Climate Break

Electrifying Freight Corridors
Freight corridors are designated pathways used for the transportation of commercial goods. Billions of tons of cargo are transported around the world via freight corridors each year and this number is continuing to climb with the increasing popularity of e-commerce and home delivery services. Currently, freight transportation makes up 8 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions and this number is expected to double by 2050. Switching from powering freight transportation with diesel to electricity can help cut down on these emissions.
More About Freight Trucks
Compared to other freight transportation methods, like ships and trains, trucks create the most emissions. They can emit more than 100 times more carbon dioxide than ships that carry the same amount of goods and travel the same distance. Due to this, trucks are the cause of 65 percent of freight emissions, despite carrying less than a fourth of the world’s cargo.
Other than carbon dioxide, diesel trucks also emit black carbon, which is the black plume of smoke that comes from a truck’s tailpipe. Black carbon is another kind of climate pollutant and is linked to the fast melting of ice-covered areas, like glaciers, as well as health problems in humans. These health issues disproportionately impact low income communities and communities of color due to their proximity to major highways, freight depots, and ports.
The Benefits of Electric Trucks
In 2019, approximately 91 percent of America’s transportation was dependent on oil and transportation was responsible for 70 percent of all U.S. petroleum consumption. Oil prices tend to be more susceptible to fluctuations than electricity, which has historically had lower and more stable prices. Electric trucks also have zero tailpipe emissions, like carbon dioxide and black carbon. This can play an important role in helping the environment and improving air quality, especially around major cities, highways, and ports.
Despite common misconception, electric trucks are now able to meet the demands of freight operations as stated by the North American Council for Freight Efficiency. A battery electric truck can drive 465 miles on a single charge and can cover 3,676 miles in 18 days while spending only 13 percent of its time charging. Many companies, like Volvo, Daimler, and Scania, are continuing to work on improving electric trucks for long-haul transportation and private investors, like Kabisa, have been installing more charging infrastructure for freight fleets. Since 2022, large operators like Amazon, UPS, and FedEx have begun successfully rolling out thousands of electric delivery vans and freight movement trucks and in 2025 sales of electric heavy freight trucks almost tripled.
This real-world performance data establishes that electric trucks are suitable for freight use. Electric trucks also have lower operational costs than diesel trucks, with heavy-duty electric vehicles reducing operating costs by 25 percent when compared to diesel and medium-duty electric vehicles reducing operating costs by 50 percent.
The Challenges
Despite the benefits, the adoption of electric trucks remains slow, with electric trucks only encompassing 1.1 percent of new heavy-duty trucks sold in Europe as of 2024. According to the Hewlett Foundation, high upfront costs for new electric vehicles and charging infrastructure are the biggest barriers to electrification. The initial investment in electric trucks can be two to three times that of traditional diesel trucks. This high cost is largely due to expensive batteries. Luckily, the prices of batteries are dropping and have decreased by approximately 87 percent from 2010 to 2019. The cost of batteries is projected to decline even further over the following years while their changing speeds are continuing to improve.
Various components other than batteries, like electric motors and system management devices for electric trucks, also pose cost challenges. However, their prices are also predicted to decrease as manufacturing efficiency of electric trucks continues to increase. On top of the high cost of new electric vehicles, the U.S. also has a 12 percent excise tax on the sale of new heavy-duty trucks. This can add an additional $21,000 to the cost of purchasing new trucks and trailers.
