I'm a title. Click here to edit me.
Foratom highlights nuclear's role in EU hydrogen economy
WNN 4 May 2021 Nuclear provides a perfect solution for the generation of large quantities of low-carbon and affordable hydrogen, the European nuclear trade body Foratom said today in a position paper. This, it said, will be key as Europe aims to transform all parts of its economy, including transport and industry. The position paper makes a number of policy recommendations aimed at recognising the contribution nuclear energy can make in decarbonising such areas. Image from Foratom Foratom says the EU has set itself the "very ambitious" target of decarbonising its economy by 2050. "Achieving this will require a massive transformation of the energy, industry, transport and building sectors," it says. "Whilst solutions already exist to decarbonise the power sector by 2050, hard-to-decarbonise sectors such as transport and industry remain a challenge." On 8 July last year, the European Commission adopted the EU Hydrogen Strategy, which sets out how hydrogen can support the decarbonisation of industry, transport, power generation and buildings. The strategy addresses the investments, regulation, market creation, and research and innovation required to enable this. The strategy says that between 2020 and 2024 the European Commission will support the installation of at least 6 GW of renewable hydrogen electrolysers in the EU, and the production of up to 1 million tonnes of renewable hydrogen. From 2025 to 2030, there needs to be at least 40 GW of renewable hydrogen electrolysers and the production of up to 10 million tonnes of renewable hydrogen in the EU. From 2030 to 2050, renewable hydrogen technologies should reach maturity and be deployed at large scale across all hard-to-decarbonise sectors, it says. The strategy defines 'renewable hydrogen' as "hydrogen produced through the electrolysis of water (in an electrolyser, powered by electricity), and with the electricity stemming from renewable sources. It says 'low-carbon hydrogen' "encompasses fossil-based hydrogen with carbon capture and electricity-based hydrogen, with significantly reduced full life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions compared to existing hydrogen production." The strategy, however, did not specifically mention nuclear power among low-carbon electricity sources. Foratom questions whether, given the variable nature of renewable energy sources and the volume of installed capacity needed to provide a continuous supply of electricity to produce this hydrogen, there will be sufficient renewable electricity available to meet demand. In addition, it says this may not be the most cost-effective approach. "Nuclear will definitely play an important role, even if it is not mentioned," the organisation says in its new position paper, titled Nuclear Hydrogen Production - A Key Low-Carbon Technology for a Decarbonised Europe.
Nuclear enables environmentalists to talk about 'plenty'
WNN 30 April 2021 Caring about the environment has traditionally focused on the scarcity of natural resources, but with nuclear power a healthier world can also mean abundance for all, environmentalist Ben Heard said today at the Atoms for Humanity discussion on Why Humanity Needs Nuclear produced by Russia's Rosatom. Heard is an advocate for nuclear power in his native Australia, through his directorship of environmental NGO Bright New World. Kirsty Gogan and Ben Heard at the Atoms for Humanity discussion The discussion centred on the social, environmental and global partnerships aspects of the United Nation's Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It was moderated by Kirsty Gogan, managing partner at LucidCatalyst and a co-founder of TerraPraxis. Asked about SDGs 13, 14 and 15, which concern, respectively, climate change, life under water and life on land, Heard first described how his own environmentalism had changed once he came to understand the benefits of nuclear energy. "It was 10 years ago this year that I first spoke up publicly to say that I had changed my mind on this particular issue; an issue that had felt really consequential to my identity as someone who really cared about the environment," he said. This change required personal reflection and a consideration of the professional exposure it would entail. "It turned out to be a really positive experience in a lot of ways. It brought me into contact with a whole new world and a great many new people who were starting to think in these ways as well. Even better than that, it really opened up my thinking and my ideas to realise that, if we can take the energy challenge and meet it with something that we can really scale up, then we can also tackle so many of these other sustainability and conservation challenges in really intelligent and exciting ways to make a better world. "It was really transformational in my thinking - how to preserve the environment, how to care for the world around us - that has been very challenging, very difficult, sometimes confrontational, but ultimately very rewarding. And I'm glad to see and sense that there's a real change now in thinking that's becoming much more widespread and that gives me real hope for what's going to happen next." Three decades ago, the main environmental concerns, he said, were deforestation, acid rain and air pollution. "Climate change came a little later and became