CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

Rethink needed over Scottish carbon targets

(40 posts)

No tags yet.


12

  1. chdot
    Admin

    "

    THE energy firm behind a controversial bid to burn coal under the Firth of Forth to create gas has blamed political uncertainty as it said work on a planning application is now likely to be postponed.

    Cluff Natural Resources highlighted factors including the energy commission recently set up by the Scottish Government, a motion at the SNP conference calling for a ban on underground coal gasification (UCG) and the Scottish parliamentary elections next May.

    But North Sea veteran Algy Cluff, who heads the company, said he was still committed to the project to build Britain’s first UCG plant.

    “It remains our avowed intention to seek approval to install a pilot plant as soon as is practicable to generate limited production from the Firth of Forth before constructing Britain’s first UCG plant,” said Cluff, who is chairman and chief executive of the company.

    "

    http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/anger-as-energy-firm-aims-to-burn-coal-under-forth-1-3869000

    Posted 9 years ago #

  2. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Because Longannet is part of the European Trading Scheme for Carbon emissions, it is treated differently in ways too complex and dull to imagine. But in short, no it does not give an immediate boost to Scotland's measured performance.

    Sounds too complex and dull for me to even try imagining. Notwithstanding, that the single largest point source of carbon emissions in Scotland is closing is surely not a point in dispute?

    Posted 9 years ago #

  3. chdot
    Admin

    "it is treated differently"

    So on a 'balance sheet' somewhere its as though Longannet isn't closing?

    Or is it about the actualité of replacing the generating capacity with that from somewhere else?

    Posted 9 years ago #

  4. Charlethepar
    Member

    Notwithstanding, that the single largest point source of carbon emissions in Scotland is closing is surely not a point in dispute?

    Indeed. And some of what fills the gap in electricity generation will be of lower carbon intensity.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  5. Charlethepar
    Member

    @chdot

    When Longannet closes, SP will be able to use the carbon permits somewhere else, or sell them to someone else to use. So, by itself, closing one plant does not reduce the totality of emissions.

    The total number of carbon permits across Europe is gradually reducing over years, which does reduce emissions over time, theoretically in the most efficient way.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  6. chdot
    Admin

    "So, by itself, closing one plant does not reduce the totality of emissions."

    That depends.

    If the closure time matched the commissioning of some renewables it would.

    Also presumably the 'extra' electricity will come from newer/more efficient plants(?)

    Posted 9 years ago #

  7. kaputnik
    Moderator

    So, by itself, closing one plant does not reduce the totality of emissions.

    They (or someone else) wouldd have to build themselves a new fossil-fuel power station in Scotland first though before those emissions were actually "in"/"from" Scotland though?

    Posted 9 years ago #

  8. chdot
    Admin

    "have to build themselves a new fossil-fuel power station in Scotland first"

    I think that is the point here - somehow carbon trading offsets 'account for' the closure and allocation of 'country of origin'(?)

    "Sounds too complex and "

    Posted 9 years ago #

  9. Charlethepar
    Member

    @kaputnik, chdot

    The idea is that we have decided that big plant carbon emissions will be dealt with through EU wide permit trading. It does not matter to the planet where the carbon is emitted. Once we have made that choice, we have no policy need to worry about large plant carbon emissions in our own territory.

    So, for things we can and do worry about, like household energy consumption, we take the carbon intensity of electricity as a given.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  10. chdot
    Admin

    This is the new PR narrative - 'it's for poor people' -

    "

    “The reality is that hydrocarbons will remain a major part of the world’s energy system for many years, not least because they provide the path to prosperity for many millions of people in the developing world, enabling them to enjoy living standards that the western world takes for granted.”

    "

    http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/closure-major-cardiff-waste-site-9935734

    Posted 9 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

12

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin