Membrane Technology Breakthrough for Fractionating Hydrocarbons Announced: Ultrathin Polymer Membranes with Locked Intrinsic Microporosity

     Last year, I posted about the potential of polymer membrane technology that can fractionate hydrocarbons via reverse osmosis and its potential to revolutionize refining. Now, a team of international researchers has developed a new class of ultrathin polymer membranes that can separate complex hydrocarbon mixtures. This new method, like the reverse osmosis method, can significantly reduce the energy required to separate the hydrocarbons, which currently is one of the most energy-intensive industrial processes. As recounted by Tech Xplore, the researchers discovered:

“…a new way to form the separating layers in polymer membranes for molecular separations. The breakthrough derives from the way the cross-linking agent for the polymer film is added to the polymer during membrane fabrication.”

“The membranes combine extremely high molecular selectivity with fast liquid transport—a combination that has long eluded scientists and engineers working in this field.”

     The results of the testing were reported in a paper in Science:

     Currently, the thermal distillation of hydrocarbons uses about 1% of the global energy supply. Membrane technologies have long been in development, but have been limited by the materials used.

"Membranes can, in principle, do the same job as distillation or evaporation, using far less energy," explains lead researcher Andrew Livingston, professor of chemical engineering and vice president of research and innovation at Queen Mary University of London, and CEO of Exactmer.

"The problem has been finding materials that are both fast and selective when exposed to real hydrocarbon mixtures."

     The key to the new method is manufacturing polymer membranes so that their nanoscale pores are "locked" in place during formation. Sub-nanometer pores separate molecules by size and type, but the polymers normally swell when exposed to hydrocarbons, causing the pores to expand and lose selectivity.

“To overcome this, the team developed an in-situ cross-linking approach that stabilizes the polymer structure while the membrane is being formed. This process locks the pores in their optimal configuration, producing what the researchers call polymers of locked intrinsic microporosity (PLIMs).”

"The key was stabilizing the structure before the polymer had a chance to swell," explains Dr. Zhiwei Jiang, who led the research as head of membrane research at Exactmer and who is now assistant professor at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore.

"This preserves the tiny pores that make molecular separation possible, while still allowing hydrocarbons to flow through very quickly."

     Quasi-elastic neutron scattering at the ISIS Neutron and Muon Source, the U.K.'s national pulsed neutron facility, was used to develop the process.

     As noted below, the method tested quite successfully with light Arabian oil. It also tested successfully by separating a mixture of virgin naphtha with C4-C6 hydrocarbons from heavier naphtha hydrocarbon components.

     The researchers also demonstrated that the membranes can be manufactured at scale. Testing showed stable performance over 30 days of continuous operation. As noted below, the membranes can be manufactured as drop-in membranes into existing module designs.

"These membranes aren't just laboratory curiosities," said Dr. Adam Oxley, first author of the research paper and now deputy vice president of membranes at Exactmer. "They can be produced using established manufacturing techniques and fitted into existing industrial module designs. At Exactmer, we are building these new techniques into membranes used for high-value separations in organic solvents."

     Below, the researchers note that the membrane process can be used in petroleum refining, petrochemicals production, for industrial solvents, in the pharmaceutical industry, and with biofuel feedstocks.

     Future research directions include deploying the PLIM membrane tech alongside existing refinery processes and deriving pharmaceuticals in organic solvents.

"This work shows that membrane-based molecular separation in organic liquids is no longer just a theoretical possibility," said Livingston. "With the right materials design, it can be fast, selective, scalable—and ready for industry."

     Dr. Zachary P. Smith, associate professor of chemical engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), said,

"As all chemists know, 'like dissolves like.' So how can you separate hydrocarbon liquids using a hydrocarbon polymer without the polymer itself dissolving while in use? Livingston and his team have developed an approach to 'lock' their polymers in place, making them stable under aggressive conditions.

"More than that, they have shown that this approach works with some of the newest and most innovative emerging polymers in membrane science, helping to push the field into untapped areas of application."

     Ryan P. Lively, professor in the School of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology, added,

"One of the key technological barriers facing membrane deployment in crude oil refining [is/was] the very low productivity of the membrane units. The membranes from Livingston's research are more than 100 times more productive than the first-generation membrane materials—the fact that this was achieved along with improved separation efficiency is a remarkable achievement.

“The composition of the membrane selective layer is interesting. The polymer backbones used had been considered previously, and cross-linked polymers had been considered previously, but the special combination that the team discovered really hit a sweet spot in terms of membrane performance.”

