Could quantum computing could cut industrial emissions by billions of tonnes?

Started by SpikeDudley07, Today at 05:51 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Topic: Could quantum computing could cut industrial emissions by billions of tonnes?   Views(Read 58 times)
Active members in this topic:
SpikeDudley07(1)

SpikeDudley07

The Quantum Insider has a write up of a new Boston Consulting Group study looking at quantum computing's potential climate impact. The headline figure is big: BCG estimates quantum computing could eventually help cut emissions by between three and seven billion tonnes a year, around five billion at the midpoint. For comparison, that is a meaningful slice of global emissions. The catch is the timeline. BCG's numbers deserve a closer look before anyone gets carried away

BCG identified nine priority applications where quantum could help. These include better battery materials and energy storage, sorbents for direct air carbon capture, cleaner ammonia and fertiliser production, green hydrogen, and decarbonising heavy industries like steel, cement, chemicals, shipping and aviation. Most of them involve chemistry problems that classical computers find extremely hard to simulate accurately. That is where quantum is expected to shine

On the energy side, the report says a single large quantum computer could draw roughly a megawatt of power. But the world would only need somewhere between 230 and 1,400 machines by 2040, giving the industry a footprint of around 90 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent. That works out to a benefit ratio of roughly 60 to 1 once the savings arrive. The subtitle pretty much says it all, cutting emissions without an AI sized footprint. Compared with the AI build out, that is a modest footprint

The big caveat is time. BCG expects only 10 to 15 percent of the savings to be achievable by 2040, partly because industrial plants run for 20 to 40 years before major replacement. A brilliant new catalyst discovered in 2032 might not be widely used until the 2050s. And the whole thing depends on quantum delivering commercially useful results, plus materials that are economical outside the lab

Consultancy reports always come with big numbers, so I would treat the exact figures with some caution. Still, the reasoning about chemistry problems is sound. Do you think quantum will help with climate in a meaningful way? Or is this another case of very long term promises?

404: Signature not found