You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
Is it safe to turn it on an AC? If you have an air purifier, where should you put it? An air quality expert answers our pressing questions.
You’re in your apartment, windows closed, hiding out from the wildfire smoke blanketing your city. But it’s starting to smell a little bit like barbecue, and your eyes are getting watery. What should you do?
Wildfire smoke contains tiny particles, invisible to the human eye, that can enter your lungs and bloodstream. Those particles can exacerbate the risk of having an asthma attack, heart attack, and stroke. They also have lasting effects on your heart and respiratory system, and can lead to premature death. You really want to take the likelihood that smoke is getting into your home seriously.
But that can lead to a lot of questions.
Maybe you have an air purifier. Where should you put it?
Maybe you don’t have an air purifier, but you have a window air conditioner. Is it safe to turn it on?
I called up John Volckens, a professor of mechanical engineering at Colorado State University, and grilled him on every home configuration I could think of to understand how you can protect yourself against the dangers of smoke. Volckens studies air quality, exposure science, and air pollution-related disease. He has even pioneered the development of new pollution sensor technologies. Hehad a lot of helpful tips to offer.
It’s important to understand there’s really no way to fully prevent smoke from getting inside your home. Even if you don’t smell it or feel its effects, you should do what you can to protect yourself.
That’s because most homes and buildings “breathe.” As the sun heats the upper reaches of the building, it warms the air, which expands and wants to escape. As the air flows out, the lower part of the house, where it’s cooler, draws new air in to replace it.
“The analogy would be like if a 6-foot flood of water came to your house. It doesn’t matter how many sandbags you have, the water’s coming in, right?” Volckens said. “If the air quality index is like 400 outside for a few hours, it’s going to get to like 200 inside your home no matter what.”
The number one thing you can do is get an air purifier. You might not be able to find one in stores right now or have one delivered in time, but there are other options, too, as I’ll discuss below.
Place it wherever you are.
We spend a third of our lives in bed, so Volckens said he likes to have one in the bedroom. “If you have seasonal allergies, creating that kind of safe space for your immune system can be really helpful,” he told me.
But if you only have one device, when you’re done sleeping, just pick it up and move it into the kitchen, office, or living room with you. It should only take about an hour to work its magic and get whatever room you’re in to the best air quality that it’s capable of.
Window AC units work by recirculating the air in your apartment, so they won’t exacerbate the issue and are generally safe to use. The filters in your window units won’t do much to improve your air, though — they are designed to catch larger particles like dust and animal fur, and smoke particles will slip right through.
If you have a central air conditioning system that delivers cool air through ducts and vents, that’s another story. Those are typically designed to draw in air from the outside. In that case, the best thing to do is install what’s called a MERV filter, which you can purchase at most hardware stores or big box stores. Volckens recommends picking up a filter rated MERV-13, which can capture the smallest particles at a relatively high rate.
“It will probably be like 75% efficient. So if 100 wildfire smoke particles pass through that filter, only 25 will get through,” he said. “You're going to knock down the concentration significantly, especially as that filter keeps cycling air through your home.”
The one thing to keep in mind is that these filters are so good, they will get clogged quickly. A clogged filter will cause your HVAC system to work too hard, which could lead to mechanical issues, so make sure you remember to replace it every couple of months.
What's the alternative to an air purifier?
DIY air filters are surprisingly easy to make and incredibly effective. No, really. All you have to do is buy a box fan, duct tape, and a MERV filter. Tape the filter to the back of the box fan. That’s it.
“They work just as well as commercial air cleaners,” said Volckens. They’re a little bit louder, but otherwise, it’s the exact same idea. “A commercial air purifier might have a fancier fan and a fancier filter, but it’s still just a fan and a filter.”
And if you want to get a little fancier, you can build what’s called a Corsi-Rosenthal box. It’s the same idea, but envelops the fan intake in four filters instead of one. The Washington Post has a very easy-to-follow video showing how to build one. “They work as best as the highest-end air cleaners you could buy for one-fifth or one-tenth of the cost,” said Volckens.
N-95 masks, like the kind recommended to protect against COVID-19, also effectively filter out pollution, and are your best bet. Even a blue surgical mask will be somewhat helpful, said Volckens.
If you’re tired of being cooped up at home, you can also find what Volckens likes to call “clean air zones.” He recommended the public library, a Starbucks, or any other public building. Go support your local movie theater.
“Most public buildings actually have more efficient air cleaning than homes because the buildings were built more recently and they’re built to code standards that require cleaner air.”