"Being able to go from a small postage-stamp test to a full-size membrane module in such a short time indicates that the prospects for membrane-based oil refining are bright. Indeed, this article and others in the academic literature continue to indicate that there are real economic and environmental benefits to moving forward with membranes for oil refining at larger and larger scales."

     Membrane technologies appear to be the future of oil refining, but will likely take years to further develop.

 

  

References:

 

Ultrathin membranes could transform hydrocarbon processing by slashing energy use. Science X staff. University of London. TechXplore. June 18, 2026. Ultrathin membranes could transform hydrocarbon processing by slashing energy use

Ultrathin polymer membranes with locked intrinsic microporosity for hydrocarbon fractionation. Adam Oxley, Chunchun Ye, Seok Ju Han, Guoke Zhao, Yihao Guo, Xin Shi, Jie Liu, Keenan Smith, Mona Sarter, and Zhiwei Jiang +13 authors. Science. 18 Jun 2026. Vol 392, Issue 6804. pp. 1268-1273. Ultrathin polymer membranes with locked intrinsic microporosity for hydrocarbon fractionation | Science

Data Centers: Some Thoughts on Impacts, Benefits, and Backlash

 

       AI is capital-intensive, energy-intensive, water-intensive, emissions-intensive, replaces some humans, and has the potential to increase income inequality as small groups of executives can be the only employees of multi-billion-dollar companies. It is also likely a major factor in increasing electricity prices for everyone. Despite all these downsides, it has the potential to improve many aspects of life and benefit humans, society, and even the environment in a myriad of ways. Technophobia is not the best approach. Neither is unbridled technophilia.

     Agentic AI is designed to mimic human intuition to address its intended functions. Machine learning has the potential to find hidden patterns in data that are too difficult or time-consuming for humans to discover. It can analyze vast amounts of data quickly. It is not going to exceed its capabilities and be out-of-control any time soon. Ideas like AI superintelligence – the point where AI exceeds human cognitive abilities in every way, singularity – the idea that when superintelligence occurs, technological growth becomes uncontrollable and irreversible, and artificial general intelligence – the point where AI matches human cognitive abilities – these ideas are interesting and all, but we are likely nowhere near those points. Right now, AI acts basically as a very good digital assistant. There is still a lot of slop and hallucinations being produced by bad training. It does outperform humans on many tasks, and that makes it likely to expand.

     People should probably be madder at cryptocurrency than AI. It uses about a third of the power that AI uses now, although after expected AI growth, that will fall to about 20-25%. Crypto does not provide benefits to society aside from secure transactions. It requires many big data centers. It is also the choice of criminals and terrorists. However, its decentralized nature means it doesn’t require brick-and-mortar facilities for employees like other payment systems, such as credit card companies. That offsets some of its energy intensity.

     Innovation usually requires some trial-and-error in terms of impacts. Technology by itself is neither good nor bad. I can certainly understand why people don’t want to live near data centers. I have heard there are noise and heat island effects. Water consumption is important, but data centers need not produce wastewater that is highly toxic if wastewater treatment is adequate. Nonetheless, treated wastewater needs to be monitored as well. In some places, water used for data centers could compete with drinking water resources.  

    Tech companies building data centers are also backing off on their emissions trajectories and net-zero pledges since they will likely use natural gas to power at least some of their operations. In a lot of cases, there is simply not enough available land space to build out acres of solar panels just to power a portion of operations. Behind-the-meter power is a popular choice that takes some stress off power grids. However, those solutions also compete with grid power for components like transformers and gas turbines, both of which have been in short supply for a few years. A big question is how much power ratepayers are contributing to data center buildout. I don’t want AI to increase my power bill, and I sure as hell don’t want crypto increasing my power bill.

     There are several legitimate reasons to oppose data centers, but I would add that each project is different in terms of the sensitivity of location and effects on local people and the local environment, and each project is powered differently, which affects its impacts.

     On the other hand, I am seeing some social media posts suggesting that AI is some kind of inherent corporate evil that must be stopped at all costs. That is not sensible at all. The misguided young people who planned to use drones and snipers in a terrorist attack to disrupt Trump’s UFC fight cited data centers as one of their grievances.

     Once seen as left-wing oriented, tech companies like Google, Amazon, Meta, and others are now seen as more right-wing corporations hellbent on making a profit at all costs.

     Anti-capitalists also have some fair arguments that AI companies are investing in technology much more than in employees, and as the technology advances, even fewer employees will be needed. Others say that AI will end up being a bubble that will be hard to make the kind of profit predicted.

