Academician Liu Ke on Science and Technology Innovation: Six Major Misunderstandings about Carbon Neutrality, Electric Vehicles Increase Carbon Emissions Instead of Reducing Them

With the official launch of the national carbon emissions trading market on July 16, the topics of "carbon peaking" and "carbon neutrality" reached a peak in public attention.

However, there are many misconceptions and blind spots about these two concepts in the market. In response, Liu Ke, a globally renowned energy expert and foreign academician of the Australian Academy of Engineering, shared his views at the "Academician Lecture Hall" event held by the Shenzhen Institute of Innovation and Development. The event took place just one day before the launch of the national carbon market.

Liu Ke currently serves as the Dean of the School of Innovation and Entrepreneurship at Southern University of Science and Technology. He was formerly the Chief Scientist at General Electric's Global Research Center and a board member of the Caltech Energy Center. After returning to China in 2009, he was a key participant in establishing the Beijing Low Carbon Clean Energy Research Institute under the National Energy Group.

Six Major Misunderstandings About Carbon Neutrality

China emits about 10.3 billion tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually, with a per capita emission of 7.4 tons. A family of three emits about 22 tons on average each year. Although developing and utilizing wind and solar energy, improving energy efficiency, and converting CO2 into chemicals all contribute to carbon reduction to some extent, their impact is quite limited compared to the massive CO2 emissions. Liu Ke pointed out that the current market understanding of carbon neutrality is limited and there are several typical misunderstandings.

The first misunderstanding is the belief that wind and solar energy have become cheaper than coal power, so solar and wind can completely replace coal power to achieve carbon neutrality. The fact is that there are 8,760 hours in a year, and the average solar power generation hours across the country are about 1,700 hours. This means solar power is cheaper than coal power for about 1/5 to 1/6 of the time, but for the remaining 5/6 of the time, if energy storage is needed, the cost is much higher than coal power. Wind energy is not much better, with an average generation time of about 2,000 hours. Although China’s wind and solar capacity is growing rapidly, their total generation is still small compared to coal power. Moreover, relying on batteries to solve the instability of solar and wind power is "very dangerous," as it is estimated that the world’s five-year battery production capacity can only meet Tokyo’s blackout needs for three days. Solar and wind energy need to be vigorously developed, but with the current high storage costs, they cannot replace fossil fuel power generation in the foreseeable future.

The second misunderstanding stems from the first: people mistakenly believe there will be a "magical" large-scale energy storage technology. In reality, the energy industry does not have Moore’s Law like the computer industry. Humans have been developing batteries for over 100 years, but the energy density has not seen revolutionary improvements. Currently, the cheapest large-scale energy storage is still the pumped hydro storage technology invented over 100 years ago.

The third misunderstanding is that making chemicals from carbon dioxide can achieve carbon neutrality. However, on a scale basis, converting CO2 into chemicals does not have carbon reduction value. About 87% of the world’s oil is burned, and about 13% is used to produce all petrochemical products. Converting the tens of tons of carbon emitted by an average household into chemicals is not only unnecessary but would also cause more carbon emissions, so this method contributes very little to carbon reduction.

The fourth misunderstanding is the belief that CCUS (Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage) can achieve carbon neutrality. Capturing and purifying CO2 emissions from production processes and then recycling or storing them theoretically allows large-scale CO2 capture. However, "carbon neutrality is not just a technical issue but a comprehensive issue balancing economics and social development," emphasized Academician Liu Ke. Under current technology, costs are very high, complete carbon fixation is not achievable, and CO2 capture in nature is very difficult. So far, the CO2 emission reductions achieved by CCUS are very limited.

The fifth misunderstanding is that improving energy efficiency can achieve carbon neutrality. Increasing energy efficiency can significantly reduce carbon emissions in industrial processes and product use. China’s energy efficiency has indeed improved significantly over the past 20 years, but during the same period, total carbon emissions did not decrease but increased substantially. Therefore, improving energy efficiency is an important means of carbon reduction, but as long as fossil fuels are used, its contribution to carbon neutrality will be very limited.