Wildfire smoke is truly disgusting. The particles can contain thousands of chemicals, and they will stick to any surface they touch — the ceiling, the carpet, your clothing. You can certainly wash your clothes and linens, but it might not be possible to scrub every surface of your home.
“The best thing you can do when the air does clean up is to just open all your windows and get some good air exchange going,” said Volckens. “I guarantee, yes, you’ll have that wildfire smell for a couple of days, but it will eventually go away.”
Before we hung up, I asked Volckens if there were any other tips we didn’t cover.
“The only thing I’ll say is that this problem isn’t going away,” he said. “And it’s our doing, right? This is the result of a warming planet.”
This article was last updated on June 28, 2023.
Read more about wildfire smoke :
The 5 Big Questions About the 2023 Wildfire Smoke Crisis
Wednesday Was the Worst Day for Wildfire Pollution in U.S. History
When There’s Smoke, Getting Indoors Isn’t Enough
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Two U.S.-based companies are betting on lithium-sulfur to compete with China.
By the time the Swedish battery giant Northvolt declared bankruptcy last month, a well-funded U.S. startup, Lyten, had already swooped in to snatch up the company’s previously shuttered Bay Area factory. With China flooding the market with its cheap lithium-ion tech, Lyten is betting that creating a fully domestic battery supply chain will require alternate chemistries — like, say, lithium-sulfur, Lyten’s recipe of choice.
Lithium-sulfur has long been a promising contender, as in theory, these batteries can have a much higher energy density — the amount of energy that can be stored in a given space — than traditional lithium-ion. They also rely primarily on cheap, abundant, and easy to access materials. “We don’t use nickel, we don’t use manganese, we don’t use cobalt, we don’t use graphite,” Keith Norman, Lyten’s chief sustainability officer, told me — all markets where China plays a leading role. Scaling up standard lithium-ion battery production to meet forecasted global demand would require opening nearly 400 new mines by 2035, according to Benchmark Mineral Intelligence. “We believe if you could snap your fingers and change that to lithium-sulfur, that mining requirement will be reduced somewhere between 80% and 90%,” Norman said.
Lyten’s customers, Norman said, want these batteries as soon as possible, and acquiring Northvolt’s old 200-megawatt plant will allow the company to begin commercial production there next year. Lyten also recently announced plans for a Reno-based gigafactory, which is scheduled to come online in 2027. Zeta Energy, a Houston-based lithium-sulfur startup, also aims to commercialize in 2025, and is set to announce the opening of its 100-megawatt plant in the coming weeks.
While both companies have dreams of enabling more efficient, lightweight, and cost-effective electric vehicles and energy storage systems, there are reasons why lithium-sulfur has yet to be commercialized.
For one, sulfur is generally a poor conductor of lithium ions, and therefore requires extra conductive material to compensate, increasing the battery’s weight. Lithium-sulfur batteries also have notoriously short cycle lives due to the “polysulfide shuttle effect,” which causes the sulfur in the cathode to dissolve in the liquid electrolyte, damaging the anode and — you guessed it — decreasing the battery’s capacity and cycle life.
“It could be solved,” Arumugam Manthiram, an engineering professor and battery researcher at the University of Texas at Austin, told me. After being involved in the initial lithium-ion battery breakthroughs of the 1980s, Manthiram said he’s seen traditional battery tech continue to improve year after year. He thinks lithium-sulfur will follow the same trajectory, only quicker. “Can it be solved in five years, 10 years? I’m optimistic.” he told me. He’s currently working with Lyten on a Department of Energy-funded grant to accelerate the commercialization of lithium-sulfur batteries for use in EVs.
Zeta thinks it’s already found the ticket, though. It claims to offer three times the energy density of traditional lithium-ion at less than half the price. While Melissa Schilling, Zeta’s head of strategic marketing and innovation, couldn’t reveal much about Zeta’s proprietary cathode, she did tell me that it’s made of a sulfur-carbon polymer that eliminates the dreaded polysulfide shuttle effect (a claim that’s been externally verified) and allows for greater electrical conductivity. The company’s lithium-metal anode is made of carbon nanotubes, a.k.a. tiny cylinders composed of carbon atoms. The nanotubes help improve the anode’s stability, thus increasing energy density compared with traditional graphite anodes while also preventing the formation of dendrites, tiny projections on the anode that can cause the battery to break down.