     Some states are putting the brakes on, such as New York, banning new data center development. Other states, like Ohio, are drawing back incentives meant to lure in these companies for data center projects.

 

 

 

Greenpeace’s Blocking and Delay of Golden Rice Has Led to Over 100,000 Unnecessary Deaths and Hundreds of Thousands of Unnecessary Blindnesses Due to Vitamin A Deficiency, According to New Calculations

     Greenpeace, its supporters, and those it convinced that genetically engineered ingredients were dangerous, have managed to block the rollout of GMO golden rice for over two decades. According to new calculations, this has resulted in over 100,000 unnecessary deaths and millions of unnecessary blindnesses in developing countries. That is a very sad fact. This rice is not dangerous, but it can prevent these blindnesses and deaths by simply providing sufficient vitamin A. Golden Rice is fortified with beta-carotene, a precursor of vitamin A, which gives it a golden-yellow color. Other than that, it is no different from other rice. This is a clear case where the Precautionary Principle harms. It kills. The results are according to new calculations by DC Abundance founder and research director at the Golden Gate Institute for AI, Abi Olvera. She notes that the

 "delay has killed about 106,000 children and left another 210,000 to 425,000 blind."

     According to the World Health Organization, vitamin A deficiency blinds 250,000 to 500,000 people every year. The deficiency also weakens the immune system, so they are likely to be sickened and die from other causes. About one-third of children worldwide are vitamin A-deficient, and about half of children in Sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia are vitamin A-deficient.

     Golden Rice is licensed for free to any farmer earning $10,000 or less per year. It has been ready since 2000, but today it doesn’t grow anywhere. This is a crime. Why has it happened? Because the anti-GMO forces are strong and somehow convincing to those in power in the countries that need the rice.

     Olvera notes:

“That works out to roughly fourteen children dying every single day, for twenty years, from a nutrient we already know how to add to food.”

“If a new disease were killing fourteen children a day, it would have an internationally-recognized name and a task force. Golden Rice got vilified as one word instead: GMO.”

     She points out that we have been eating many different GMOs for decades with zero ill effects.

     Ronald Bailey, who has been advocating against Greenpeace’s blocking and delay of Golden Rice for decades, calls their opposition “scientifically ridiculous.”

"If ever there was a clear-cut cause for outrage, it is the concerted campaign by Greenpeace and other nongovernmental organizations, as well as by individuals, against Golden Rice."

“In 2016, I reported the open letter by 100 Nobel Prize laureates calling on "Greenpeace to cease and desist in its campaign against Golden Rice specifically, and crops and foods improved through biotechnology in general." The laureates suggested that Greenpeace was committing a "crime against humanity." And as recently as 2024, I warned that Greenpeace's crusade against Golden Rice will continue to blind and kill children when reporting that the anti-technology activist group had persuaded a Philippine court to block local farmers from planting the grain.”

     He is referring to the Philippines’ 2024 decision to block its 2021 approval of Golden Rice, which was immediately blocked by Greenpeace and the courts.

     Olvera notes that there is hope that future beneficial GM crops won’t be able to be easily blocked with inexpensive lawsuits like Golden Rice has been blocked for over 25 years.

“…the Global South is engineering crops of its own now, aimed at preventing harm, like pests and crop failure, rather than high margins or novelty. One is a cassava richer in iron and zinc. The more of these that become normal, the harder it gets to keep blocking the one that should have come first.”

     We can do better, and we should keep in mind that the Precautionary Principle can do and often does more harm than good, in this case, much more harm.

References:

 

Over 100,000 kids have died due to Greenpeace blocking genetically enhanced rice, new calculation shows. Ronald Bailey. Reason. June 17, 2026. Over 100,000 kids have died due to Greenpeace blocking genetically enhanced rice, new calculation shows

A blocked GMO rice could have saved 100,000 children. The same tech makes pineapples pink: A rice that could prevent childhood blindness and death has been ready for two decades. It still isn't growing anywhere. The same technology is safely used in the U.S. on luxury pineapples. Abi Olvera. Positive Sum. Substack. June 16, 2026. A blocked GMO rice could have saved 100,000 children. The same tech makes pineapples pink.

