ECR Alumni Case Study – Mai Bui

What did you study at university?

For my undergraduate studies, I graduated from Monash University in Australia with a double degree, which combined a Bachelor of Engineering (Chemical Engineering) and Bachelor of Biomedical Science. The universities that offer double degrees will structure the course so you get a blend of the two degrees over a five-year period. Typically, biomedical science is three years and engineering would be four years, but the combined course does the two degrees in five years.

Wow! What’s it like studying a double degree in Australia?

Not all universities offer it. For the universities that do, they tend to match up subjects where there are synergies.  For example, engineering may be combined with commerce, law, science or IT. The biomedical science and chemical engineering combination can lead into multiple career pathways across biomedical engineering, chemical engineering or biomedical science.

Double degrees can take more brain space as you are studying two different disciplines which often use different teaching styles and require students to switch between modes of learning. The biomedical science subjects required more memorizing and practical experimental lab classes which helped make sense of a lot of the content. In contrast, engineering subjects required much more mathematics, problem solving and analytical skills.

What motivated you to do a PhD?

Towards the end of my studies, I had to think about what work experience I wanted to do. We learned a bit about CO₂ separation but in the context of a technology for purification of natural gas. And then, because of my involvement with Engineers Without Borders, I was very much aware of climate change and wanted to do something on the topic of carbon capture and storage (CCS).

I did my final year research project with CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation), Australia’s government-funded research agency, on chemical looping combustion technology – a process which inherently separates CO₂. During my time there, I was really impressed by their research and the impact they had. For instance, they had invented wi-fi, as well as the anti-counterfeit technology used in the plastic banknotes that we have in the UK and Australia.

This motivated me to apply for work experience with CSIRO to work in the program that did carbon capture, because I wanted to learn more on this topic and how the CO₂ capture pilot plant worked. So that was really exciting.

After my summer work experience at CSIRO, they offered a part-time role over my last year of studies, and my CSIRO supervisor also encouraged me to do a PhD. So I did a bit of research around PhD scholarships and what I’d need in terms of grades. In Australia, a PhD can be a disadvantage when you’re applying for industrial engineering jobs, because you’ll often be considered overqualified for graduate roles. My professors at the time were very honest and wanted me to be sure about doing a PhD. I knew I loved my role at CSIRO and wanted to continue working in a field related to finding solutions to the problem of climate change. So I took the plunge and signed up to a PhD at Monash University. My PhD project was in collaboration with CSIRO who provided significant support over the four years including a top-up scholarship, travel funding and time to work on their pilot plant. They provided a very hands-on experience, which included going out to the pilot plant, taking plant measurements, sampling and analysing solvent samples, learning about process control systems, and a lot of face-to-face time with the plant operators.

What did you do after that?

At the end of my PhD, a conservative Prime Minister called Tony Abbott was elected, which meant funding cuts of millions of dollars, and the research on climate change at CSIRO was scaled back significantly. Anyone who was doing research on clean energy, climate change and climate systems modelling was either made redundant or had their research funding cut/reduced. There was a mass exodus of expertise in those areas with researchers going to other parts of the world.

During my PhD, I had done an IEAGHG CCS summer school in Nottingham, where I spent a week learning about CCS. It seemed like a dynamic and exciting research environment. So when I was looking for jobs abroad, the UK seemed like an attractive place for research, especially for work in the field of CCS. Culturally, the UK is relatively similar to Australia, and the research environment seemed very welcoming and open. Most of the postdoc roles that I applied for were in the UK.

I received an offer from Imperial College London to work for Professor Niall Mac Dowell. In 2016, I started a postdoc role at Imperial on a project about bioenergy with CCS (BECCS), which involved evaluating the feasibility of using waste biomass as fuel for UK power plants, including an assessment of emissions of contaminants like trace metal, SO_X and NO_X.  At the time, carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies were stil novel and new, and I could see a potential future in this space. My research expanded out from BECCS to other CDR technologies including direct air capture (DAC) and biochar. I was still doing a lot of research on industrial applications of CCS to decarbonize power and industry.

During my post-doc, I was even able to continue my PhD research on flexible operation of amine absorption CO₂ capture technologies. I was lucky enough to work on two test campaigns at the TCM facility in Norway on a demonstration-scale CO₂ capture plant, which captured 80 to 275 tonnes per day. In contrast, for my PhD, I was working with a much smaller pilot plant that captured half a tonne of CO₂ per day. The TCM facility was essentially industrial scale.