Zeta’s batteries can go through about eight times more charge/discharge cycles than traditional lithium-sulfur batteries, according to the company’s figures and Manthiram’s estimation. Optimizing these batteries for EVs, though, will likely mean a much shorter cycle life, which may not be on par with what lithium-ion can do. Even so, Schilling told me, “what we’re going to beat lithium-ion on is density and cost.” The company has raised $30 million to date, and is in the midst of raising its Series B round. While Schilling couldn’t reveal the names of Zeta’s initial customers, she told me that the company is collaborating with a large automaker and heavy equipment manufacturer. Zeta has also received the same commercialization grant from the DOE as Lyten.
For its part, Lyten currently provides 25% greater energy density than top-of-the-line lithium-ion batteries, Norman told me. The company expects that soon, it will be able to offer twice the energy density at half the material cost. Lyten’s tech relies upon a so-called supermaterial, three-dimensional graphene, which it’s developing in-house. This gets combined with sulfur in the cathode to form a more conductive and stable composite material.
Norman said you can think of 3D graphene like a sponge with pore sizes “perfectly designed to hold sulfur atoms.” The graphene “gives [the sulfur] conductivity and gives it a rigid structure that doesn’t allow it to break down as easily,” he told me, meaning the battery is less likely to succumb to the polysulfide shuttle effect. Lyten’s anode is also made of energy dense lithium-metal.
Lyten hasn’t publicly revealed its battery’s cycle life, however, and in a follow-up email, Norman told me that when it comes to EV batteries, Lyten is “not yet at the cycle life we need,” though the company is “seeing 20-30% improvement in lithium-sulfur battery performance each year.” For customers using lithium-sulfur for earlier-stage applications such as drones, satellites, and two- and three-wheelers, Norman wrote that Lyten’s current cycle life “meets or very nearly meets their requirements.”
The company seems to have the money to work towards these improvements. Lyten achieved “unicorn” status last year, recording a valuation over $1 billion after closing a $200 million Series B round. It counts Stellantis and FedEx among its backers, and the Department of Defense is even funding a demonstration of Lyten’s battery tech aboard the International Space Station, where lithium-sulfur cells will be tested for use in everything from satellites to space suits.
Norman told me the company’s recent purchase of Northvolt’s old Bay Area facility represents an important step in Lyten’s path to scale. The California plant was originally designed to produce lithium-metal batteries for Cuberg, a startup Northvolt acquired in 2021 and closed down this summer. Like Lyten’s and Zeta’s, Cuberg’s batteries used a pure lithium-metal anode, while its cathode was the same old nickel-manganese-cobalt chemistry that conventional lithium-ion batteries use. With this kind of chemistry, Norman told me, it would be “very difficult to ever compete on costs.”
One of the main ways that Northvolt ultimately went wrong, Norman and Schilling agreed, is that it tried to scale standard lithium-ion tech too quickly in a price-sensitive environment. “They kind of went right to these 10, 20, 30 gigawatt-hour facilities,” Norman told me. “As they tried to scale those, they ran into a lot of manufacturing challenges and just the cost and time of trying to learn that on these huge facilities kind of bit them.” Schilling told me she thinks QuantumScape, a manufacturer of solid-state batteries for EVs, is running the same risk.
To compete with the low-cost Chinese batteries flooding the market, Norman told me domestic tech has to be demonstrably better — incremental improvements in efficiency, cost, or sustainability will not be enough. “Fundamentally, you’ve got to have a differentiated battery that customers are really dying to get their hands on,” Norman told me. But he knows that if Lyten successfully commercializes lithium-sulfur, other companies and countries will quickly get into the game.
After all, major battery giants such as LG, Samsung, SK, and Panasonic are well aware of what’s going on in the lithium-sulfur space, Manthiram told me, even if they’ve yet to make any noise about it. “They are quietly doing some work, R&D. They don’t hype it because they have a product already made,” Manthiram said, referring to the company’s widely available lithium-ion batteries. “They are also watching what academic labs are doing, what Lyten is doing, what others are doing.”
These behemoths are sure to pounce when and if the timing is right. Yet Lyten and Zeta still have the opportunity to pioneer a novel battery technology that can be fully made in America — something thus far unheard of in the battery universe.
On Stellantis and Samsung’s factories, a new Jaguar EV, and innovative climate finance
Current conditions: Japan’s warmest autumn ever recorded has delayed the country’s vibrant foliage season • The east coast of Australia is bracing for a “rain bomb” • A Canadian storm system is bringing a blast of Arctic air to the Midwest and Northeast today through Thursday.
