Blair's legacy to be demolished

Posted by Graham Thompson - 22 March 2013 at 2:19pm - Comments
All rights reserved. Credit: Kate Davison / Greenpeace

The third worst eyesore in Britain, according to readers of Country Life, and one of our top three polluters, closed forever today.

Didcot A coal-fired power station has fallen foul of the Large Combustion Plant Directive, a European ruling to close the continent’s dirtiest power stations, and will no longer be spewing thousands of tonnes of CO2, not to mention acutely toxic pollutants, into the atmosphere and into nearby Radley Lakes.

Several doomed attempts were made to edge this filthy dinosaur into the twenty-first century, with gas and biomass added to the fuel supply and filters added to remove Nitrous Oxide. Greenpeace lent a hand when we blocked the coal conveyer belts, forcing the plant to switch to gas during our occupation, and a group of volunteers climbed the chimney and branded the plant ‘Blair’s Legacy’.

Here’s one of those volunteers, Ben Stewart from our Press Office, questioning the Prime Minister from the top of the chimney -

Unfortunately, even burning a lower carbon fuel like gas, plants like Didcot are still carbon intensive due to the low efficiency of large, centralised power stations. They waste two thirds of the energy they produce because heat can’t be easily transported, and so these power stations just release it into the atmosphere through their giant cooling towers.

Gas has a role in the UK’s energy system, as back-up for renewables used in flexible combined heat and power (CHP) stations where both the electricity and heat can be used by the local homes and businesses. CHP plants can be three times as efficient as big, centralised plants like Didcot.

Thanks in large part to the pressure Greenpeace supporters brought to bear on the last government, dirty monsters like Didcot A will never be built in the UK again. But switching from big, centralised coal to big, centralised gas, as George Osborne is pushing for, is no more sustainable than switching from Marlborough to Silk Cut.

It’s time to quit, George.

Yeah, and all the people that YOU have helped put out of work, thanks. Im sure their families, and dependants are so pleased. I hope when the lights go out, youll be happy then you bunch of tree hugging fools. Those idiots that broke in. nothing but criminals. You are all very deluded people that think switching a few power stations off will mend the world.

Hurray!!! It's at start at least! Lets stop damaging our planet and start looking after it! #saveourplanet!

You are right, we ALL know that writing comments on web forums is what truely mends the world...

to the guy who posted first. i'm not surprised you used anonymity, the fact is, people like you are the reason we are in this climatre mess in the first place, defeatists, that don't believe we can change anything. WAKE UP!

closing coal fired power stations is a huge step in the right direction, if we are able to replace them with renewable sources of energy, it will not only boost the ecomony, but within a decacde will be cheaper than fossil fuels! Before you post on the comments section, do your research.

Pompus off the cuff comments do not help, they make you sound ignorant, and unaware of the climate disaster our generation is facing. nice comment with the tree hugging too, makes you sound so intellectual, next time you want to speak ill of an organisation who is working on behalf of your childs future, try and back it up with evidence.

wow.

BB, are you surprised people post aninymously when all they get is verbal abuse and name calling. As has been said, when your lights go out, you'll know who to thanks.

Unless it's escaped your notice, ALL the comforts and systems of modern living, and ALL the health advances and freedoms you enjoy today have been brought about BECAUSE we have plentiful, cheap and reliable electricty generated by fossil fuels. Your job DEPENDS on it, your life DEPENDS on it. Would you really throw that away, as renewables simply CANNOT replace them. They are too intermittant, ineficient and expensive to be viable, and without the subsidies they receive (which generally transfers wealth from the poor to the rich), they would collapse.

Further, unless it's escpaed your notice, the much vaunted 'gobal warming because of CO2 hypothesis' is a myth, a huge politically driven scam, on you and me, the taxpayer and energy consumer. There is not one single piece of observational evidence that demonstrates a causal relationship between CO2 and temperature. Not one! You don't have to take my word for it, but go research it yourself, as I have done, in all aspects, economics, ethics, physics, chemistry, etc. Ask yourself a simple question: if man's contribution of 3% of the atmospheric CO2 is so bad, why isn't the other natural 97%? Also ask yourself this: if the claim is that increasing CO2 causes temperatures to rise, why has the last 17 year's CO2 rise NOT caused any temperature rise?

To force the closure of such a power station before suitable replacements have been built is folly at its worst, and to use 'global warming' as the driving reason, defies any rational or scientific logic!

Just one point.. SELCHP in Deptford never fulfilled its promise to supply heat to the community. Why was that?
Instead it just ended up as a waste burning/energy producing incinerator. I wonder how many other CHP's systems will ultimately end up the same.

Open the coal mines, I miss a coal fire in the winter and we can put the unemployed to work in the mines, means they won't have time to go to greenpeace demos :)

Not everyone who supports Greenpeace is unemployed.

I dont understand why people come on to the Greenpeace website to attack the supporters,

We are only trying to make the planet we live on a better place.