Chinese Scientists are Developing a Coal Fuel Cell Which Can Generate Electricity Without Combustion and Carbon Emissions: It Also Recycles Carbon On-Site

      Fuel cells produce energy without combustion. Instead, they make energy via chemical reactions. A research team led by Xie Heping of the Chinese Academy of Sciences at Shenzhen University has developed what they describe as a zero-carbon-emission direct coal fuel cell (ZC-DCFC). To release the electrochemical energy of the coal, it is pulverized into a fine powder, dried, purified, and treated before being fed into the anode chamber. Oxygen flows into the cathode, where the coal particles are directly oxidized through an oxide membrane, producing an electrochemical reaction that generates electricity.

     According to Interesting Engineering:

“At the outlet of the anode, the carbon dioxide produced by the reaction is captured directly on-site and then either catalytically transformed into useful chemical feedstocks such as synthesis gas or chemically stabilized into compounds like sodium bicarbonate. This closed-loop handling of carbon contributes to a process that is described as both silent and clean in operation.”

     This is much different than burning coal to produce heat to run steam turbines. Those processes are limited by the thermodynamics of heat engines, which limit thermal efficiency to 40%, which is known as the Carnot efficiency ceiling. Zie notes that:

“…the zero-carbon-emission direct coal fuel cell (ZC-DCFC) avoids the energy losses associated with combustion and heat-based engine systems, allowing for significantly higher theoretical efficiency.”

     This technology has been slowly advancing since 2018, as “challenges in materials science, cell durability, fuel processing, and the ability to maintain continuous coal feed” have been addressed.

“The latest version of the fuel cell, though, improves stack scalability, long-term stability, carbon conversion efficiency, and overall system integration, according to the research team.”

“Xie also noted that the concept could be applied to deep coal seams located about 1.2 miles underground. Instead of mining and transporting coal to the surface – a costly and complex process – the system could convert coal into electricity in situ, transmitting only power upward. In turn, this approach could help offset pressure on supply as shallow coal reserves gradually diminish.”

     Capturing and utilizing CO2 on-site is a key feature of the fuel cell. High-purity CO2 is captured at the anode and transformed into syngas and/or minerals. There are still many details to be worked out and improved with this technology, but it is a significant effort to extract energy from coal in a much more sustainable way.

References:

 

China is developing a technology that converts coal into electricity with nearly zero carbon emissions. Sarah Jones. Daily Galaxy. June 4, 2026.  China is developing a technology that converts coal into electricity with nearly zero carbon emissions

China’s electrochemical system converts coal into electricity with no direct carbon emission. Chinese researchers have developed a coal-based fuel cell that generates electricity through an electrochemical process rather than combustion. Bojan Stojkovski. Interesting Engineering. April 26, 2026. China's tech turns coal into electricity with no direct carbon emission

Air Pollution from Satellites Via Rocket Launches and Re-Entries is Dimming the Sun by Lingering in the Upper Atmosphere: It is an Ongoing Geoengineering Experiment, Says New Paper

  

     A new paper in Earth’s Future explores the geoengineering effects of rocket launches and re-entries related specifically to satellite mega-constellations (SMCs). The main effective source of air pollution and dimming is particulate matter, specifically black carbon, or soot, from the combustion of kerosene used as propellant. Since many of these particulates are emitted above the troposphere, they can act much like small-scale geoengineering experiments. In light of that, the paper provides some important data about this source of solar dimming. Black carbon lingers much longer above the troposphere than it does in the lower atmosphere, where it drops to the ground much more quickly, resulting in a potential of 540 times the effect on climate. This amplification is due to the soot staying in the upper atmosphere for years instead of days or weeks.

     The paper focuses on the emissions of SMCs, noting its share of space sector emissions:

“Using data from rocket launches and satellite deployments between 2020 and 2022, the team projected emissions out to the end of the decade. The analysis showed that in 2020 these megaconstellations contributed about 35% to the total climate impact from the space sector and will climb to 42% by 2029.”

     The researchers note that by 2029, the amount of this particulate matter accumulating in the upper atmosphere will have similar impacts to a geoengineering experiment.

     Project lead, Professor Eloise Marais (UCL Geography) said:

“The space industry pollution is like a small-scale, unregulated geoengineering experiment that could have many unintended and serious environmental consequences. Currently the impact on the atmosphere is small, so we still have the chance to act early before it becomes a more serious issue that is harder to reverse or repair. So far there has been limited effort to effectively regulate this type of pollution.”

“The cooling effect from the reduction in sunlight that we calculate with our models may sound like a welcome change against the backdrop of global warming, but we need to be extremely cautious.”

     The researchers also noted that this is likely to be an underestimate since the data used was from 2020-2022, when there were fewer SMCs in orbit. SMCs, such as those launched by Starlink, have significantly increased the number of launches and re-entries. Starlink currently has about 12,000 satellites in orbit. They note that early estimates of an additional 65,000 satellites in orbit by 2030 are likely to be underestimated.