Electric charging infrastructure is a second major barrier to the adoption of electric trucks. Installing new charging stations takes a lot of time, money, and careful planning. The creation of electric charging infrastructure is currently much more complex than installing diesel fueling stations. Without sufficient charging infrastructure, demand for electric trucks remains low and with low demand, investment in charging infrastructure is slow to increase. Charging larger class vehicles can also require several hours, which is inconvenient and impractical.
The trucking industry and freight operations have long been designed with diesel trucks in mind. The diesel truck market is also a lot more mature than the electric truck market, which means there are more diesel truck options on the market to choose from than electric trucks. Electric trucks can also require more specialized equipment and technicians for maintenance and repairs than diesel trucks, although electric trucks tend to have lower maintenance requirements and experience fewer mechanical failures than their diesel counterparts.
Lukas Lukoschek’s Take
Lukoschek co-founded Kabisa to address some of these challenges facing the electrification of freight transportation. Kabisa is a company that operates in East Africa, in countries like Rwanda, Tanzania, Kenya, and Uganda, and specializes in the sale and lease of electric vehicles. Kabisa is also working on installing more public charging infrastructure and provides specialized maintenance services for electric trucks. With Kabisa, Lukoschek hopes to create a reliable public charging network in East Africa to push the region towards electrification and sustainability.
About Our Guest
Lukas Lukoschek is the co-founder and CFO of Kabisa and is passionate about tech solutions that help achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. He has an MBA from Harvard University and has worked as an Engineer and Entrepreneur in the Energy industry. Previously, Lukoschek founded a solar mini-grid company operating in Africa and Asia.
Resources
MIT Climate Portal, Freight Transportation
International Energy Agency, Electrifying Freight: Pathways to Accelerating the Transition
LOTS Group, Decarbonizing Transportation
Center for Sustainable Energy, The Electric Truck market is Gaining Speed
Rocky Mountain Institute, Electrifying Freight Transport
The Future List, Lukas Lukoschek, Founder of Kabisa
Transcript
Ethan :  I’m Ethan Elkind, and you’re listening to Climate Break – climate solutions in a hurry. Today’s proposal? Transitioning East Africa’s diesel freight trucks to battery electric models. We caught up with Lukas Lukoschek, co-founder and CFO of electric truck company Kabisa, at New York City Climate Week.
Lukas : In East Africa, you have two main freight corridors, the northern corridor and central corridor, where over 15,000 diesel trucks are currently operating, and we are working on electrifying all these trucks.
Ethan : Freight corridors like in East Africa move commercial goods, and globally make up about 8% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. But the high costs of imported fossil fuels in this region are now making electric trucks cheaper to operate than diesel alternatives.
Lukas :  The biggest challenge we have to overcome is just the perception of EVs. People are worried about battery degradation, people are worried about, uh, charging times, um, of course, range anxiety is still a big topic. Even though a lot of these, um, sort of fears are not founded in reality. And so, we are working, um, with early adopters to actually showcase that sort of the move to electric transport is a much easier step than they think.
Ethan : Long term, Lukoschek hopes to expand outside of East Africa.
Lukas : What really sort of made the East-African e-mobility market explode is, having a very clear, sort of policy that, uh, incentivizes EV adoption. So across East Africa, we have lower importation costs of electric vehicles as well as low electricity costs when charging electric.
Ethan : To learn more about Kabisa and electrifying Africa’s diesel trucks, visit climatebreak.org.

