From emissions to resources #2/3

Jan Mertens

Everything we do now is becoming more and more chemical, electrochemical or biochemical. We use batteries. That's electrochemistry, solar panels are actually electrochemistry, too. Hydrogen is already almost pure chemistry. E-fuels are pure chemistry. We’re actually getting closer and closer to the chemical industry. And they actually turn more and more into energy companies. Because one problem is also: how can we run these chemical processes flexibly? How can we balance energy demand and production? We actually need to talk to each other much more. The line between the energy and chemical industry is actually blurring.

Karel Volckaert

The line between energy and application or between energy and chemicals are partially going to blur. We need to make those more compatible and that brings us right to the chemical sector. 

Jan Mertens

Well, I think we have to be realistic. We should have those processes as soon as possible - and we're working on it. And also, around metals, because that's something we haven't talked about yet. The ultimate goal is to reduce CO2 emissions. But we do need a lot more materials than we used to in the past. If there was one good thing about coal and gas plants, it's that you don't need a lot of raw materials over the full lifetime, even though those seem like super-sized plants. If you compare that to the material intensity of solar and wind, it's actually not much. 

For solar and wind and batteries and hydrogen, we need a lot more materials, some critical materials. I'm thinking silver for solar panels, cobalt, lithium, nickel for batteries, rare earth elements for wind. We do need to think "from emissions to resources." So, we’re solving the emissions problem, but we’re creating another challenge. In LCA (life Cycle Assessment) they call that the "pollution displacement." That's something we don't pay enough attention to today. It's not just about not having enough, but also about its environmental impact, because mining, refining, even recycling is not without environmental impact. So we need to accelerate on that as well, to make those processes cleaner. 

I dare to believe that if we start that today and then accelerate it, we can solve that, as well. I think the ultimate goal there is recycling. But when I talk to recyclers today, they say: "Well, to do that at a really large scale ... it won't be within the first 10-15 years." So, I do see a big challenge there, mostly in those first 10, 15 years, before we actually get that large-scale recycling going, because for the next 10-15 years, we're going to have to do basically everything with new materials. And that certainly means we’re going to have to pay attention to the environmental and social impact of their mining and refining. 

In terms of lifecycle assessment, we try to think not only about the process itself, but also what happens upstream and downstream. We have about 15 people doing LCA studies in Paris and we're now integrating new sociologists into the lab, because we're seeing that many of those issues are not just technical or economic or environmental, but they’re also increasingly sociological.

Karel Volckaert

You’re scientific director of the ENGIE Group, which of course operates globally. Do you see dynamics in other countries or on other continents where you can say, on the one hand: "That, we can actually learn something from" And on the other hand, maybe, you could see it as kind of threat to what we want to do here.

Jan Mertens

If you look at what's happening in America with the IRA, the Inflation Reduction Act, well, that's accelerating. Actually, that's often the case with Americans. They wait and they watch Europe. And then suddenly when they’ve understood it, they accelerate and overtake. And that's exactly what is happening with the Inflation Reduction Act. If you look at the huge amount of money that is being released for renewable technologies, for solar, for batteries, for wind, but also for mining, because they just understood that we're going to need a lot of those materials. And for recycling, too. That's actually massive. 

And so you see a lot of companies thinking, “Can't we build our recycling facilities, our battery mega-factory in the US”? Can't we do our mining there? And they actually take it one step further. The IRA also says, for example, if you open a new mine, in Canada, Australia, there is actually an opportunity to be partially funded by the IRA, if you make sure some of the material goes to the US. So they actually are moving at a pace that I think is unprecedented. And I think that's where we need to make sure EU doesn't fall too far behind. I know in the EU we have the Critical Raw Materials Act and the Net Zero Industrial Act. But if you start looking at the ambitions that are in there, compared to what's happening in the US, they’re still too small. 

Karel Volckaert

How do you see the developments in China?

Jan Mertens

I’m not a real China expert. But looking at the analyses of where our renewable technologies come from, the technologies that ENGIE has prioritized on its roadmap, we do worry a bit. Because many of those materials, even if they’re not mined there, are refined in China. The value chain is completely over there. So that's a legitimate concern, I think, for many European and American companies. How can we bring that value chain back here? That's not obvious either, because again, these are super-sized refineries, super-sized PV manufacturing plants that need a lot of green energy if we want to do it sustainably. Do we have enough renewable energy to roll out here in the short term, and secondly these plants are not without air and water emissions, either? Do we want that? Do we have enough room for it? And also in terms of the people. Everybody wants an electric car. But they certainly don't want a mine and preferably not even a windmill. I think that's the next step, we need to make people aware that we are going to have to have recycling facilities as well as mines here anyway. 

If we don't want to be completely dependent on one country for our energy - because we had a taste of that last year -  we need to make sure we don't repeat that, and that's why I think Europe does have a big role to play in that recycling process. Shouldn't we at least be able to keep those materials that are here actually, and not keep importing them?

A word by Jan Mertens

I had the great pleasure of talking in a podcast format which was rather new for me to Karel Volckaert, COO of Itinera which is a famous Belgian Think Tank. We talked about the energy transition and climate challenges in general. I really appreciated the open atmosphere in which the talk was held. The fact that no questions were discussed on beforehand and so no preparation was possible, lead to a spontaneous and informal talk which I hope you can sense in the English text below. In case you understand Dutch, the real podcast can be found here: 

The Future is the AND. Karel Volckaert spreekt met Jan Mertens, wetenschappelijk directeur Engie groep - Itinera Talks | Podcast on Spotify

Enjoy and do reach out in case you have comments!

Jan Mertens

Chief Science Officer ENGIE Research And Innovation
Professor at University of Ghent