     Lead author Dr. Connor Barker (UCL Geography) said:

“Rocket launches are a unique source of pollution, injecting harmful chemicals directly into the upper layers of the atmosphere and contaminating Earth's last remaining relatively pristine environment. Though this soot’s impact on climate is currently much smaller than other industrial sources, its potency means we need to act before it causes irreparable harm.”

     They also analyzed the potential of SMCs to increase ozone depletion and found that the effect on ozone would likely be small, since most comes from propellants that emit chlorine, and few SMCs emit chlorine. They generally burn kerosene instead. However, it is estimated that there are enough rockets that burn fuels that emit chlorine to result in a little less than 10% of global ozone-depleting emissions. The SMCs are designed to be temporary, to burn up on re-entry, and be replaced by additional launches.

     More information is given in the paper’s conclusions about the effects of SMCs and the methodologies of the study:

“Satellite megaconstellations (SMCs) have grown rapidly since the first operational satellites were launched in 2019, to now comprise almost three-quarters of satellites in low-Earth orbit and most propellant consumed. Further rapid expansion is expected in the coming decades, leading to significant increases in launch rates to maintain megaconstellation populations and in re-entry rates as these relatively short-lived satellites reach end-of-life. Here we use an emission inventory of the major air pollutants from rocket launches and object re-entries at the dawn of the megaconstellation era (2020–2022). We evaluate the NOx emission factor used in the emission inventory against high-altitude aircraft observations from the SABRE campaign and project emissions to 2029. We implement these emissions in the GEOS-Chem model coupled to the RRTMG radiative transfer model to quantify O3 loss and radiative forcing attributable to SMCs.”

     They analyze trends in propellant consumption and the emissions of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rockets to arrive at their predictions.

      While those critical of geoengineering often point to the possibility of unintended consequences, it is not certain that there are any as of yet or whether there will be. This study and subsequent quantification of upper atmosphere emissions should be important in determining if, and by how much, future geoengineering efforts will be successful in reducing global warming. 

 

References:

 

Research paper warns that there’s a massive experiment at work to geoengineer the Earth’s climate. Frank Landymor. Futurism. May 23, 2026. Research paper warns that there’s a massive experiment at work to geoengineer the Earth’s climate

Radiative Forcing and Ozone Depletion of a Decade of Satellite Megaconstellation Missions. Connor R. Barker, Eloise A. Marais, Eric Y. P. Tan, Sebastian D. Eastham, Glenn S. Diskin, Joshua P. DiGangi, Yonghoon Choi, Andrew W. Rollins, Eleanor Waxman, T. Paul Bui … Earth’s Future. Volume 14, Issue 5. First published: 14 May 2026. Radiative Forcing and Ozone Depletion of a Decade of Satellite Megaconstellation Missions - Barker - 2026 - Earth's Future - Wiley Online Library

Satellite launch pollution rapidly accumulating in the upper atmosphere. University College London. 14 May 2026. Satellite launch pollution rapidly accumulating in the upper atmosphere | UCL News - UCL – University College London

 

Solar Farms in India are Losing Efficiency Due to Extreme Heat and Air Pollution: However, After Removal of the SPP5-8.5 Climate Scenario, Lower Efficiency Loss is More Likely

       Extreme heat appears to be increasing in India, where farmers have noted that the heat is hotter, comes earlier, and stays longer. For PV solar panels, efficiency drops when it gets too hot, typically in the hottest parts of the day. Thus, panel temperatures are monitored. A study published in November 2024 in Environmental Research Letters by scientists at the Center for Atmospheric Sciences, IIT Delhi, explores how rising temperatures and air pollution may affect solar output in the coming decades.

     The study compared historical conditions between 1985 and 2014 with projections for 2041–2050. The study concluded that PV solar panel efficiency could decline by up to 3.3% by midcentury, which could result in annual electricity losses of between 600 and 840 gigawatt-hours (GWh).

     The study includes the effects of heat and particulate air pollution. Particulate pollution in the air dims the sun, which means less will be received by the panels. It appears that the study also includes “soiling” of the panels as well, when dust is deposited on the panels, which is common in arid environments. India often has high levels of particulate pollution. Autumn crop residue burning in India is a major source of seasonal particulate pollution, and it is not uncommon for it to be bad enough to close schools and some businesses.