For a transcript of this episode, please visit https://climatebreak.org/electrifying-freight-with-lukas-lukoschek/

Background and Context
For roughly 15 years, Climate.gov was the federal government’s public face for climate science. Launched by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in 2010, the site translated NOAA’s climate research into expert blogs, data visualizations, and curriculum resources for educators.
But in 2025, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) cut hundreds of jobs across NOAA, including most of the ten-person Climate.gov team. With no one left to maintain it, the site stopped publishing new content. And by June 24, 2025, Climate.gov’s URL redirected to a stripped-down NOAA webpage.
Rebecca Lindsey, Climate.gov’s former program manager and editorial lead, was one of those laid off. Rather than let over a decade of public climate education disappear with the site, she and two former colleagues spent months rebuilding it. The result, launched in June 2026, is Climate.us– an independent nonprofit now led by Lindsey as project director. The new site carries over much of Climate.gov’s content, including data visualizations, teacher resources, and a collection of Q&As that debunk common climate misinformation. “We try to help people see that [climate change] matters to everybody,” says Lindsey.
The Solution
The idea that climate science should be accessible to everyday people, not just scientists and policymakers, traces back to the Global Change Research Act of 1990. The Act directed federal agencies to coordinate climate research and make it available for public use. Climate.gov, and now Climate.us, were built with the same mission in mind.
Lindsey argues that “learning about climate and being comfortable talking about it is an important action” for the public to take. She points to a pattern called the “spiral of silence”-- most Americans believe in human-caused climate change and want to act on it, but each assumes, wrongly, that this view is unpopular and therefore stays quiet. Breaking that silence is the first step in shifting the broader public conversation on climate. “No one has to become an expert,” Lindsey says, “but people need some basic facts.”
And operating as an independent nonprofit, rather than as part of a government agency, allows Climate.us to limit political interference. As Lindsey asserts, the new independent nonprofit model allows her and her colleagues to “tell stories and share information without anyone… telling us what we need to say to be consistent with someone else’s policy, view, or position.”
Challenges
Rebuilding the site hasn’t been easy. Climate.gov once had a staff of ten, and now Climate.us runs on three people full-time. Lindsey says rebuilding the website itself has proved a challenge, as none of the three are web developers. Instead, they’ve had to rely on the expertise of outside contractors. The original site also had teams dedicated to interacting with specific audiences, including the general public, educators, and local and tribal decision-makers. Now, those roles fall to the same three people, meaning less capacity to engage with each group.
Fortunately Climate.us crowdsourced enough funds– roughly $280,000– to get the project off the ground. But Lindsey says existing funding will likely run dry in early 2027. Still, she sees the project as worth fighting for: “I’m not going to let this investment that the government made for 15 years… go without a fight”
How to Get Involved
Climate.us relies on a volunteer network of subject-matter experts to review content before it's published. Lindsey encourages scientists interested in joining to reach out to info@climate.us. The public can also support the project by engaging with the site or donating through its ongoing crowdfunding campaign.
About Our Guest
Rebecca Lindsey is the project director of Climate.us. Based in West Virginia, she holds a biochemistry degree and a master’s degree in journalism.
Further Reading
Climate.us, About Us
NPR, Ex-NOAA employees re-create a valuable climate data site shut down by Trump
Grist, The plan to make climate science harder to erase
National Archives, Celebrating the 25th Anniversary of the U.S. Global Change Research Program

For a transcript of this episode, please visit https://climatebreak.org/preserving-public-access-to-climate-information-with-rebecca-lindsey/