The sixth misunderstanding is the hope that electric vehicles can replace fuel vehicles to reduce carbon emissions. Liu Ke stated, "If the energy structure does not change and 67% of electricity still comes from coal, then electric vehicles are increasing carbon emissions rather than reducing them. Only when most of the power grid is supplied by renewable energy can electric vehicles be considered clean energy vehicles."

Carbon Neutrality Solutions for the Automotive Industry

Speaking of electric vehicles, Liu Ke believes that using methanol to produce hydrogen technology may be a viable path to truly clean electric vehicles.

Electric vehicles appeared 100 years ago. Why have they not defeated fuel vehicles in the past century? According to Liu Ke, on one hand, it is an issue of energy density and infrastructure. Liquid fuels have much higher energy density than lead-acid batteries and are easy to transport. Humans have built liquid fuel refueling facilities worldwide. On the other hand, it is a matter of mass production cost and pollution. Materials needed for lead-acid batteries are expensive, and heavy metals (nickel, cobalt, lead, cadmium, etc.) can cause environmental pollution. Battery recycling remains a challenge. These two points are why Liu Ke is not optimistic about mainstream electric vehicles today. "The capital market is very hot now, but whether it can make money, (electric vehicle companies) know best themselves," Liu Ke said.

Liu Ke believes hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are a direction worth researching. "They have high power generation efficiency, can reduce dependence on oil, emit only water vapor, and costs can come down after large-scale production." However, hydrogen also faces high storage and transportation costs, safety risks, and large infrastructure investment.

In this regard, Liu Ke recommends the methanol-to-hydrogen technology route because methanol is an excellent liquid hydrogen storage and transport carrier. He said China produces coal and has mature coal-to-methanol technology. Using methanol to produce hydrogen can effectively reduce carbon emissions. Methanol can also be produced from natural gas. The shale gas revolution has revealed over 100 years’ worth of natural gas reserves worldwide. "With over 100 years of natural gas, there is over 100 years of methanol," Liu Ke said. In the future, we can also produce methanol using solar energy, making the methanol completely green.

Using methanol and other liquid fuels to supply hydrogen energy can solve the pain points of electric vehicle charging and fuel cell hydrogen station construction. Currently, methanol refueling stations have been successfully demonstrated in multiple provinces and cities nationwide. Existing gas stations can also be simply modified to add methanol refueling functions. The storage and transportation technology of alcohol-water solutions is also relatively mature. At the same time, underground parking lots can build their own methanol hydrogen power generation systems, which can supply power to charging piles in real time without expanding the power grid.

Future Carbon Neutrality Pathways

Regarding how to achieve carbon neutrality in the future, Liu Ke proposed several practical pathways:

First, build a low-carbon energy system by combining existing coal chemical industry with renewable energy. On one hand, achieve zero carbon emissions in the existing coal chemical industry; on the other hand, prepare green hydrogen and oxygen by electrolyzing water using solar, wind, and nuclear energy, greatly reducing CO2 emissions from coal-to-methanol production.

Second, promote carbon-neutral technology in the coal sector — micro-mineral separation technology. Before coal combustion, separate combustible materials and minerals containing pollutants to prepare low-cost liquid fuel-like substances and soil conditioners, addressing coal pollution, fertilizer overuse, and soil ecological issues at the source, while producing high value-added chemicals such as methanol and hydrogen at low cost.

Third, achieve integrated development of photovoltaics and agriculture by combining photovoltaics with agriculture, animal husbandry, water resource utilization, and desert control, realizing the integration of photovoltaics with desert management and joint carbon reduction in photovoltaics and agriculture.

Fourth, comprehensive utilization of peak-valley electricity and thermal energy storage. Use distributed thermal storage modules to store coal power as heat during off-peak electricity periods, then use it for heating or air conditioning when needed, significantly reducing CO2 emissions and achieving true coal-to-electricity conversion. Coupled with rooftop photovoltaic strategies and county-level economies, further reduce electricity consumption.

Fifth, use renewable energy to produce methanol, then generate distributed power. Methanol hydrogen energy distributed power can replace all scenarios using diesel engines, complementing unstable renewable energies such as photovoltaics and wind power.