The Biden administration yesterday approved a $7 billion conditional loan for the joint venture between Stellantis and Samsung SDI – called StarPlus Energy – to help the companies build two EV battery plants in Kokomo, Indiana. The Department of Energy estimates the projects will create 3,200 construction jobs and 2,800 operations jobs, and the finished plants will produce 67 GWh of batteries, “enough to supply approximately 670,000 vehicles annually.” The loan isn’t finalized yet, and its fate hangs in the balance as President-elect Trump’s administration may not see it through. Though as The New York Timesnoted, “both projects are in congressional districts represented by Republicans,” and “some of them may be unwilling to get in the way of projects that bring thousands of jobs and billions of dollars to their districts.” Just two days ago, Stellantis CEO Carlos Tavares resigned, and the company has been posting sluggish U.S. sales figures. Last week the DOE announced another conditional loan for EVs: $6.6 billion for Rivian to build its Georgia manufacturing plant.
Jaguar has unveiled the first concept car of the company’s new all-electric era. The much-anticipated electric Type 00 (which apparently is pronounced “zero zero”) is a two-door coupe that comes in two colors: Miami pink and London blue. It will get up to 430 miles of range and charge 200 miles in 15 minutes. It will go on sale sometime in 2026 and cost at least $127,000. In its announcement, Jaguar called the car “an unmistakable, unexpected, and dramatic physical manifestation of Jaguar, as the brand continues its transformation.” The company has committed to going fully electric by 2025, and recently launched a rebrand complete with a new logo and a flashy but kind of weird ad campaign that hasn’t been entirely well received.
Jaguar
Barbados completed a “debt for climate resilience” swap that will free up about $125 million and enable the Caribbean island to invest in water and sewage infrastructure. So-called debt for nature swaps involve a country reducing or cancelling its debts by agreeing to preserve biodiversity or nature preservation. This is apparently the first case of a country using such a transaction to build climate resilience, and others are likely to follow Barbados’ lead. “In the face of the climate crisis, this groundbreaking transaction serves as a model for vulnerable states, delivering rapid adaptation benefits for Barbados,” said Prime Minister Mia Mottley. The government will have to meet sustainability performance targets as part of the deal.
The aviation industry is relying on “sustainable” aviation fuel – or SAF – to help it lower its carbon footprint. But a new report finds airlines aren’t using enough of the stuff to make any meaningful difference. The report, from Brussels-based advocacy group Transport and Environment, ranks 77 major global airlines and airline groups on their use of and commitment to SAF using a points scale of 0 to 100 and found that none of them scored above 61 points, “highlighting how much progress airlines still need to make.” Most airlines failed to get above 24 points. SAF makes up about 1% of global aviation fuel use, Reutersreported. It is more expensive than fossil fuel-based kerosene and there isn’t much of it to go around. The report points to a lack of investment in SAF from oil producers. Below is a graph showing oil giants’ estimated 2023 fuel production. You can just about see the SAF if you squint.
Transport and Environment
Tesla reportedly told Cybertruck workers at its factory in Austin, Texas, not to come to work today, tomorrow, or Thursday. “Given that it is a critical time for Tesla deliveries, particularly of its flagship model, the timing is suspect,” said Jameson Dow at Electrek, suggesting a sales slowdown. The company also lowered its Cybertruck leasing pricing, which might also indicate a demand slump for the electric pickup. Meanwhile, a Delaware judge yesterday rejected CEO Elon Musk’s $56 billion pay package for a second time, even after shareholders voted to reinstate it. Judge Kathaleen McCormick said the attempts to get the package approved were “creative” but “go against multiple strains of settled law.” If Tesla appeals, the case could go to the Delaware Supreme Court.
About 12,000 public EV charging ports came online in the U.S. over the last three months, bringing the total in the national charging network to more than 200,000. That’s double the number recorded in 2020.
Confidence in the United Nations’ ability to find cooperative solutions to some of humanity’s biggest threats took another walloping this weekend when negotiators left the fifth and final UN plastic pollution treaty talks in Busan, South Korea, with no deal.
A planet-wide agreement on curbing plastic pollution was always going to be a big ask. Lacking the existential drama that undergirds the annual climate change conference, the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for Plastics (or “the INC-5,” as this fifth round of meetings was seductively named) doesn’t exactly attract the same level of media attention as its parent group. For another thing, the connection of plastics to the cascading effects of global warming is less obvious than that of burning fossil fuels, though by no means less severe: Conventional plastics are made using newly extracted fossil fuels and, as such, are a last resort profit center for oil companies facing the expiration of their social license to operate. Plastic-related emissions are expected to outpace those of coal within the decade.