something very all-encompassing, and it is. It is already impacting biomes all over the planet and it's going to impact the chemistry of our oceans," he said. "I'm struck by the fact that it was climate change that got me interested in nuclear technologies." The word 'clean' applies to nuclear energy in a 'holistic' way, he said. For example, the absence of air pollution and what that means for the health of people, settlements and ecosystems. Another important benefit of nuclear energy, in contrast to some other clean energy technologies, concerns land use. "The last thing I want to see us doing is liquidating scarce natural landscapes in the name of tackling climate change. It seems to be in tension with the values that we're trying to address. The beauty of nuclear technology is that it takes that tension out of the picture. We can have that energy at scale, and the clean air and the clean water, and preserve our landscapes, and actually help to begin restoring them, which is for me extremely powerful." He described the role of nuclear energy in clean energy systems as "where really beautiful synergies start to happen". ... A recording of Why Humanity Needs Nuclear is here. > Read the full article
De-Risking The Energy Transition
Webinar – Thursday 6th May at 1pm (BST) Top Tier Impact Strategies (TTIS) – Anj Chadha, Moderator
LucidCatalyst – Kirsty Gogan and Eric Ingersoll, Panelists The latest UN Emissions Gap Report 2020 has stated that, despite a brief dip in carbon dioxide emissions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the world is still heading for a temperature rise in excess of 3°C this century — far beyond the Paris Agreement goals of limiting global warming to well below 2°C and pursuing 1.5°C. To stabilise temperature rises below 2°C, the world must reach Net Zero by mid-century or earlier, which is not just a slogan, it’s an imperative of climate physics. To get on the path to stabilise temperatures at 1.5°C, emissions need to fall by a minimum of 8% year on year over the next two decades. To put that into context, total CO2 emissions for 2020 (when COVID-19 shut down our economies) decreased by around 5-7%. Reducing emissions at the pace and scale required demands wholesale structural change, including utilisation of all currently available low-carbon technologies and new innovations. The challenges may be unevenly spread across sectors, especially for the hard to decarbonise sectors such as industry, shipping, and aviation — but all must contribute. Top Tier Impact Strategies (TTIS), an ESG advisory business, has partnered with LucidCatalyst, an energy consultancy, to shed light on the enormous challenges of this imperative energy transition, including the opportunities for utilising low-carbon technologies in various sectors. This four-part webinar series will begin with an essential topic: ‘De-risking the energy transition’, which will address the following questions: How much does the world need to do (and by when) in terms of energy transition to stay on track to hit the Paris Agreement targets? How much land will be needed for the clean energy infrastructure required by mid-century? How easy will it be to secure this land? How is public support for renewable projects evolving over time?
– How might this impact the ability to turn over our energy infrastructure in a timely manner given the urgency of emissions reductions (i.e., 45% reductions by 2030) to keep warming below 1.5°C, for example? How might transmission infrastructure fundamentally create bottlenecks for renewables deployment? What will be necessary to decarbonise the global liquid fuels industry? How do the risks and challenges of the energy transition affect private companies and how might it inform their corporate strategy? LucidCatalyst will be sharing examples of their recent work to answer these questions. REGISTER
Reimagining Energy: Non-Power Applications
GAIN Webinar Series April 20, 2021, 9:00 am – 11:00 am MST Eric Ingersoll and Kirsty Gogan were invited to be part of an expert panel at the GAIN webinar series and presented on "Reimagining Energy: Non-Power Applications.” Reimagining Energy Explore the evolving role of various energy sources and the new uses enabled by innovation. Future energy systems will be sourced with a sustainable supply chain. Imagine a future of energy that is more integrated and customized to local needs. Our speakers will share how thinking far into the future is shaping their work today.
Webinar #2 Agenda
Energizing America: A Roadmap to Launch a National Energy Innovation MissionCarbon Negative: Necessity of Carbon Removal Innovation
Reimagining Energy – Non-Power Applications
Video - COMING SOON!!
GAIN Shaping Our Carbon-Free Future Webinar #2
Colin Cunliff, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Dawn James, Microsoft
Kirsty Gogan and Eric Ingersoll, LucidCatalyst and TerraPraxis The Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear (GAIN) Webinar Series examines the opportunities, challenges, and innovations needed for Shaping our Carbon-Free Future. It is an initiative of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE), to advance nuclear power as a resource capable of meeting the nation's energy, environmental and national security needs by resolving technical, cost, safety, proliferation resistance, and security barriers through research, development and demonstration.
