Regulation has been given an unfairly bad name. As a top physicist who became an Energy Secretary and took an interest in fridges found out, the right regulation can do the opposite of what economists expect: accelerate innovation and cut costs, as well as cutting emissions.

The first twenty years of international negotiation on climate change took an approach that was guaranteed to fail: attempting to solve an immensely complex issue through a single, legally binding agreement. The history of diplomacy in trade and security shows that success requires a different approach: breaking a problem up into manageable parts, and growing agreement gradually, strengthening it as parties’ interests increasingly converge.

Science can only tell us a part of what we need to know about the risks of climate change. We also need to make judgements about politics, technology, and international security. To tell truth to power, we need to bring these fields of knowledge together.

The Paris Agreement on climate change has been widely hailed as a diplomatic triumph, but it commits its signatories only to a process, not to anything of substance. It represents a gamble: that if enough governments say they will act, they will believe each other and have the confidence to move forward – and that businesses and investors will believe them too. Six years later, the gamble appears to be succeeding, but despite this, progress is nowhere near fast enough. Global emissions of greenhouse gases are still going up.

Science can only tell us a part of what we need to know about the risks of climate change. We also need to make judgements about politics, technology, and international security. To tell truth to power, we need to bring these fields of knowledge together.

Regulation has been given an unfairly bad name. As a top physicist who became an Energy Secretary and took an interest in fridges found out, the right regulation can do the opposite of what economists expect: accelerate innovation and cut costs, as well as cutting emissions.

The first twenty years of international negotiation on climate change took an approach that was guaranteed to fail: attempting to solve an immensely complex issue through a single, legally binding agreement. The history of diplomacy in trade and security shows that success requires a different approach: breaking a problem up into manageable parts, and growing agreement gradually, strengthening it as parties’ interests increasingly converge.

The Paris Agreement on climate change has been widely hailed as a diplomatic triumph, but it commits its signatories only to a process, not to anything of substance. It represents a gamble: that if enough governments say they will act, they will believe each other and have the confidence to move forward – and that businesses and investors will believe them too. Six years later, the gamble appears to be succeeding, but despite this, progress is nowhere near fast enough. Global emissions of greenhouse gases are still going up.

Food loss and waste (FLW) are important contributors to food insecurity, with a considerable environmental impact by inducing extra crop production and post-harvest greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. FLW and the associated climate impacts vary greatly among different adopted technology and value-chain configurations, and solutions should be found for specific situations. FLW can be approached from a chain perspective; in many cases, reducing FLW at a certain chain stage is best achieved by interventions elsewhere along the chain. The Agro-Chain Greenhouse Gas Emissions (ACE) calculator supports the identification of FLW and GHG emission hotspots along a chain, as well as estimating the net effects of interventions. FLW-reducing interventions mostly contribute to climate mitigations, as demonstrated for rice and various fruits and vegetables; however, some high-tech interventions may induce higher extra GHG emissions than can be mitigated by FLW reduction. In high-income countries, where most food is wasted by households, manufacturers, the hospitality and food industry, and retailers, mechanisms could be set in place to achieve the target of reducing food waste by 50 percent by 2030.

To meet climate targets, a shift to low-emission diets that also support health and sustainability is necessary. A high-impact target is to reduce red meat consumption by 50 percent by 2030 in high- and middle-income countries based on the 2019 EAT-Lancet diet. Actions to lessen animal-based meat consumption could cut dietary emissions by 3–8 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year (Table 9.1). Scaling up plant-based meat will require viable products, low costs, effective public policy to catalyse change, and strong markets. The priority actions are to facilitate consumer behavioural change for large segments of populations, promote policy targets and actions for reduced-meat diets in high- and middle-income countries, use public-private finance to improve alternative meat product nutrition and sustainability, and enhance affordable technology and business options.

Gas turbine engines for aircraft applications are complex machines requiring advanced technology drawing from the disciplines of fluid mechanics, heat transfer, combustion, materials science, mechanical design, and manufacturing engineering. In the very early days of gas turbines, the combustor module was frequently the most challenging. Although the capability of the industry to design combustors has greatly improved, challenges still remain in the design of the combustor, and further innovations are required to reduce carbon emissions. Many companies in the aviation industry committed to a pathway to carbon-neutral growth and aspire to carbon-free future in 2008. Additionally, airframers have aggressive goals to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 50% by 2050 compared to those in 2005. Achieving these goals require technology advancements in all aspects of the aviation industry including airframers, engine manufactures fuel providers, and all the associated supply chains. The focus of this chapter is the influence of one module of the aircraft engine – the combustor.

The purpose of a process heater is to heat some type of fluid, usually a liquid hydrocarbon. Process heaters, also called fired heaters, consist of the heater itself, the burners used to generate the heat, the process fluid being heated, and the controls for monitoring and adjusting the system. This chapter is not intended to be exhaustive as there are entire books written on the subject of fired heaters. Rather, it is intended to be representative with a particular focus on the fuel including a discussion of renewable fuels. Unlike many other industrial combustion systems, such as glass melters and steel reheat furnaces, the fuel composition in a process heater varies considerably. It is commonly a waste product from the production of, for example, gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel. The fuel variability is an important parameter that significantly impacts the equipment design, particularly the burners which need to operate safely on all fuels and efficiently with minimal emissions on the design fuels.  Some common applications for process heaters in those industries include distillation/ fractionation, thermal cracking, catalytic cracking, hydrotreating, hydrocracking, and catalytic reforming.

The purpose of a process heater is to heat some type of fluid, usually a liquid hydrocarbon. Process heaters, also called fired heaters, consist of the heater itself, the burners used to generate the heat, the process fluid being heated, and the controls for monitoring and adjusting the system. This chapter is not intended to be exhaustive as there are entire books written on the subject of fired heaters. Rather, it is intended to be representative with a particular focus on the fuel including a discussion of renewable fuels. Unlike many other industrial combustion systems, such as glass melters and steel reheat furnaces, the fuel composition in a process heater varies considerably. It is commonly a waste product from the production of, for example, gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel. The fuel variability is an important parameter that significantly impacts the equipment design, particularly the burners which need to operate safely on all fuels and efficiently with minimal emissions on the design fuels.  Some common applications for process heaters in those industries include distillation/ fractionation, thermal cracking, catalytic cracking, hydrotreating, hydrocracking, and catalytic reforming.

Gas turbine engines for aircraft applications are complex machines requiring advanced technology drawing from the disciplines of fluid mechanics, heat transfer, combustion, materials science, mechanical design, and manufacturing engineering. In the very early days of gas turbines, the combustor module was frequently the most challenging. Although the capability of the industry to design combustors has greatly improved, challenges still remain in the design of the combustor, and further innovations are required to reduce carbon emissions. Many companies in the aviation industry committed to a pathway to carbon-neutral growth and aspire to carbon-free future in 2008. Additionally, airframers have aggressive goals to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 50% by 2050 compared to those in 2005. Achieving these goals require technology advancements in all aspects of the aviation industry including airframers, engine manufactures fuel providers, and all the associated supply chains. The focus of this chapter is the influence of one module of the aircraft engine – the combustor.