     India has an ambitious goal of installing 500GW of renewable energy by 2030 from just over 100GW installed now.

     The article in WhoWhatWhy notes that there are some efforts to make solar panels less affected by heat:

“Manufacturers are developing advanced solar cells capable of operating more efficiently under high-temperature conditions. Researchers are also exploring cooling systems, improved panel materials, and new installation designs that enhance airflow and reduce heat buildup.”

     Panels may be cleaned to remove dust. Automated cleaning systems are utilized in the more arid regions of Gujarat and Rajasthan.

     The abstract of the paper is given below, along with some important figures. It can be remarked that the higher end of the predictions includes the SSP5-8.5 scenario that has recently been abandoned by the IPCC as implausible. That means the higher end of the predictions is implausible as well. That means efficiency losses are likely to remain within the 2-2.5% range and power generation losses closer to 600GWh.

  

 

 

References:

 

Feedback loop threatens to undermine solar power as a solution to global warming. Tauseef Ahmad. WhoWhatWhy. June 11, 2026. Feedback loop threatens to undermine solar power as a solution to global warming

Future photovoltaic potential in India: navigating the interplay between air pollution control and climate change mitigation. Sushovan Ghosh, Dilip Ganguly, Sagnik Dey and Subhojit Ghoshal Chowdhury. Published 8 November 2024. Environmental Research Letters, Volume 19, Number 12. Future photovoltaic potential in India: navigating the interplay between air pollution control and climate change mitigation - IOPscience

 

UN Global Multidimensional Poverty Index 2025: Overlapping Hardships: Poverty and Climate Hazard: Summary, Review, and Commentary

 This UN report begins with the following statement:

“The climate crisis is fundamentally changing global poverty. It has left more people than ever at risk of poverty and less likely to escape it.”

     This is concerning because many people, including many scientists, do not believe we are in a climate crisis. The report links poverty to climate risks, saying they reinforce one another. That may be true in a few cases, but I do not think it is true for the bulk of those in poverty. I would say that things like inadequate energy access and electricity access contribute more to poverty than climate change. The report talks about “climate-related disasters,” but these likely include any kind of disaster related to weather, which, as we know, have always been happening.

     It seems that this latest version of the report focuses on the relationship between climate hazards and poverty:

 “This 2025 Global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) report, for the first time, overlays data on climate hazards and multidimensional poverty to assess how exposed poor people are to climate shocks.”

     Part I notes four key climate hazards: high heat, drought, floods, and air pollution. Some of those things may also be considered weather hazards, unrelated to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Air pollution, at least particulate matter pollution, is quite hazardous to humans, but in terms of climate, the aerosol particles promote temporary climate cooling. Thus, I would argue that air pollution is an environmental hazard but not a climate hazard. Floods and droughts are affected by many other factors besides anthropogenic GHG emissions. The report presents climate hazards and poverty as a double burden where these two are inseparably related, without providing convincing evidence, as if merely replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy would reduce and eliminate poverty, which is an absurd idea. The report seeks to strengthen the links between the two, which seems to me an attempt to prove that the energy transition needs to happen faster.

     The first of the key findings of the report gives five statements, which I will look at one at a time.

    Four of the five things stand out here for me: the finding that twice as many children live in poverty as adults, the finding that two-thirds of people in poverty live in middle-income countries, the finding that 83.2% of people in poverty live in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, and the finding that 83.5% of people in poverty live in rural areas.

     Certainly, these people, families with many children living in middle-income countries in rural areas in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, are most exposed to the elements and to weather events, including those influenced by climate change.

     Second is the finding that lack of access to clean cooking fuels (such as propane), sanitation, adequate housing, and adequate nutrition. These are things that can be fixed by governments, aid organizations like the UN, other initiatives, and businesses that can offer opportunities.

     Third is the finding that progress in reducing poverty has been uneven, with some successes and some continuing failures.

     Fourth, they emphasize that those in poverty are more exposed to climate risks.

     The report does note that post-Pandemic trends indicate that there has been stagnation in addressing multidimensional poverty. Poverty reduction slowed down after the COVID pandemic.

     Part II explores how poverty and climate hazards overlap. This part of the report shows that tropical and subtropical regions are most affected by high-heat, droughts, flooding, and air pollution. This is true, but again, these hazards are not strictly climate hazards. They are also weather hazards, lack of adaptation hazards, inadequate pollution abatement hazards, inadequate flood control hazards, inadequate drought mitigation hazards, etc. They are also better termed environmental hazards than climate hazards, and the report does sometimes call them environmental hazards. People in poverty are more exposed to environmental hazards. This is true. They are also likely more exposed to climate hazards, but the ones given in the report are really either just environmental hazards or both environmental and climate hazards. We can’t just flip a switch that turns fossil fuels off to make these problems go away.