How Hydrogen-Enabled Synthetic Fuels Can Cut Global Emissions
The Cimpatico Podcast March 24, 2021 Kirsty Gogan discusses the three main organising principles in order to achieve decarbonisation — Scale, Speed, and Cost. She uses the analogy of “Impossible Burgers” with respect to traditional fossil fuels and suggests that low-cost, clean hydrogen-based synthetic fuel can be a feasible alternative to fossil fuel in shipping, aviation, and other industries.
Driving Deeper Decarbonisation with Hydrogen-Enabled Synthetic Fuels
Nuclear Watch Institute To meet the Paris climate goals, we must bring global carbon emissions down to zero by mid-century. This will require massively increasing global clean power generation, especially as energy demand is expected to double from current levels to meet rising global energy demand. Nuclear energy can play a key role in ensuring a successful and timely transition, provided it becomes highly competitive everywhere in the world. A concerted effort will be required to make sure new nuclear projects do not experience costly delays or budget overruns, as has happened with recent projects in the United States and Europe. New commercial offerings are set to drive such needed rapid and cost-effective decarbonisation, beyond generating clean electricity. In September 2020, LucidCatalyst published a new report: Missing Link to a Livable Climate that made a crucial breakthrough in designing new strategies for clean, low cost and large-scale hydrogen and clean synthetic fuels production. These hydrogen-enabled synthetic fuels would address the two thirds of global energy use beyond the power sector, which includes sectors like shipping, aviation, and industry. These sectors all use fossil fuels like oil and gas for fuel, making them difficult and expensive to decarbonise. Extensive infrastructure is in place supporting the use of fossil fuels, and electrification will only be possible for a small portion of total fuels usage. We therefore need carbon-neutral “drop-in” fuels that can be produced cost effectively and at scale. The LucidCatalyst team found that the unique attributes of high temperature heat, small environmental footprint, high capacity factor and low cost electricity, combined with very high productivity manufacturing delivery and deployment models, can produce hydrogen-enabled synthetic fuels at prices competitive with oil and gas today. Hydrogen itself is an emissions-free fuel, and is also entirely renewable: it is derived from water, and burns back into water. Produced using low-carbon methods (instead of oil, gas, and coal), hydrogen would become entirely carbon-neutral, and could play an important role as an energy carrier and feedstock for synthetic fuels. Refinery-scale Gigafactory and world-class shipyard manufacturing approaches could build these hydrogen production facilities rapidly and at scale. To replace the expected flow of 100 million barrels of oil per day (350EJ by 2050) via these approaches would require an investment of $17 trillion spent over 30 years from 2020-2050. This is less than the $25 trillion the oil and gas industries otherwise intend to spend to produce conventional fuels over the next several decades. And renewables like solar and wind would require a massive $70 trillion to produce equivalent hydrogen. These facilities could also produce ammonia to fuel marine vessels. Recent modelling done by LucidCatalyst suggests that such a facility could produce ammonia for about $60 per barrel of oil equivalent, which is quite competitive with fossil marine fuel today. It would take about 325 of these to decarbonise today’s global shipping industry. By 2050 this number could grow to 600. Since publishing this report in September 2020, LucidCatalyst have already experienced strong market interest in these solutions that easily plug into the existing energy infrastructure that powers civilization, cost-competitively and without emissions. > View article
Why Hydrogen Needs Nuclear Power To Succeed
Oilprice.com By Alan Mammoser For carbon-free hydrogen to play a significant role in decarbonization, it will need to be produced in large quantities at low cost to compete with hydrocarbons. In a future power system heavily dependent on intermittent renewables, hydrogen will likely find economical use in power storage for grid balancing. However, for an actual ‘hydrogen economy’ to arise, hydrogen will have to expand into the so-called ‘hard to abate’ sectors where a large portion of carbon emissions occur. Hydrogen for direct heat in industry, and hydrogen-derived fuels (synthetic fuels such as ammonia and synthetic hydrocarbon fuels produced from hydrogen and CO2), would displace the liquid hydrocarbons