And yet despite fierce resistance from petrochemical-producing industries and nations (more on that later), a curious champion has emerged for a legally binding plastic treaty. Alongside the expected environmental heavyweights in Busan last week were several business coalitions pushing in tandem for more ambitious mandatory regulations.
There are plans to hold an “INC-5.2” next year to resolve the outstanding differences, and mounting pressure from business interests on the other side of the fight could potentially neutralize at least some of the influence of the countries that normally dominate such talks. “Businesses cannot solve the crisis alone,” Julia Cohen, the co-founder and managing director of Plastic Pollution Coalition, told me in an emailed statement. But they can “play a key role in shaping national positions, driving scalable solutions, and fostering emerging markets” alongside continued efforts to secure a global treaty.
Two main business coalitions are attempting to do just that. The first is Champions of Change, which works with the Plastic Pollution Coalition, Greenpeace, and Break Free From Plastic, and counts among its 350 signatories household brands like Ben & Jerry’s, Blueland, and Lush Cosmetics. The alliance is demanding a cap on plastic pollution, the phase-out of single-use plastics, greater reuse targets, and a justice-focused approach that centers the concerns of frontline communities. “Voluntary corporate pledges are no match for an international legally binding treaty that would require companies to move away from plastic,” Sybil Bullock, the senior oceans campaigner at Greenpeace, told me in an email. “We have seen past voluntary business commitments from top polluters fail time and time again to deliver meaningful reductions in plastic pollution.”
The Business Coalition for a Global Plastics Treaty, by contrast, stops short of calling for a plastic cap, focusing instead on phasing out “avoidable plastic products” and calling for a “global criteria for circular product design.” Specifically, the group — convened by the World Wildlife Fund and the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, which advocates for a circular economy — is pushing for a “treaty based on strong global rules across the full lifecycle of plastics and with a comprehensive financing mechanism.” Its signatories includebusinesses that have historically been criticized for their reliance on plastic, including Unilever, Nestle, and PepsiCo, and its softer approach has its skeptics.
“You can only downcycle plastic and currently, how plastic is recycled, it gets contaminated by other plastics that are so toxic we cannot use them for anything that is touching or even close to touching our food,” KT Morelli, a campaign organizer for Breathe Free Detroit, which successfully campaigned to shut down a local plastic incinerator, told me. “There’s no circular answer to plastics.”
Kristen McDonald, the senior director of the plastics program at Pacific Environment, an environmental group focused on the Pacific Rim, agreed that “business actions alone — voluntary steps — have not worked so far, and so I’m very skeptical that they will work in the future.” Still, she said it’s only logical that businesses are as impatient as environmentalists when deciding on plastic regulations. If an international agreement isn’t reached, it creates a “really chaotic business environment where certain plastics are restricted in some places and not in others,” leading to trade problems and an uneven playing field at a global level as different companies face different local rules. As she added, a plastic treaty “actually stabilizes things for companies” — unless, of course, the company in question happens to be in the petrochemical industry.
Even the environmentalists working with the business groups agree that there isn’t an entirely private-sector solution to the plastic crisis. “We’re not ready to give up on the treaty process,” Erin Simon, the vice president and head of plastic waste and business at WWF, told me over email. But, she pointed out, after the U.S. pulled out of the Paris Agreement in 2017, there had been a “groundswell of support from cities, states, and other non-federal actors,” including corporations that filled in the leadership void with “commitments that would help move the needle toward reaching our global climate goals.”
And yet despite the limitations of the business coalitions, Morelli told me she thinks there is still promise in the private sector. “They have more power than the government,” she stressed, noting that “small companies and large companies can choose to refuse plastic” and push their suppliers to do the same.
This is significant because, as is the case at COP, oil-rich nations (and oil-rich lobbyists) hold outsized negotiating power at the meetings. Despite more than 100 nations favoring an agreement that would have curbed plastic production — turning off the tap at the source, as plastic-reduction advocates like to say — Russia, Saudi Arabia, and the American Chemistry Council, a trade group, pushed for a treaty last week that would have focused on plastic recycling and “mismanaged waste,” instead, an insistence that led negotiations straight into an impasse. (After flip-flopping, the United States took a noncommittal middle ground of opposing mandatory production caps but otherwise agreeing that too much plastic is probably bad.)
In the absence of a treaty and with pessimism growing around INC-5.2, business-led action might be the best shot remaining for plastic-free organizers. “Having these companies step up on their own is huge and would help us all,” Morelli said.