     Below, they show that middle-income countries can have high poverty rates.

     The report emphasizes countries facing multiple climate hazards as they define them and offers some practical solutions.

“Overlapping pressures make building resilience an urgent priority. This calls for strengthening local capacities to adapt, including through measures such as nature-based solutions, climate-smart livelihoods and adaptive social protection systems. Equally essential are improved early warning systems, powered by innovative technologies and local partnerships, that can identify at-risk populations and target responses quickly and effectively.”

     There was no mention of improved energy and electricity access.

     The graph below compares multidimensional poverty and monetary poverty and how the poorest are affected by both.

     The report shows “how key environmental stresses intersect with multidimensional poverty.” Again, I will point out that these environmental stresses may not have that much influence from anthropogenic GHG emissions from fossil fuels and so should not be lumped in as part of the so-called “climate crisis.” It is true that global warming influences weather patterns and may exacerbate droughts in some regions, flooding in others, and is likely a major factor for high-heat. For droughts and floods, it is a contributing factor among other contributing factors.

     The report also notes some study limitations:

“While these measures offer valuable insights, they have limitations. Thresholds may not capture local sensitivities, a limitation especially relevant to the metric for heat, which does not consider historical temperature conditions. Humidity, a critical factor in how heat is experienced, is also not captured due to data limitations. Remote sensing data, while essential for achieving global coverage, can overlook microclimatic variation or localized coping strategies. Flood data from EM-DAT may underrepresent smaller or unreported events, particularly in areas with weak reporting systems.” 

     My main problem with the report is the conflating of what should be termed environmental hazards or perhaps climate-related environmental hazards, as climate hazards. It is the same thing the media often does in dubbing extreme weather events and things like wildfires as climate change events, as if burning fossil fuels were their only cause, when in fact it is just one among several influencing factors. Other than that, the report does a good job of attempting to quantify the effects of these climate-related environmental hazards on people in poverty.

 

   

References:

 

Global Multidimensional Poverty Index 2025: Overlapping Hardships: Poverty and Climate Hazards.  United Nations Development Programme. October 2025. mpireport2025en.pdf

Brazil is Developing an Ethanol Power Plant Pilot Project Utilizing the Country’s Abundance of Sugarcane Ethanol and Available Ethanol Infrastructure: Meanwhile, Ethanol Trade/Tariff Imbalances Between the U.S. and Brazil Are Being Corrected by New U.S. Reciprocal Tariffs

      The implementation phase of the world’s first utility-scale engine designed to run almost entirely on ethanol is complete and ready for real-world testing in Brazil. The Suape II power plant in Pernambuco is being developed by the energy company Suape Energia and Finnish technology firm Wärtsilä. The demonstration plant will determine whether ethanol can serve as a viable fuel for dispatchable electricity generation. The project is taking advantage of Brazil’s abundance of sugarcane ethanol and associated infrastructure, which has been used for vehicle transport for decades. The project will determine whether ethanol is competitive with other dispatchable power sources such as natural gas. As a biofuel, ethanol also has a lower carbon footprint than natural gas, so that is a factor as well. The project was initially announced early in 2025 and is just now getting to the testing and validation phase.

     Interesting Engineering notes:

“According to Suape Energia and Wärtsilä, the project uses a modified Wärtsilä 32M engine capable of operating on ethanol derived primarily from Brazilian sugarcane. The demonstration will involve thousands of hours of testing over the coming years, providing data on performance, reliability, emissions, and economics.”

“Brazil is uniquely positioned to test the concept. The country is the world’s largest producer and user of sugarcane ethanol and has spent decades building infrastructure for ethanol production, storage, and transportation. However, most of that fuel has traditionally been consumed in the transportation sector.”

     Brazil is well-suited to using sugarcane ethanol to advance its energy transition goals. It is both the global leader in sugarcane ethanol production and consumption. The ethanol sector in Brazil is huge and currently valued at about $20 billion. Many “flex-fuel” cars in Brazil run on  a mandatory blend of at least 30 percent ethanol, and up to 100 percent ethanol. The policy has helped Brazil avoid some of the worst of the recent oil & gas supply shocks.