now used in heavy industry (cement, chemicals, steel), heavy shipping, and aviation. The International Energy Agency sees this shift as necessary to eventually reach carbon-neutrality in the global energy system. In its Sustainable Development Scenario, emissions in the industrial and transport sectors remain stubbornly high in 2040, far exceeding those in the power sector where significant reductions have occurred (and reach actual negative emissions by 2070). The IEA’s scenario sees hydrogen, ammonia, and synfuels composing 1.5% of global energy consumption in 2040, but rising to almost 10% in 2070 as hydrocarbon fuels see steep declines. But the agency does not set out a clear path toward this outcome. Some entrepreneurs claim they can already provide carbon-free hydrogen at $2/kg. But others see that a much steeper fall is required, toward $0.90/kg for hydrogen-based fuels to replace liquid fuels at a large scale in the aviation and shipping sectors. Whether this can be achieved even by mid-century is unclear, leading many observers to call for various forms of a carbon tax to make clean hydrogen viable. In any event, reaching the lower price points will require innovation, including innovation in nuclear power. The future of green hydrogen may well depend on research and innovation occurring now in advanced reactors and nuclear fuels in the United States and abroad. Going nuclear A nuclear plant’s electricity and heat can power electrolysis for carbon-free hydrogen production. The concept is just beginning to be demonstrated at existing light water reactors in the US. Researchers are also looking at utilizing light water reactors for high-temperature steam electrolysis, which offers efficiency advantages over lower temperature water electrolysis. This will require augmenting the heat produced by the plant to reach the temperatures required for more efficient steam electrolysis. ... Small reactor speculations The need for nuclear in carbon-free hydrogen production took on urgency in a recent panel discussion, part of the Atlantic Council’s Global Energy Forum, entitled ‘Nuclear Beyond Power: Hydrogen, Heat, and Desalination.’ Kirsty Gogan, who is Managing Partner at the consultancy LucidCatalyst in the UK, said that according to her firm’s calculations, the target price point of $0.90/kg can be reached by 2030 with ‘advanced heat.’ In this case, the term refers to collections of small modular reactors. LucidCatalyst published a report last fall called ‘Missing Link to a Livable Climate: How Hydrogen-Enabled Synthetic Fuels Can Help Deliver the Paris Goals.’ It conveys interesting proposals for the large-scale production of green hydrogen, to occur much more quickly than what is envisioned in the IEA’s scenario. The authors argue that large-scale production of green, low-cost hydrogen for synthetic fuels cannot be done competitively with electrolysis powered by renewable energy, perhaps not even by mid-century. They argue the actual land requirements for that would be too great. Moreover, they point out that wind and solar power do not produce heat as a primary energy product, and therefore can only be applied to less efficient low-temperature electrolysis. They recommend instead “a new generation of advanced heat sources,” which are actually advanced modular reactors (see report p. 26), which power electrolysis with heat. And they argue that the production of such reactors can occur in large numbers and economically with advanced manufacturing and standardization, at or close to ports and shipyards. Modern shipyards offer them important models of the kind of large-scale, low-cost production they are seeking. One format would be a floating production platform, moored near a harbor, deploying high-temperature modular reactors for high-temperature electrolysis dedicated to the production of hydrogen and its conversion to ammonia for ship fuel. The report compares capital and operating costs for light water and molten salt small modular reactors to show the cost advantages of advanced nuclear technologies (report, p. 49). Another suggested format is a ‘gigafactory’ with small modular reactors built on the site itself, for concentrated, large-scale hydrogen production close to ports and rails. The report contains impressive illustrations of what these facilities might look like someday, should they ever be built. These ‘advanced heat’ schemes will no doubt be followed by many more in the years ahead as entrepreneurs seek to dramatically lower the cost of clean hydrogen and hydrogen-based synthetic fuels. Other panelists pointed to the real possibilities for advanced nuclear. “The key will ultimately be producing the high temperatures needed to most effectively produce hydrogen,’ said Seth Grae, President, and CEO, Lightbridge Corporation, which is a US-based company working on advanced nuclear fuels. “Nuclear is the only feasible way to meet this goal,” he said. > Read the full article
