathways for reducing carbon emissions that would have a 66 percent chance of limiting global warming this century to 1.5 degrees Celsius above the preindustrial average.

Continue Reading

Science

U.S. Efforts to Cut Emissions Stalled in 2024 as Power Demand Surged

Published

on

U.S. Efforts to Cut Emissions Stalled in 2024 as Power Demand Surged

America’s efforts to cut its climate change pollution stalled in 2024, with greenhouse gas emissions dropping just a fraction, 0.2 percent, compared to the year before, according to estimates published Thursday by the Rhodium Group, a research firm.

Despite continued rapid growth in solar and wind power, emissions levels stayed relatively flat last year because demand for electricity surged nationwide, which led to a spike in the amount of natural gas burned by power plants.

The fact that emissions didn’t decline much means the United States is even further off-track from hitting President Biden’s goal of slashing greenhouse gases 50 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. Scientists say all major economies would have to cut their emissions deeply this decade to keep global warming at relatively low levels.

Since 2005, United States emissions have fallen roughly 20 percent, a significant drop at a time when the economy has also expanded. But to meet its climate goals, U.S. emissions would need to decline nearly 10 times as fast each year as they’ve fallen over the past decade. That seems increasingly unlikely, experts say, especially since President-elect Donald J. Trump has promised to dismantle Mr. Biden’s climate policies and promote the production of fossil fuels, the burning of which generates greenhouse gases.

“On the one hand, it is notable that we’ve now seen two years in a row where the U.S. economy grew but emissions went down,” said Ben King, an associate director at the Rhodium Group. “But it’s far from enough to achieve our climate targets.”

Advertisement

The biggest reason that U.S. emissions have fallen in recent years is that electric utilities have been retiring their older, dirtier coal-fired power plants and replacing them with cheaper and less-polluting natural gas, wind and solar power. That trend mostly continued last year, with a few unexpected ups and downs.

The nation’s demand for electricity, which has stayed more or less flat for two decades, suddenly jumped by roughly 3 percent in 2024, in large part because scorching heat during the summer caused many Americans to crank up their air-conditioners. A smaller factor was that tech companies have been building more energy-hungry data centers in states like Virginia and Texas.

While power companies installed large numbers of wind turbines, solar panels and batteries last year to meet rising demand, natural gas use also rose to record highs, while coal use declined only slightly. The net result was that emissions from the power sector increased an estimated 0.2 percent, according to the Rhodium Group.

At the same time, transportation, the nation’s largest source of greenhouse gases, saw an 0.8 percent rise in emissions last year. Gasoline and jet fuel consumption both increased as Americans continued to drive and fly more after the pandemic. Nearly 10 percent of new car sales in 2024 were less-polluting electric vehicles, but those models still make up a small fraction of total cars on the road and have yet to put a major dent in transportation emissions.

On the flip side, emissions from America’s industrial sector — which includes steel, cement and chemicals — fell by 1.8 percent in 2024. Some of that may have been the result of lost output, as two hurricanes and a strike at the nation’s ports disrupted some factory activity in the fall, Mr. King said.

Advertisement

“It’s a reminder that there’s always some bumpiness in emissions,” Mr. King said. “It’s not just a question of how many electric vehicles are on the road or how much solar we’ve installed. A big portion of our economy still relies on fossil fuels.”

One of the most striking findings in this year’s data was that emissions from oil and gas operations dropped roughly 3.7 percent in 2024. Even though the United States produced record amounts of oil and near-record amounts of natural gas last year, many companies appear to have curbed leaks of methane, which is the main ingredient in natural gas and which can seep into the atmosphere and contribute significantly to global warming.

Over the past few years, the Biden administration and several states have adopted new regulations that require oil and gas producers to detect and fix methane leaks. Many companies also have financial incentives to capture methane to sell rather than vent it into the air.

Between 2014 and 2024, U.S. companies appear to have reduced the amount of methane that escaped, per each cubic feet of gas they produced, by 40 percent, according to the Rhodium Group.

Several experts have estimated that greenhouse gases generated in the United States could start dropping sharply in the years ahead if many clean energy policies stay in place, particularly the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act that pumped hundreds of billions of dollars into low-carbon energy technologies such as electric vehicles, wind turbines, solar panels, nuclear reactors, green hydrogen and batteries.

Advertisement

While Mr. Trump has pledged to scrap many of Mr. Biden’s subsidies and tax credits for electric vehicles and low-carbon energy, it remains to be seen whether Congress will agree.

That law has not yet had a major impact on the country’s emissions, said Mr. King, since it takes time for new factories to open and power plants to get built. But, he said, data shows that low-carbon energy and transportation now make up fully 5 percent of total U.S. private investment.

“That’s a leading indicator that things are changing quickly,” he said.

Continue Reading

Trending