Heat Pumps
Traditional heating and cooling systems are the largest sources of emissions in a home. Heat pumps have lower carbon emissions than any other home heating system and can even be carbon neutral when run by renewable energy sources, like solar panels. They are also safer, more efficient, and cheaper in the long run. What keeps many homeowners from installing them, despite the benefits, is the high upfront costs. Heat pump group-buy programs can help with that.
How It Works – Heat Pumps and Group-Buys
Heat pumps work in a similar way to refrigerators and air conditioners. They extract heat from the air, ground, water, or from waste heat generated by factories or data centers and amplify it. Then, this heat is moved into the home with the help of a liquid called a refrigerant. The refrigerant changes from liquid to gas and back again, transferring heat throughout the process. When the refrigerant changes from liquid to gas, it absorbs heat, and when changed back to liquid it releases the heat. Then, the heat is delivered throughout the home through forced air or via a hydronic system (using water, steam, or glycol solution as a medium for heat transfer).
This way of transferring heat allows heat pumps to be more efficient than other heating technologies, like boilers or electric heaters. The energy output of a heat pump is typically 4 times greater than the electrical energy used to run it. This can be up to 5 times more energy efficient than gas boilers.
Installing a heat pump has a high upfront cost but group-buy programs can help make it more budget-friendly. To participate, homeowners fill out an interest form through a coordinator like Heat Pumped. Interested households are then grouped together by region and offered a deal that can save each household $3000 to $6000 dollars. This deal works similar to Costco, where installers can negotiate discounts from manufacturers on equipment due to buying and installing in bulk.
The Advantages and Disadvantages
Since heat pumps are more energy efficient than conventional heating systems, heat pumps can reduce homeowner’s energy bills and stay unaffected by price increases from extreme weather or high energy demand. On average, homeowners in the US can save $370 per year by switching to a heat pump, or up to $1000 per year when switching from an especially inefficient heat system, like those run on oil or propane.
Heat pumps don’t only heat, they can also cool, and they can replace not only heaters but also traditional air conditioners. They also have more temperature control and allow each room in the home to be heated or cooled individually. Heat pumps don’t require the combustion of fossil fuels or carbon monoxide emissions, like other heating sources, making them safer. Furthermore, despite the common myth, heat pumps are effective even at very cold temperatures, working well at temperatures as low as -20° Fahrenheit.
Installing heat pumps is a difficult project and requires more planning and preparation than traditional boiler installations. Detailed calculations and a thorough analysis of the property need to be conducted to understand the property’s insulation abilities, as well as its heating and cooling requirements. Space can also be a challenge. Smaller properties or apartments might not be able to fit heat pump systems. Additionally, ground and water-source heat pumps require large outdoor areas or nearby water sources like ponds, rivers, or lakes. There are also a variety of refrigerants that can be used and some of them can be harmful to the environment. Luckily, biodegradable fluid options are available.
Although group-buy programs are an excellent way to save money, they sometimes require a household to have to wait until a group is formed and a discount can be applied before installing the heat pump. So, group-buy programs are not ideal for homeowners who need their heating systems upgraded quickly.
Shreyas Sudhakar’s Take
Shreyas Sudhakar believes that heat pumps have the potential to greatly decrease our carbon foot-prints. Sudhakar also believes that group-buy programs are important for encouraging households to make the environmentally-friendly switch to heat pumps. Those unsure about the cost of heat pump installation can be persuaded by the thousands of dollars they save through a group-buy program. Group-buy participants can also spread the word about their new heating system, encouraging more households to join in on the savings and install lower emission heating systems.
About Our Guest
Shreyas Sudhakar, a former rocket propulsion engineer, is the founder and CEO of Vayu, a heat pump installation company in the Bay Area. With his company, he hopes to improve the heat pump installation process for homeowners through transparency with customers, honest recommendations, and expert installers that take the time to understand the needs of each individual home.
Resources
International Energy Agency, How Heat Pumps Work
Harmon Mechanical, A Guide to Heat Pump Refrigerants
Rewiring America, The Pros and Cons of Heat Pumps
NYS Clean Heat, The Benefits of Switching to Heat Pumps
Geowarmth, Heat Pumps’ Disadvantages: the Real & The Myths
For a transcript of this episode, please visit https://climatebreak.org/buying-heat-pumps-with-neighbors-with-shreyas-sudhakar/