Advanced heat sources are key to decarbonisation, says LucidCatalyst
World Nuclear News Given the scale and urgency of the required clean transition combined with the growth of the global energy system, all zero-carbon hydrogen production options must be pursued, energy research and consultancy firm LucidCatalyst stresses in its latest report. The report, Missing Link to a Livable Climate, describes how to decarbonise "a substantial portion" of the global energy system, for which there is currently "no viable alternative", and presents the six actions that are needed. "The potential of advanced heat sources to power the production of large-scale, very low-cost hydrogen and hydrogen-based fuels could transform global prospects for near-term decarbonisation and prosperity," the report says. "While it sounds daunting to achieve the scale of production needed, the scalability and power density of advanced heat sources are a major benefit. By moving to a manufacturing model with modular designs, it is possible to deliver hundreds of units in multiple markets around the world each year." The clean energy from these units, combined with "aggressive" renewables deployment, gives a much better chance of achieving the Paris goals of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius in the very limited time available, it says, and maximising the opportunity thus requires action without delay. First, this study shows how scalable, cost-effective hydrogen can be produced in the near term. > Read the full article
ETI NCD Study cited in the UK's HM Treasury NetZero Interim report
LucidCatalyst's ETI NCD Study is cited in the UK's HM TreasuryNetZero Interim report as evidence that "learning can, and does, occur for nuclear power plant construction where nations are able to invest in fleet deployment, using the same design across multiple projects, as seen in the Republic of Korea and elsewhere.” (Page 39) > Read the HMT Net Zero interim report
Atomic Insights Podcast – All Reactors Large and Small
Atomic Show #289 By Rod Adams Pro-nuclear advocates generally agree that there is a large and growing need for new nuclear power plants to meet energy demands with less impact on the planet and its atmosphere.
There is frequent, sometimes passionate discussion about the most appropriate reactor sizes, technologies and specific uses. Atomic Show #289 is a lively discussion among some of the world’s most focused experts on the topic of nuclear plant costs and the relationship of costs to sizes and deployment concepts.
Guests include: Kirsty Gogan – co-founder of Energy for Humanity, Managing Director at LucidCatalyst and co-founder of TerraPraxis Eric Ingersoll – co-founder of LucidCatalyst and co-founder of TerraPraxis Nick Touran – creator of WhatisNuclear.com and advanced reactor design engineer Chris Keefer – President of Canadians for Nuclear, founder of Doctors for Nuclear Energy, host of the Decouple podcast and the We CANDU It Podcast Jessica Lovering, co-founder and co-Executive Director of Good Energy Collective We reached several conclusions. Nuclear can be expensive but it doesn’t have to be expensive Series building programs can successfully reduce construction and manufacturing costs Series building programs that keep crews together on the same site for unit runs of 4, 8 or even more units have an established history of success. Factory manufacturing is an intriguing prospect that might best be applied to nuclear plants by using shipyards for production and delivery. Seismic isolation techniques can enable systems to be more location agnostic and limit the amount of redesign required for new locations. There is room for innovation and new ideas in nuclear. Smaller nuclear systems can make the technology more accessible and more widely acceptable. Long held beliefs about nuclear in terms of risks, public acceptance, and needs for isolation and security deserve to be challenged. Some believe that the more experience you have with nuclear, the better you will appreciate its benefits and capabilities. > Listen to the podcast
Nuclear Sector Deal Webinar Series 2021
Kirsty Gogan of LucidCatalyst joined a distinguished panel to discuss how we can achieve cost reduction in nuclear new build. The new build cost reduction target is to deliver a 30% reduction in the cost to the consumer of low carbon new nuclear generation by 2030, in support of the UK’s net zero commitment. View the case for change in the slide deck from the webinar, below.
