A team led by Matteo Pasquali, director of Rice’s Carbon Hub, has unveiled how carbon nanotube fibers can be a sustainable alternative to materials like steel, copper and aluminum. Photo by Jeff Fitlow/ Courtesy Rice University

Researchers at Rice University have published a study in the journal Carbon that demonstrates how carbon nanotube (CNT) fibers can be fully recycled without any loss in their structure or properties.

The discovery shows that CNT fibers could be used as a sustainable alternative to traditional materials like metals, polymers and the larger, harder-to-recycle carbon fibers, which the team hopes can pave the way for more sustainable and efficient recycling efforts.

“Recycling has long been a challenge in the materials industry — metals recycling is often inefficient and energy intensive, polymers tend to lose their properties after reprocessing and carbon fibers cannot be recycled at all, only downcycled by chopping them up into short pieces,” corresponding author Matteo Pasquali, director of Rice’s Carbon Hub and the A.J. Hartsook Professor of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Materials Science and NanoEngineering and Chemistry, explained in a news release. “As CNT fibers are being scaled up, we asked whether and how these new materials could be recycled in the future .... We expected that recycling would be difficult and would lead to significant loss of properties. Surprisingly, we found that carbon nanotube fibers far exceed the recyclability potential of existing engineered materials, offering a solution to a major environmental issue.”

Rice researchers used a solution-spun CNT fiber that was created by dissolving fiber-grade commercial CNTs in chlorosulfonic acid, according to Rice. Mixing the two fibers led to complete redissolution and no sign of separation of the two source materials into different liquid phases. This redissolved material was spun into a mixed-source recycled fiber that retained the same structure and alignment, which was unprecedented.

Pasquali explained in a video release that the new material has properties that overlap with and could be a replacement for carbon fibers, kevlar, steel, copper and aluminum.

“This preservation of quality means CNT fibers can be used and reused in demanding applications without compromising performance, thus extending their lifecycle and reducing the need for new raw materials,” co-first author Ivan R. Siqueira, a recent doctoral graduate in Rice’s Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, said in a news release.

Other co-authors of the paper are Rice graduate alumni Oliver Dewey, now of DexMat; Steven Williams; Cedric Ginestra, now of LyondellBasell; Yingru Song, now a postdoctoral fellow at Purdue University; Rice undergraduate alumnus Juan De La Garza, now of Axiom Space; and Geoff Wehmeyer, assistant professor of mechanical engineering.

The research is part of the broader program of the Rice-led Carbon Hub, an initiative to develop a zero-emissions future. The work was also supported by the Department of Energy’s Advanced Research Project Agency, the Air Force Office of Scientific Research and a number of other organizations.

Pasquali recently led another team of Rice researchers to land a $4.1 million grant to optimize CNT synthesis. The funds came from Rice’s Carbon Hub and The Kavli Foundation. Read more here.

.

.

.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Solar surpasses coal to become ERCOT’s third-largest power source in 2025

by the numbers

Solar barely eclipsed coal to become the third biggest source of energy generated for the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) in 2025, according to new data.

In 2024, solar represented 10 percent of energy supplied to the ERCOT electric grid. Last year, that number climbed to 14 percent. During the same period, coal’s share remained at 13 percent.

From the largest to smallest share, here’s the breakdown of other ERCOT energy sources in 2025 compared with 2024:

  • Combined-cycle gas: 33 percent, down from 35 percent in 2024
  • Wind: 23 percent, down from 24 percent in 2024
  • Natural gas: 8 percent, down from 9 percent in 2024
  • Nuclear: 8 percent, unchanged from 2024
  • Other sources: 1 percent, unchanged from 2024

Combined, solar and wind accounted for 37 percent of ERCOT energy sources.

Looking ahead, solar promises to reign as the star of the ERCOT show:

  • An ERCOT report released in December 2024 said solar is on track to continue outpacing other energy sources in terms of growth of installed generating capacity, followed by battery energy storage.
  • In December, ERCOT reported that more than 11,100 megawatts of new generating capacity had been added to its grid since the previous winter. One megawatt of electricity serves about 250 homes in peak-demand periods. Battery energy storage made up 47 percent of the new capacity, with solar in second place at 40 percent.

The mix of ERCOT’s energy is critical to Texas’ growing need for electricity, as ERCOT manages about 90 percent of the electric load for the state, including the Houston metro area. Data centers, AI and population growth are driving heightened demand for electricity.

In the first nine months of 2025, Texas added a nation-leading 7.4 gigawatts of solar capacity, according to a report from data and analytics firm Wood Mackenzie and the Solar Energy Industries Association.

“Remarkable growth in Texas, Indiana, Utah and other states ... shows just how decisively the market is moving toward solar,” says Abigail Ross Hopper, president and CEO of the solar association.

New UH white paper pushes for national plastics recycling policy

plastics paper

The latest white paper from the University of Houston’s Energy Transition Institute analyzes how the U.S. currently handles plastics recycling and advocates for a national, policy-driven approach.

Ramanan Krishnamoorti, vice president for energy and innovation at UH; Debalina Sengupta, assistant vice president and chief operating officer at the Energy Transition Institute; and UH researcher Aparajita Datta authored the paper titled “Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for Plastics Packaging: Gaps, Challenges and Opportunities for Policies in the United States.” In the paper, the scientists argue that the current mix of state laws and limited recycling infrastructure are holding back progress at the national level.

EPR policies assign responsibility for the end-of-life management of plastic packaging to producers or companies, instead of taxpayers, to incentivize better product design and reduce waste.

“My hope is this research will inform government agencies on what policies could be implemented that would improve how we approach repurposing plastics in the U.S.,” Krishnamoorti said in a news release. “Not only will this information identify policies that help reduce waste, but they could also prove to be a boon to the circular economy as they can identify economically beneficial pathways to recycle materials.”

The paper notes outdated recycling infrastructure and older technology as roadblocks.

Currently, only seven states have passed EPR laws for plastic packaging. Ten others are looking to pass similar measures, but each looks different, according to UH. Additionally, each state also has its own reporting system, which leads to incompatible datasets. Developing national EPR policies or consistent nationwide standards could lead to cleaner and more efficient processes, the report says.

The researchers also believe that investing in sorting, processing facilities, workforce training and artificial intelligence could alleviate issues for businesses—and particularly small businesses, which often lack the resources to manage complex reporting systems. Digital infrastructure techniques and moving away from manual data collection could also help.

Public education on recycling would also be “imperative” to the success of new policies, the report adds.

“Experts repeatedly underscored that public education and awareness about EPR, including among policymakers, are dismal,” the report reads. “Infrastructural limitations, barriers to access and the prevailing belief that curbside recycling is ineffective in the U.S. contribute to public dissatisfaction, misinformation and, in some cases, opposition toward the use of taxpayers’ and ratepayers’ contributions for EPR.”

For more information, read the full paper here.