Perovskite Solar Cells
Conventional solar panels are usually heavy and expensive to install. Perovskites are a class of materials that have the potential to create lighter weight and cheaper solar cells that still convert the sun to electricity at a high efficiency. Perovskite solar cells could potentially make solar energy more affordable, accessible, and environmentally friendly.
What Are Perovskite Solar Cells?
Perovskites are a group of materials in which hydrogens and carbons bind to a metal, such as lead, and a halogen, such as chlorine, and form a three dimensional crystal lattice. Thousands of different chemical compositions are possible, which allows perovskite solar cells to absorb many different colors of the solar spectrum, depending on which composition is used. This ability makes it possible for the perovskite solar cells to be used in tandem with or on top of other kinds of solar cells, such as traditional silicon solar cells, because each type of cell absorbs different parts of the solar spectrum. Together with the silicon cells, the total power conversion efficiency, or the efficiency of converting solar energy into electricity, increases to over 33 percent.
To make a perovskite solar cell, a thin layer of perovskite ink solution is deposited onto a base and then heated to set it into a film. The thin perovskite layer absorbs light, exciting a type of charged particle called electrons. These electrons are then extracted to generate electricity. Additional layers of material help direct the flow of electrons and laser scribed channels separate the film into individual cells. Separating the film into individual cells helps lower the current and raise the voltage, making a higher voltage solar device.
The Benefits
When compared to traditional silicon solar panels, perovskites solar cells are cheaper and create fewer emissions. Silicon is rarely found in its pure form, which is the form it is needed in for conventional solar panels. Silicon is mostly found in beach sand as silicon dioxide. To get rid of the excess oxygen, the silicon dioxide is heated in a furnace to a very high temperature of about 1500 to 2000 degrees celsius. The energy required to run these furnaces not only increases the production cost of the silicon solar panels, but also creates additional greenhouse gas emissions. By comparison, perovskite solutions are made and set at lower temperatures, therefore resulting in fewer emissions and potentially costing less to produce.
Conventional solar panels are rigid, flat, and heavy, so they are mostly installed on top of roofs or as solar farms. Perovskite solution can be deposited on bases of many different shapes, and it weighs very little. This gives perovskite solar cells more flexibility in the ways they can be used. Perovskite also appears to be more resilient to imperfections in its crystal lattice structure than other materials typically used in solar panels, which improves its performance. These features of the perovskite solar cells, as well as their high power conversion efficiency, that matches that of traditional solar panels at over 26 percent, gives perovskites solar cells the potential to improve accessibility of solar panels.
The Challenges
According to the Integrated Energy Systems Office of the US Department of Energy, there are four primary challenges to the commercialization of perovskite technology: durability, power conversion efficiency at scale, manufacturing, and technology validation and bankability.
The durability of perovskite cells is limited when compared to other solar cells. Perovskites can decompose when exposed to stressors like moisture, oxygen, light for extended periods of time, heat, and applied voltage. Early perovskite devices degraded within a matter of minutes or hours, but now they can last for several months. Still, devices that cannot operate for more than 20 years, or ideally 30, are not likely to be commercially successful.
Perovskites have shown high power conversion efficiency as small devices, but maintaining these high efficiencies in larger devices still needs to be achieved. Methods used in labs for producing perovskite devices are not easily scalable, making uniform and high-performing perovskite material difficult to produce in a large-scale manufacturing facility. This can lead to significant differences between the efficiency of small devices and larger devices.
The US Department of Energy has created several funding programs for perovskite cells, but getting investment from other financial institutions is still a challenge. The testing protocols for perovskite devices are not standardized and there is a lack of field data on their long-term operational behavior. To increase investment in their production, confidence in the technology needs to be increased through standardized testing protocols that can accurately demonstrate how perovskite technologies fare in real-world circumstances.
Marina Leite’s Take
Marina Leite believes that perovskite solar cells have great potential. Perovskite solar cells could reduce the cost of solar panels by at least 30 percent while being better for the environment to produce. Perovskite solar cells can also be placed on top of existing solar panels, increasing overall efficiency.
Leite’s lab is working on discovering the best perovskite materials to use in the solar cells by utilizing machine learning models that help predict the efficiency and durability of each material. The materials are tested under different conditions of light, temperature, oxygen, and humidity to see how they degrade, then machine learning models help extrapolate those results to other environmental conditions and predict the behavior of the material under such conditions days and weeks into the future.
About Our Guest
Marina Leite began her work with solar cells as a post-doctoral scholar at the California Institute of Technology between 2008 and 2011. Currently, Leite is an associate professor at the University of California, Davis, in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering, conducting scientific research that helps our society mitigate climate change. Leite is also a UC Davis Chancellor’s Fellow.
Resources
US Department of Energy, Perovskite Solar Cells
National Laboratory of the Rockies, Photovoltaic Research
Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, Laser Scribing of Solar Cells
US Department of Energy, Perovskite Research Challenges
World Economic Forum, Solar power has big limitations, but Perovskites could change that
UC Davis Material Science and Engineering, Faculty Spotlight: Marine Leite
Leite Lab, Materials for Energy Harvesting
For a transcript of this episode, visit https://climatebreak.org/developing-perovskite-solar-cells-with-dr-marina-leite/

Cellular Agriculture
Livestock farming is a major driver of global greenhouse gas emissions, deforestation, and water consumption, yet global demand for meat continues to rise. Cellular agriculture offers an alternative by cultivating meat from animal cells in a bioreactor. This could significantly reduce the climate and environmental impacts of meat production while delivering the same quality of meat consumers love.

