FFI to study developing US coal mine into hydrogen hub
Australia's Fortescue Future Industries (FFI) is planning to carry out a feasibility study on converting the former Centralia coal mine in the US' Washington state into a hydrogen production facility powered by electricity from renewable sources.
The planned study follows FFI, the low-emissions energy arm of Australian iron ore producer Fortescue Metals, entering into a binding agreement with Washington's Industrial Park at TransAlta. Centralia closed in 2006 and supplied coal to the 51-year old Centralia power plant, which now receives coal from the Powder river basin in the US. Centralia is owned and operated by Canadian utility TransAlta, which closed one of the plant's generation units in 2020 and plans to close the second 670MW unit at the end of 2025.
The proposed hydrogen production plant will decarbonise hard to abate sectors of the North American economy and support the development of a Pacific northwest green hydrogen hub, FFI said. It said it will apply for a US Department of Energy hydrogen hub programme grant together with its Pacific northwest partners
Related news posts
Mitsui makes delayed exit from Paiton power project
Mitsui makes delayed exit from Paiton power project
Tokyo, 1 May (Argus) — Japanese trading house Mitsui completed on 30 April the ¥109bn ($690mn) sale of its stake in Indonesia's 2,045MW Paiton coal-fired power plant in east Java following multiple delays. Mitsui originally tried to complete its exit by the end of March 2022 . It said the procedures with Paiton's offtaker Indonesian state-owned power firm Persero took more time than expected without providing further details. Japanese thermal power producer Jera withdrew from Paiton by selling its 14pc share in 2021. Mitsui sold its 45.515pc share in Paiton Energy, as well as a 45.515pc stake in Netherlands-based subsidiary Minejesa Capital and a 65pc stake in Singapore-based IPM Asia that are related companies of the Paiton project. Mistui sold the stakes to RH International (RHIS), which is a Singapore-based subsidiary of Thai power producer Ratch, and Indonesian power company Medco Daya Abadi Lestari's subsidiary Medco Daya Energi Sentosa (MDES). Paiton Energy is now owned by RHIS, MDES and Qatar-based company Nebras Power. Mitsui did not disclose their ownership ratios. Paiton consists of the 615MW No.7, 615MW No.8 and the 815MW No.3 units, which sell electricity to Persero through an unspecified long-term contract. Mitsui now holds 9.6GW of power capacity assets globally, with 8pc being coal-fired projects. The exit from Paiton cut its coal-fired ratio by 8 percentage points, while raising its renewable ratio by 3 percentage points to 32pc. Growing global pressure against coal-fired power generation likely prompted Mitsui to exit Paiton. Energy ministers from G7 countries this week pledged to accelerate "efforts towards the phase-out of unabated coal power generation". By Nanami Oki Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
New US rule may let some shippers swap railroads
New US rule may let some shippers swap railroads
Washington, 30 April (Argus) — US rail regulators today issued a final rule designed to help customers switch railroads in cases of poor rail service, but it is already drawing mixed reviews. Reciprocal switching, which allows freight shippers or receivers captive to a single railroad to access to an alternate carrier, has been allowed under US Surface Transportation Board (STB) rules. But shippers had not used existing STB rules to petition for reciprocal switching in 35 years, prompting regulators to revise rules to encourage shippers to pursue switching while helping resolve service problems. "The rule adopted today has broken new ground in the effort to provide competitive options in an extraordinarily consolidated rail industry," said outgoing STB chairman Martin Oberman. The five-person board unanimously approved a rule that would allow the board to order a reciprocal switching agreement if a facility's rail service falls below specified levels. Orders would be for 3-5 years. "Given the repeated episodes of severe service deterioration in recent years, and the continuing impediments to robust and consistent rail service despite the recent improvements accomplished by Class I carriers, the board has chosen to focus on making reciprocal switching available to shippers who have suffered service problems over an extended period of time," Oberman said today. STB commissioner Robert Primus voted to approve the rule, but also said it did not go far enough. The rule adopted today is "unlikely to accomplish what the board set out to do" since it does not cover freight moving under contract, he said. "I am voting for the final rule because something is better than nothing," Primus said. But he said the rule also does nothing to address competition in the rail industry. The Association of American Railroads (AAR) is reviewing the 154-page final rule, but carriers have been historically opposed to reciprocal switching proposals. "Railroads have been clear about the risks of expanded switching and the resulting slippery slope toward unjustified market intervention," AAR said. But the trade group was pleased that STB rejected "previous proposals that amounted to open access," which is a broad term for proposals that call for railroads to allow other carriers to operate over their tracks. The American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association declined to comment but has indicated it does not expect the rule to have an appreciable impact on shortline traffic, service or operations. Today's rule has drawn mixed reactions from some shipper groups. The National Industrial Transportation League (NITL), which filed its own reciprocal switching proposal in 2011, said it was encouraged by the collection of service metrics required under the rule. But "it is disheartened by its narrow scope as it does not appear to apply to the vast majority of freight rail traffic that moves under contracts or is subject to commodity exemptions," said NITL executive director Nancy O'Liddy, noting it was a departure from the group's original petition which sought switching as a way to facilitate railroad economic competitiveness. The Chlorine Institute said, in its initial analysis, that it does not "see significant benefit for our shipper members since it excludes contract traffic which covers the vast majority of chlorine and other relevant chemical shipments." By Abby Caplan Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
G7 countries put timeframe on 'unabated' coal phase-out
G7 countries put timeframe on 'unabated' coal phase-out
