A startup called Mattiq is using a combination of nanotechnology, AI, and electrolysis to produce novel materials that could eventually substitute for carbon-intensive materials in sectors from chemicals to plastics to fuels. In this episode, CEO Jeff Erhardt and I dig into the technological and business details.
Simply amazing concept, the thought of knocking whole points off the carbon budget.
Question: How can we avoid the mistakes of the past? Without slowing innovation to a halt, but before a process becomes so ubiquitous that the equipment and intermediate chemicals are a must have in every city --- How do we avoid creating the new DDT, microplastics, radioactive waste, pthalates, etc etc etc.
Also, seems hard to imagine that washing-machine scale could match industrial-scale economics, given the necessary level of materials-handling expertise.
Agreed. I'm generally pessimistic about novel molecules. Not a great track record.
Also: Wake me when they actually *HAVE* something! This seems like speculation.
On the topic of economies of scale, take the water splitting electrolyzer example. If you could synthesize a catalyst that performed similar to Iridium, maybe now you can put an electrolyzer anywhere, and it can run intermittently to match a solar/wind generation. The CapEx of the electrolyzer is a big hurdle. Now, just fix the storage and transportation issues of H₂ and problem solved! (LOL)
So glad the first two comments said some of what I came here to say...enjoyed this pod as nearly every Volts pod, but I wish you'd ask harder questions. At this stage in the game, we HAVE to take a precautionary attitude, too many Earth systems are already teetering. What if we'd taken a decade or three to really understand how to minimize the dangers of things like plastics or PFAS? The gee-whiz aspect of stuff like these novel chemicals needs to be tempered by caution. Even if they CAN be far more circular than petro-based plastics (say, 90%), if they become anything like as ubiquitous, then they're likely to have major negative impacts--that 10% could be devastating.
With the death of Chevron, embedding an understanding of the need for precaution is even more critical...so asking the hard questions couldn't matter more. Right now, we have the gee-whiz-kids & Silicon Valley bros, we have a severely weakened regulatory context, and we have an election that runs the risk of bringing in a catastrophic regime. We need to inject critical thinking and respect for natural complexity everywhere we possibly can!
I am a fellow working at the DOE on various decarbonization issues (thinking a lot about thermal energy storage) and I thought the concept of some molecules or molecular transformations being electro, thermo or bio-privileged was very interesting. I think this is the paper to which he was referring: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41929-024-01131-6
One of the authors, Edward Sargent, is an Advisor to Mattiq.
That was very interesting! I recently toured the world largest chemical plant of German BASF and they have an hydrogen electrolyzer pilot plant that is supposed to go into production by end of 2024. To be powered by offshore wind located in the North Sea in the future.
Have you heard of Terraform Industries? They are a startup synthezising hydrocarbons from atmospheric CO2 using solar power. I suggest you interview their founder Casey Handmer after checking his blog and the co homepage.
It’ll be interesting to see where this goes, especially with the current limitations of AI/ML in terms of hallucinations. The empirical testing speed sounds like a bottleneck, so combining this with more advanced chemistry modeling (quantum if/when it gets there) may accelerate the development process significantly. On a more macro scale I’m also curious how scaling from lab to commercial will work—probably the largest limiter for later-stage cleantech companies as they seek profitability and to cross the so-called “valley of death”.
Another fantastic podcast David! At the beginning, I started wondering, "When are they going to talk about ammonia?" I wasn't disappointed. The other thought was, "What about all that surplus electrical wind energy in remote places like west Texas & Iowa that's already been developed by BigOil&Gas and BigAg to make higher profits producing & processing oil & corn ethanol?" Isn't that why all those crypto miners who got kicked out of China immediately relocated to Texas? And now they're getting paid to curtail crypto mining when there's peak demand on the ERCOT grid. Heads they win, tails you lose.
Simply amazing concept, the thought of knocking whole points off the carbon budget.
Question: How can we avoid the mistakes of the past? Without slowing innovation to a halt, but before a process becomes so ubiquitous that the equipment and intermediate chemicals are a must have in every city --- How do we avoid creating the new DDT, microplastics, radioactive waste, pthalates, etc etc etc.
Also, seems hard to imagine that washing-machine scale could match industrial-scale economics, given the necessary level of materials-handling expertise.
Agreed. I'm generally pessimistic about novel molecules. Not a great track record.
Also: Wake me when they actually *HAVE* something! This seems like speculation.
On the topic of economies of scale, take the water splitting electrolyzer example. If you could synthesize a catalyst that performed similar to Iridium, maybe now you can put an electrolyzer anywhere, and it can run intermittently to match a solar/wind generation. The CapEx of the electrolyzer is a big hurdle. Now, just fix the storage and transportation issues of H₂ and problem solved! (LOL)
So glad the first two comments said some of what I came here to say...enjoyed this pod as nearly every Volts pod, but I wish you'd ask harder questions. At this stage in the game, we HAVE to take a precautionary attitude, too many Earth systems are already teetering. What if we'd taken a decade or three to really understand how to minimize the dangers of things like plastics or PFAS? The gee-whiz aspect of stuff like these novel chemicals needs to be tempered by caution. Even if they CAN be far more circular than petro-based plastics (say, 90%), if they become anything like as ubiquitous, then they're likely to have major negative impacts--that 10% could be devastating.
With the death of Chevron, embedding an understanding of the need for precaution is even more critical...so asking the hard questions couldn't matter more. Right now, we have the gee-whiz-kids & Silicon Valley bros, we have a severely weakened regulatory context, and we have an election that runs the risk of bringing in a catastrophic regime. We need to inject critical thinking and respect for natural complexity everywhere we possibly can!
I am a fellow working at the DOE on various decarbonization issues (thinking a lot about thermal energy storage) and I thought the concept of some molecules or molecular transformations being electro, thermo or bio-privileged was very interesting. I think this is the paper to which he was referring: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41929-024-01131-6
One of the authors, Edward Sargent, is an Advisor to Mattiq.
That was very interesting! I recently toured the world largest chemical plant of German BASF and they have an hydrogen electrolyzer pilot plant that is supposed to go into production by end of 2024. To be powered by offshore wind located in the North Sea in the future.
Have you heard of Terraform Industries? They are a startup synthezising hydrocarbons from atmospheric CO2 using solar power. I suggest you interview their founder Casey Handmer after checking his blog and the co homepage.
It’ll be interesting to see where this goes, especially with the current limitations of AI/ML in terms of hallucinations. The empirical testing speed sounds like a bottleneck, so combining this with more advanced chemistry modeling (quantum if/when it gets there) may accelerate the development process significantly. On a more macro scale I’m also curious how scaling from lab to commercial will work—probably the largest limiter for later-stage cleantech companies as they seek profitability and to cross the so-called “valley of death”.
Another fantastic podcast David! At the beginning, I started wondering, "When are they going to talk about ammonia?" I wasn't disappointed. The other thought was, "What about all that surplus electrical wind energy in remote places like west Texas & Iowa that's already been developed by BigOil&Gas and BigAg to make higher profits producing & processing oil & corn ethanol?" Isn't that why all those crypto miners who got kicked out of China immediately relocated to Texas? And now they're getting paid to curtail crypto mining when there's peak demand on the ERCOT grid. Heads they win, tails you lose.
Materials science is amazing. I wish it could move along at a faster pace, but it's incredible nonetheless.
You were superb on All In yesterday, by the way. Toddlers with live ammo!
Agreed