The Clean Hydrogen Saga: Part II – The Cost of Clean Hydrogen
ADVANCED ENERGY | By Rauli Partanen This is part 2 of a four-part series on clean hydrogen and how to bring its costs down. A recent study “Missing Link to a Livable Climate – How Hydrogen-enabled Synthetic Fuels Can Help Deliver the Paris Goals” [by LucidCatalyst] separated the main cost components of clean hydrogen production with electrolysis into four categories. They assume dedicated systems for scalable hydrogen production, for the reasons we visited in the previous part: A system that needs to be way bigger than the current electricity system cannot work as a small subsection of our current electricity grid, relying on its surplus production. This scalability and purpose of replacing fossil fuels in current uses is also why the study looks primarily at electrolysis and not separating hydrogen from natural gas (even with carbon capture). The main factors in clean H2 production cost are: 1. Capacity factor of energy supply 2. Capital investment (CapEx) of energy supply 3. Efficiency of electrolyzers (what percentage of electricity is turned into hydrogen) 4. CapEx of electrolyzers Each of these has a slightly different effect on the price. Below we look at each of them in more detail. Capacity Factor of Energy Supply With the given assumptions (see graph top right corner), capacity factor is the single biggest driver of hydrogen production cost. A move from a high capacity factor energy supply (such as nuclear at 90%) to half of that (wind) roughly doubles the cost. If we go from wind to good solar, again halving capacity factor to a bit above 20%, the cost has more than tripled from the baseline of full capacity. CapEx of Energy Supply The cost of the energy supply, here represented as CapEx of energy supply, as $/kW of installed capacity, also has a big impact. At higher capacity factors, the cost of hydrogen will roughly double when energy CapEx goes from $1,500 to $5,500 / kW, as the price of hydrogen goes from $2.3/kg to around $5/kg. At lower capacity factors, this effect is amplified; with 40% capacity factor, the difference between those is still close to “double”, but in absolute terms it jumps from $5 to $9.2/kg, a jump of over $4/kg of hydrogen. Efficiency of Electrolyzers There are two main technologies for electrolysis presented here. LTE, or Low Temperature Electrolysis, and HTE, or High Temperature Electrolysis. HTE requires an input of high temperature steam (600-800o C) but can provide much higher efficiency. It is not yet commercial technology, but significant research is ongoing, so it is likely to become commercial in the early 2020s. At higher capacity factors, the efficiency plays a smaller role, less than $1 per kg. This difference roughly doubles for common wind power capacity factors and doubles again for good solar PV locations. Given that wind and solar produce only electricity, not steam, a nuclear reactor (or other source of clean and reliable steam) would be needed to achieve the higher efficiencies through HTE. If needed, a nuclear reactor can provide both the steam and the electricity at very high capacity factors. CapEx of Electrolyzers Electrolyzers are not free, which is why it is important we use them at maximum capacity to as great an extent as possible. But there is a difference between moderate cost and very low-cost electrolyzers. The image below compares electrolyzer CapEx costs of $250/kW and $750/kW. Again, at higher capacity factors, the difference is smaller, and gets larger when CF drops. Replacing Fossil Fuels So what is the target price? It depends on ambition. We can start replacing fossil hydrogen in current uses, such as ammonia manufacturing and oil refining at costs below $2/kg. Hydrogen used directly in certain transportation, such as long-haul trucking, would certainly benefit from low-cost supply as well, although it is still unclear how widespread its use will become. At lower costs, we can start using clean ammonia to replace bunker fuel in marine shipping, and natural gas in gas turbines (both require only minor modifications to current tech). At lower cost still, under $1/kg for example, we can start replacing fossil liquid fuels, such as JET-A in aviation, with clean, carbon neutral versions. This also depends on the cost of carbon dioxide provided at scale, as can be seen in the graph below. The estimates for wind- and solar- generated hydrogen are several times higher than the required level for the coming decades, although it is possible that costs will come down to such an extent that these cost estimates become reality around mid-century. This is too late for climate mitigation however — at least if we plan on hitting anywhere near the Paris agreement levels of less than 2o C of warming. The best cases of nuclear today can get below $2/kg, and there is still much room for optimization and cost reduction. What is perhaps more important is that nuclear can be scaled more easily, since there are a limited number of “best sites” available for wind and solar, and they also require quite a large footprint comparatively. On the positive side, a number of very good sites for wind and solar might be far away from current population and electricity use, so they can be more readily be used for hydrogen and e-fuels production that are more easy to store and transport. The topic of the next article in this series is dedicated to clean hydrogen systems, in which I present two options for increasing scale and decreasing costs. ... Read full article to view images and data, which are from: Missing Link to a Livable Climate – How Hydrogen-enabled Synthetic Fuels Can Help Deliver the Paris Goals. LucidCatalyst 2020. Cost of hydrogen production from different energy technologies in the real world now and in 2030. Image credit: LucidCatalyst