Cells to Meat - How and Why
Current food production systems, particularly for meat, can be among the most harmful human activities for the environment. They often require vast amounts of fresh water and land, are a major source of water pollution, and contribute to about one third of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. Yet, the demand for meat continues to rise, with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations projecting the demand to reach 445 M metric tons by 2050, which is a 76 percent increase from 2005. Cultured, or cell-based, meat has the potential to remedy these issues. Meat cultured in a bioreactor can avoid harming animal welfare, producing methane, or spreading food-borne diseases, and promotes a more humane, sustainable, and safe way to consume meat without substantial change to consumption habits.
Cultured meat is created by taking cells from an animal and growing them in bioreactors. Through controlling temperature, exposure to nutrients, and other aspects, the cells can be tricked into believing that they are still inside of an animal. Under these carefully monitored conditions, the cells divide and proliferate, or grow exponentially, and mature into muscle and fat tissue through a process called differentiation.

The Potential and the Challenges
Advocates for cultured beef project that it will use less land and water, and produce less greenhouse gas emission compared to farmed beef. Cultured meat additionally has the potential to benefit public health by reducing the spread of food-borne illness, infectious disease, and antimicrobial resistance. Farmed meat can carry countless pathogens, including zoonotic diseases, or diseases that can be passed from animal to human, such as influenza A. During the pandemic, meat-packing plants experienced multitudes of COVID-19 outbreaks. Cell-based meat production is conducted under more sterile conditions, so it has a lower chance of spreading such pathogens.
Despite the promising potential of cultured meat, it faces many challenges when it comes to commercialization. The primary concern of lab-grown meat is the cost. Media, or the food the cells use, is extremely expensive, and bioreactors, which were originally designed to cultivate small quantities of cells at a time, still need to be scaled. Cells are also finicky, so when conditions are unfavorable, they stop growing. With large vessels it is difficult to ensure that the conditions are always optimal for growth. Due to these high production costs, some estimates of the potential cost of cultured meat are approximately $37 per kilogram, which is 10 times more expensive than the cost of regular meat.
In addition, many studies have shown that attitudes towards lab-grown meat are mixed, with some customers having concerns about the ‘unnaturalness’ and about the safety of the product. One study showed that although 65 percent of respondents were willing to try cell-based meat, only approximately 33 percent were willing to eat it regularly or as a replacement for farmed meat. To gain consumer acceptance, the lab-grown alternative must be at a minimum equivalent, if not superior in quality to that of regular meat, which can be especially challenging for meats that require structure, like steak.

Natalie Rubio’s Perspective
Natalie Rubio believes that despite the challenges cell-based meats face, there is tremendous potential and that areas in which current technology is lacking are simply opportunities for new technologies to develop.
Rubio co-founded Deco Labs to take on some of the challenges posed to cultured meat and develop solutions to them. Currently, Deco Labs are experimenting with genetic engineering to make the cells more productive and with creating cheaper media to feed the cells and lower the cost of production. Natalie Rubio believes that despite the current cost of cultured meat, cheaper inputs can lead cell-based meats to becoming cheaper than conventional meat.

About our Guest
Natalie Rubio was one of the first interns at New Harvest and later became a New Harvest Research Fellow. As a fellow, Rubio completed her Ph.D. at Kaplan Lab at Tufts University, being among the first in the world to complete a Ph.D. in cellular agriculture. Currently, Natalie Rubio is a co-founder and CEO of Deco Labs.

Resources
TEDx Talks, Natalie Rubio on the Journey of Cellular Agriculture
Fraser et al, The Foundations of Cellular Agriculture
Rubio et al, Plant-based and cell-based approaches to meat production
Economics Research Service USDA, The Economics of Cellular Agriculture
New Harvest, Natalie Rubio among world’s first cellular agriculture Ph.D
A transcript of this episode can be found at https://climatebreak.org/growing-meat-from-cells-with-dr-natalie-rubio/