All they needed was unlimited money and it would have worked…
From the BBC:
Labour’s shadow energy minister Tom Greatrex said: “Today’s move highlights the dead hand of the Treasury in scuppering moves towards a greener energy mix.
…
“Without those guarantees the government’s commitment to energy, the environment and green jobs will be increasingly viewed as all talk, no action.”
Dr Dixon of WWF Scotland said the news was “massively disappointing”.
He said: “If technical and economic hurdles can be overcome CCS has the potential to help reduce emissions at thousands of coal power stations around the world.
“However, almost four years after launching its funding competition, plans for CCS in the UK have descended into farce.”
Juliet Swann, head of campaigns at Friends of the Earth Scotland, said: “The UK government failing to support the application to its necessary extent from the outset is not just an indication of their hypocrisy over climate change, but also shows how little interest they have in investing in Scotland.”
Full story at the BBC
Yes, we dont hear much about that HUGE project in Norway lately. At Mongstad.
You wouldnt belive how much money they have wasted on it already.
The prime minister called it Norways Moonlanding Project. Moonlanding indeed.
I think it is more of a Belly Landing. A very expensive green Belly Landing.
If only it were the case that someone in the government had realised the folly of it all. At least there’s somebody prepared to at least ask questions about value for money by some measure, even if it’s not the measure of effectiveness in improving our lives and our environment.
Good to see a balanced and impartial choice of talking heads aproached by the Beeb for comment, as ever…
Funny, I just got done reading this, which sounds like a new way for billionaires to waste money in order to feel good about themselves. Want to make a real difference with $1 billion? Give 10,000 decent middle class families $100,000. Better than making rich fruads even richer.
—
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/10/07/the-business-of-cooling-the-planet/
—
Love the option of nukeing the moon, that’ll solve the problem! Suuure it will.
This shows perfectly the repellent bias of the BBC. All their renta-quotes are from green special interest groups, not one of whom represents the poor put-upon energy bill payer. Still at least we’ll have freezing grannies to look for this Xmas, while Cameron’s daddy-in-law harvests his windfarm millions from their corpses.
Perhaps Mr Huhne would be more suited to lead a research project on the flying capabilites of Sus Domestica aka pigs.
The greens should leave well enough alone. To publicly approve carbon capture is a mistake as the energy companies will happily pump carbon into the earth (probably for free) with the guarantee that they can still pump out oil and gas.
At least the BBC was honest enough to call it a scheme.
Friends of the Earth, et al: When you undertake a fool’s errand, it’s bad form to denigrate those who decline to accompany you, wouldn’t you agree?
The UK is broke but the eco-lobby want to spend £1bn ($1.5bn) to run a pipeline 260km (160m) along the seabed to pump CO2 into a deep-sea well. Utterly bonkers – like something out of Gullivers Travels.
The only good side I can see to the country being broke is that more and more of these barmy schemes will have to be cancelled or postponed.
The reporting I watched on Channel 4 News was just as biased with no balance to the report and, of course, nobody mentioned shale gas.
I like the way the Friends of the Earth mouthpiece describes pouring unlimited funds into a bottomless pit as “investing”. ;->
We still have the problem of a Country run by Moss Bros suited Eton School boys for the benefit of their inlaws, but the saving grace of the UK is a core of career Civil Servants who grind out economics reports on a daily basis about all the latest schemes and bandwagons that their vaunted leaders are signed up to and sometimes, even the single shared brain cell used by all the British politicians wakes them up to the fact that this just won’t b***dy work. But, the brain cell will not let them go so far as to admit it..
Greenpeace opposes carbon capture.
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/press/releases/new-greenpeace-report-labels/
I would assume that their opposition indicates they think it might actually work.
Meanwhile, the oil industry has been capturing and storing CO2 for years.
http://www.statoil.com/en/technologyinnovation/protectingtheenvironment/carboncaptureandstorage/pages/carbondioxideinjectionsleipnervest.aspx
It was a stupid idea right from the start. i await with baited breath when they accept the inevitable that Britain is sat on enormous amounts of shale gas. Chris Huhne should never have been made responsible for the UK’s energy policy.
And in a double wammy the carbon capture story on BBC radio news tonight was next to this story about fuel poverty.
“Rising energy bills causing fuel poverty deaths”, so the savings by abandoning carbon capture ought to help to prevent further fuel cost rises caused by green policies, and maybe save a life or two.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15359312
maybe the usual BBC editors are on holiday.
Hahahaha this coming from a green zealot activist. Oh the hypocrisy of the hypocrisy from a hypocrit.
So we have nut jobs here protesting a pipe line…..
…but in the UK they were planning on building a 260km pipe line to pump liquid CO2 emissions, under pressure, to deep wells in the bottom of the North Sea
There is a total disconnect with all of this mess………………………
Given a completely unlimited resource I reckon I could solve the world’s financial problems. If anyone stumbles on one, let me know…
It was tried in Queensland with government support up to $500million and failed. It is another green wet dream, with the money better spent on other more worthy projects. It is about time the world took leadership and management of nations back from the green children.
CCS could theoretically be an interesting technology, but it is politically nonviable.
Greens want to get rid of coal altogether, not put a band-aid on it. For them, the only clean coal is the coal that stays underground.
Industry wants cheap power, so they are only willing to politically support CCS if it is cheap. Nobody thinks it will ever be cheap.
The only reason to support CCS is as a way to forestall efforts at creating a CO2 tax and to politically justify building new coal plants today.
ANH: “The reporting I watched on Channel 4 News was just as biased with no balance to the report …”
The report on (UK) ITV News was in a similar vein. There was a given assumption that excess CO2 was going to cause climatic problems, with no mention of any of the doubts which have been expressed by the scientific community, nor any of the statistics showing flat global temperatures over the past decade in the face of increasing atmospheric CO2.
The outside commentators brought in spoke about the loss of potential jobs and the ‘blow’ to the governments green campaign. Chris Huhne (environment and ‘climate change’ minister) said how disappointed he was.
The reason given for this scheme being stopped was that the cost would be £1.3billion, whereas the government was only willing to pay £1billion.
But it is awful isn’t it?
Every mainstream politician who wants to get elected and every mainstream scientist who wants to get funded has to profess to be a disciple of the religion of man made global warming caused by CO2 emissions. To question this is modern day heresy.
I think Huhne only stopped it because Greenpeace told them it won’t work. Greenpeace has all the experts; they’ve even written the IPCC report. ( /sarc would be misplaced )
Next on the chopping block: “Project Bard.” They had great hopes for duplicating the works of Shakespeare, but now they have to find homes for the twenty-seven chimpanzees, not to mention all of those surplus typewriters.
It “may” have worked with unlimited money. That tells me it wasn’t a sure thing even then!
“If there was a completely unlimited resource then we may have been able to surmount the technical problems at Longannet,” Mr. Huhne said.
If a frog had wings, he woundn’t bump his @ur momisugly$$ every time he jumped.