There are things that I did for my PhD and postdoc that were eventually used to inform the development of UK policy. For instance, the natural gas-fired combined cycle gas turbines (CCGT) in the UK need to operate very flexibly to balance the intermittent renewable energy in the UK grid. Consequently, CCS plants integrated into natural gas-fired CCGT would also be required to operate flexibly. DESNZ engaged with us and used our TCM plant data from our flexible operation test campaigns to help inform them on the CO₂ capture rates they should expect during flexible operation. Our research findings was used to develop the dispatchable power agreement policy. It was exciting to see research I did for my PhD, from 10 years back, being used by UK government. It was a long journey, but research sometimes will eventually have actual real-world impact.

What motivated you to transition to a new career?

After doing research for eight years, I was reaching a point where I was asking myself, what’s next? I had worked as a postdoc for a really long time. The typical “next step” options would be to apply for an academic role or do a fellowship. During my postdoc, I had other non-research roles, including working as a Senior Research and Insight Manager for Innovate UK on the Industrial Decarbonisation Challenge Fund, being an Advisory Board Member for Puro.earth and advising SBTi. These roles gave me exposure to activities that have direct real-world impact, and it was also exciting to learn new skills.

Although I still enjoyed research and teaching, I was beginning to question whether my research role provided the sense of excitement that I craved. That’s when Supercritical reached out and did a very good job of selling me the idea of trying out a new role – Director of Climate Science. I hadn’t even considered working for a start-up company, but having worked for Supercritical for almost one and a half years, I don’t regret it. It has been a massive change but in a positive way. I love that I still get to use my research knowledge to help shape the carbon removal market and evolving climate policy.

What is it you’re doing now at Supercritical?

I lead the team of climate scientists, and we evaluate the quality of carbon removal projects. We’ve developed a rigorous assessment framework that covers four key dimensions: climate science, environmental impact, social benefits and delivery risk. For the climate science indicators, we focus on the technical assessment which includes aspects like feedstock sustainability, permanence, carbon removal crediting accuracy, additionality, and the project’s measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV). For environmental impacts, we assess whether the project has a positive or negative impact on the environment (e.g. air quality, impacts to soil and water, biodiversity benefits). We look for evidence of social impacts and co-benefits. Whilst many projects operate on a do-no-harm principle, we also want to make sure that these projects have an overall positive impact to the local communities (e.g. economic empowerment, programs to improve gender equality or education). The most important dimension for the majority of buyers is delivery risk because they need their credits delivered within a certain timeframe. The delivery risk will vary with geography and for projects at different stages of development (e.g. early stage vs already operating).

In addition to assessing these different quality indicators, we recognise the importance of engaging closely with carbon removal projects to help improve practices and increase the integrity of CDR market. We also work closely with buyers to advise them on carbon removal and how to build robust portfolios of high integrity credits to meet their climate targets.

When during your career journey did you engage with the UKCCSRC?

As soon as I arrived in the UK! On day one of my postdoc, my professor recommended that I should sign up to the UKCCSRC as it was important to be part of the CCS community in the UK.  During my postdoc, I attended almost every UKCCSRC event. I did all the poster competitions, won some awards and went to events that gave me an opportunity to engage with industry, policy makers and other key stakeholders from other countries. I always recommend new students working on CCS research to sign up for UKCCSRC membership (it’s free). The events are great opportunities to meet people from the UK and internationally, and develop your network.

They are indeed!  Do you have any other thoughts you want to share about CCS – its present, its future, any concerns, anything positive?

It’s been a long journey for me, working over 14 years in this space, so I’ve seen the ups and downs. In 2018, there was a big shift in momentum when the IPCC changed the narrative and language to emphasise the urgency in addressing climate change. The release of the 1.5°C report by the IPCC led to a lot of policy changes globally, including the UK government legislating a net zero target. When I first started working in CCS, the narrative was focused on decarbonising fossil fuel use in the power sector, and that didn’t resonate with the general public. Since then, we’ve demonstrated that CCS has a role addressing emissions across multiple sectors, especially hard-to-abate sectors. CCS is essential for decarbonising industry, producing low-carbon hydrogen, generating CO₂ feedstock for sustainable aviation fuels and carbon dioxide removal technologies like BECCS and DAC. CCS has a portfolio of important roles and is essential for the transition to net zero.