     On June 2, 2026, the U.S. Trade Representative proposed a 25% tariff on all Brazilian goods, including ethanol. It is unclear how long such a designation would last since the Trump administration’s tariffs have been limited by the courts. As detailed below by Ethanol Producer Magazine, ethanol-specific reciprocal tariffs by the U.S. on Brazilian ethanol have an important basis since Brazilian tariffs on U.S. ethanol had disrupted a once balanced trade of ethanol between the two countries.

“Brazil has discontinued its previously balanced tariff treatment and failed to reciprocate U.S. tariff treatment of ethanol,” the USTR wrote. “In 2010, Brazil took steps to facilitate bilateral trade in ethanol by suspending a 20% tariff on imports of ethanol. In a similar spirit of promoting bilateral ethanol trade, the United States allowed the “blender” tax credit for U.S. ethanol producers and the $0.54/gallon surcharge on ethanol imports to expire the following year. Bilateral trade in ethanol subsequently flourished, with U.S. exports of ethanol to Brazil steadily increasing until Brazil abruptly departed from this reciprocal treatment in 2017. At that time, Brazil instituted a duty-free tariff rate quota (TRQ) of 600 million liters, with imports above that amount subject to a 20% tariff. This came after a successful lobbying campaign by the Brazilian sugarcane and ethanol industries, which claimed that ethanol imports jeopardized domestic Brazilian ethanol production. Since then, Brazilian tariffs on ethanol have fluctuated, but have been set at 18% since February of 2023. Brazil has the ability to evaluate and change its ethanol tariff on a monthly basis, which further contributes to uncertainty in the market. Brazil has therefore abandoned bilateral cooperation to promote ethanol trade, choosing instead to establish non-reciprocal and unfair conditions for trade in this critical product.”

“These actions by Brazil have denied fair and equitable market opportunities for U.S. ethanol producers,” USTR continued. “Imports of U.S. ethanol into Brazil have generally declined since Brazil reinstated its tariff on ethanol. In 2025, U.S. exports to Brazil totaled $96 million, an 87% decrease from the peak export value of $761 million in of 2018. Additionally, in 2024, U.S. ethanol import market share in Brazil had fallen to 54%, from a high of nearly 100% in 2018. At the same time, Brazilian ethanol exporters have continued to benefit from relatively open U.S. market access. In 2024, U.S. imports of ethanol from Brazil amounted to approximately $203 million dollars, while U.S. exports of ethanol to Brazil that same year amounted to only $53 million.”

     They go on to compare ethanol trade balances between the U.S. and Canada to the ethanol trade imbalance between the U.S. and Brazil to further make the case that the Brazilian tariffs have been unfair to the U.S. Brazil has had open and unfettered access to U.S. ethanol markets while impeding the ability of the U.S. to sell ethanol to Brazil.

     The Renewable Fuels Association also showed support for USTR’s findings:

“We agree with USTR that Brazil’s ethanol trade policies are unreasonable and restrictive, and we support the Trump administration’s efforts to level the playing field,” said Geoff Cooper, president and CEO of the RFA. “The U.S. ethanol industry would prefer to return to days of free and open two-way trade with Brazil. But the Brazilians have instead chosen to enforce punitive tariffs and technical barriers that have resulted in lost market opportunities and financial harm to U.S. producers. Thus, the Trump administration has no choice but to respond in kind.”

     The U.S. may also offer more support for ethanol, with the House narrowly passing a bill to codify year-round sales of E15 ethanol fuel with a 15% ethanol blend, a win for the corn lobby and for agricultural states. The bill will now have to go through the Senate, where its future is uncertain.

     The International Energy Agency reported that in 2023, biofuels accounted for roughly 700 TWh of electricity, projected to rise to approximately 1,250 TWh by 2030.

  

 

References:

 

Brazil launches world-first engine built for ethanol-powered grid electricity. Kaif Shaikh. Interesting Engineering. June 2, 2026. Brazil launches world-first engine built for ethanol-powered grid electricity

Brazil launches world-first ethanol-powered grid engine. Haley Zaremba. Oil Price U.S. June 4, 2026. Brazil launches world-first ethanol-powered grid engine

USTR proposes to set 25% tariff on most goods from Brazil. Ethanol Producer Magazine. June 2, 2026. USTR proposes to set 25% tariff on most goods from Brazil | Ethanol Producer Magazine

Brazil launches world’s first ethanol power plant to turn sugarcane into electricity: Ethanol has been recognized as a central element of Brazil’s energy landscape. Kapil Kajal. Interesting Engineering. March 26, 2025. World’s 1st ethanol power plant launched, to turn sugarcane into energy