London, 30 April (Argus) — G7 countries today committed to phasing out "unabated coal power generation" by 2035 — putting a timeframe on a coal phase-out for the first time. The communique, from a meeting of G7 climate, energy and environment ministers in Turin, northern Italy, represents "an historic agreement" on coal, Canadian environment minister Steven Guilbeault said. Although most G7 nations have set a deadline for phasing out coal-fired power, the agreement marks a step forward for Japan in particular, which had previously not made the commitment, and is a "milestone moment", senior policy advisor at think-tank E3G Katrine Petersen said. The G7 countries are Italy — this year's host — Canada, France, Germany, Japan, the UK and the US. The EU is a non-enumerated member. But the pledge contains a caveat in its reference to "unabated" coal-fired power — suggesting that abatement technologies such as carbon capture and storage could justify its use, while some of the wording around a deadline is less clear. The communique sets a timeframe of "the first half of [the] 2030s or in a timeline consistent with keeping a limit of 1.5°C temperature rise within reach, in line with countries' net-zero pathways". OECD countries should end coal use by 2030 and the rest of the world by 2040, in order to align with the global warming limit of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels set out in the Paris Agreement, according to research institute Climate Analytics. The countries welcomed the outcomes of the UN Cop 28 climate summit , pledging to "accelerate the phase out of unabated fossil fuels so as to achieve net zero in energy systems by 2050". It backed the Cop 28 goal to triple renewable energy capacity by 2030 and added support for a global target for energy storage in the power sector of 1.5TW by 2030. The group committed to submit climate plans — known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs) — with "the highest possible ambition" from late this year or in early 2025. And it also called on the IEA to "provide recommendations" next year on how to implement a transition away from fossil fuels. The G7 also reiterated its commitment to a "fully or predominantly decarbonised power sector by 2035" — first made in May 2022 and highlighted roles for carbon management, carbon markets, hydrogen and biofuels. Simon Stiell, head of UN climate body the UNFCCC, urged the G7 and G20 countries to lead on climate action, in a recent speech . The group noted in today's outcome that "further actions from all countries, especially major economies, are required". The communique broadly reaffirmed existing positions on climate finance, although any concrete steps are not likely to be taken ahead of Cop 29 in November. The group underlined its pledge to end "inefficient fossil fuel subsidies" by 2025 or earlier, but added a new promise to "promote a common definition" of the term, which is likely to increase countries' accountability. The group will report on its progress towards ending those subsidies next year, it added. Fostering energy security The communique placed a strong focus on the need for "diverse, resilient, and responsible energy technology supply chains, including manufacturing and critical minerals". It noted the important of "guarding against possible weaponisation of economic dependencies on critical minerals and critical raw materials" — many of which are mined and processed outside the G7 group. Energy security held sway on the group's take on natural gas. It reiterated its stance that gas investments "can be appropriate… if implemented in a manner consistent with our climate objectives" and noted that increased LNG deliveries could play a key role. By Georgia Gratton Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Industry leaders urge realism in green hydrogen push
Industry leaders urge realism in green hydrogen push
Dubai, 28 April (Argus) — Hydrogen and its derivatives will have a critically important role to play in accelerating the energy transition but policymakers need to be more realistic given that many of the technologies are still in their infancy, energy industry leaders from the Middle East and Europe said Sunday at a special meeting of the World Economic Forum in the Saudi capital Riyadh. "The market is a challenge," UAE energy minister Suhail al-Mazrouei said. "There is development of the market, but are we there yet? No. At the same time, are we serious about our production? I would say yes. It's between planning something, and getting the result you are aiming for." The UAE is planning to produce 1.4mn t/yr of hydrogen by 2031, more than 70pc of which will be green hydrogen, al-Mazrouei said. In the longer term the country aims to build its hydrogen capacity to 15mn t/yr by 2050. "Clean energy is something we decided to venture into 17 years ago when we began investing in the likes of [UAE state-owned renewables firm] Masdar and started thinking about what would happen after we export the last barrel of oil," UAE energy minister Suhail al-Mazrouei said. "What we did first is regulate and put a strategy of how much to produce." Al-Mazrouei's Saudi counterpart, Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman, voiced similar concerns. "We don't mind partnering with everybody… With the Koreans, the Japanese, our friends the UAE… but there are challenges," he said. "There is a lack of clarity on the policies, a lack of clarity on the receiving or consumer end, a lack of clarity on the incentives and a lack of clarity around what it takes to develop these technologies." Arguably more prohibitive is the "economics" of new energies such as hydrogen, he said. The cost of green hydrogen today is "between roughly $250-300/bl of oil equivalent," Prince Abdulaziz said. "What kind of a business acumen would choose to buy at $250-300/bl?" Al-Mazrouei agreed that costs are too high. "We cannot just treat the consumers as if they are ready to just pay double or triple the price [of conventional energies today]." Let's be serious The EU has set ambitious targets on renewable hydrogen. In 2022, the bloc doubled its 2030 production target to 10mn t/yr, from 5.6mn t/yr previously, and it is also working towards a separate pledge to import another 10mn t/yr by the same date. The production target is an unrealistic goal, according to the Saudi energy minister. "Those projects that have crossed the finishing line only come to 400,000t ꟷ around 4pc of the target," Prince Abdulaziz said. "How is it conceivable that in 2024, only 4pc has been achieved? How can people imagine that 10mn t/yr can be achieved?" TotalEnergies chief executive Patrick Pouyanne, who was speaking on the same panel, was even more blunt in his assessment, describing the EU's target as "impossible" and "not in reality". "Let us recognise that we are still at the infancy stage, and stop speaking about 10mn t, 20mn t, just to the media. It makes no sense," Pouyanne said. "Let's just be serious about it and find the right roadmap. Yes, we probably won't reach our target by 2030, but that's not a problem. It's more important to take steps and spend the money economically, to give them affordable and clean energy." By Nader Itayim Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Business intelligence reports
Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.
Learn more