Yes we understand we are facing an uphill struggle and we will always have our detractors (George Osborne calls us the 'Enviromental Taliban') but we will continue to fight for what we believe in until real change takes place.

We have known for years that fossil fuels have been running out but no one seems to be bothered by this as. Also Global Warming is not a myth. In fact Global Warming was first advised to the Reagan and Thatcher administrations by a NASA scientist.

Now who do you believe? The governments who get kickbacks from the fuel companies? Or a NASA scientist?

Metalpenguin, I'm not sure of the exact figures on unemployment rates amongst greenpeace fans, but my last comment was probably an insult to the unemployed, most of them probably wouldn't want to be tarred with a greenpeace brush.

Anyways, there's loads of fossil fuels left in the world to be used up, certain sections of society who don't have a part to play in that market want to open up alternative markets in this so called sustainable energy field and use environmental causes to further that cause with the same aim as the oil companies... To make as much profit as possible. 

As for your global warming, so what? The earth was warming well before industrialisation, what caused the ice sheets to pull back from the British Isles, cavemen lighting fires? 

Of course we want to see sites such as Didcot closed down, but not until an alternative secure supply of energy is available.

That source will never be wind/subsidy farms.

The chancellor's support for the dash for gas is to be applauded.  There have been too many delays to the process of exploiting shale gas.  Fracking the Bowland shales should start asap.  

 

 

Anonymous posts like the first in this chain should be outlawed.  We need to know who these people are so that they can be prosecuted for crimes against humanity.  There is no hope for the planet whilst these people are allowed to express their odious views, they need to be put against the wall.

Green Dream - as warmism is a religious cult, perhaps burning at the stake could be revived to deal with those who challenge the Church of Greenery.

I suspect there are too many fools and unprincipled lobbyists in this world, one lot leading the other.

But what is clear is that mankinds contribution of greenhouse gases has tipped the delicate climatic balance. We know it's clear because all the scientists - the experts we rely on to stop us committing foolish, ill-informed errors - tell us so.

So I wonder why some people choose to ignore them?

I suspect because they like their easy, fossil-fueled lives and would rather ignore the dire consequences for their children/grandchildren. Looks a little selfish to me but that's how some people are now.

petebb - "..what is clear is that mankinds contribution of greenhouse gases has tipped the delicate climatic balance"

Not clear at all.

 

Hmmm 'warmism is a religious cult' - tell that to NASA, the Pentagon, the National Research Council, Royal of Society of Scientists, the Geological society, the Met office, and sheesh every reputable scientific and political organisation in the world.

Now if Physics is a cult - then I'm a proud believer, and denial of Physics is simply a bit daft. But then I suspect some of the commentars above belong to a different sort of cult, one that denies science, is scared on new technolgies - like solar, wind and wave, and would be very happy with us living in the dark ages of 19th century coal.

do you think that closing coal power stations will stop CO2. you have not got a clue, china are bulding them every week, now that they are having there industral revolution. and when a volcano eruption happens it pumps out lots of co2 more than a coal power station does for years. we could allways keep buying power from france, from there nuclear power stations and have the most expensive electricity in the world .

@Brian Simpson - not 'scared on new technolgies - like solar, wind and wave' but realising that the first two offer no chance of providing energy at rreasonable cost and that the jury's out on the last, though a public inquiry on the possibility of a Severn Barage would be justifiable.

Exploiting shale gas is a relatively new way of generating energy - as the BGS and Durham Uni., reports make clear, there's nothing to fear in the process if proper precautions are taken, and it's likely to be a whole lot more effective than renewables.

[Michal Fallon's] brief in particular will be to help secure private investment for an energy revolution that's needed in nuclear, gas and especially shale. He shares the climate change scepticism of his predecessor [Hayes], but will keep his focus on the point George Osborne keeps making: how to keep costs down for consumers, and how to secure long-term cheap energy.

I'm sure we all wish him well.

@ilma

"There is not one single piece of observational evidence that
demonstrates a causal relationship between CO2 and temperature. Not one!"

Actually, the experimental work to prove this was done in the 1850s by John Tyndale, and you can demonstrate the causal relationship in your kitchen at home.

Here's someone doing just that -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/8418356.stm

And here are some more videos of experiments demonstrating the causal relationship -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5GT0v0I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWnM8PgSbiY

 

I like the way you use the term eyesore, it's the same term used by Nimbys who don't want wind farms. If you want our fiscal policies driven by not so green russians in the vain hope that we can cover our green and pleasant land with windmills congratulations!

I used to think writing was easy until I took a class.  Now I know how much work you had to put into this article and I can appreciate  the research you had to do. 
http://y8-kizi.kizifriv1.com
http://www.y8u.org
http://yepi-games.kizifriv1.com

I would read more articles on this subject if writers were more like you.  Your writing style in this article is persuasive as well as informative.  I respect your views.

http://gazo-5.gazonew.com

http://www.y8friv.asia  http://www.yepipapa.com

Follow Greenpeace UK