Email Print

UK aviation emissions must be below 2005 levels and we can't trade our way out of it

heathrow1.jpg

If we can't trade aviation emissions away, and there's no technology fix, will domestic flights have to face the chop?

Big news on aviation emissions, as the Committee on Climate Change - the government's own independent scientific emissions watchdog - have said that the UK's aviation emissions should be 'capped'.

This would mean that they must remain at or below 2005 levels. When the government announced the third runway at Heathrow, they did say that they would do something similar, but the big caveat was that this cap would be flexible, in that it would be possible for the aviation industry to buy carbon credits through the European emissions trading scheme, to balance growing emissions.

Read more »
Tags:
Email Print

'Green' planes and broken promises

A jumbo takes off.

Not green, and not strictly regulated

Last Thursday, while approving the construction of a third runway at Heathrow, Geoff Hoon claimed he was accompanying it with what he called "the toughest climate change regime for aviation of any country in the world." Cleaner planes, tougher regulation, green slots for takeoff and landing - the secretary of state was keen to broadcast the runway's green credentials.

You can understand why it's important for Geoff to make a lot of noise about green planes and strict regulation while cheerleading for a third runway. Pursuing a policy of aviation expansion while committing to an 80 per cent cut in UK emissions by 2050 might seem like a strange thing to be doing, particularly as Lord Turner of the Committee on Climate Change ruled that there must be "clear strategies" in place to cut emissions from aviation, otherwise any cuts made in other sectors will be wiped out.

Read more »
Tags:
Email Print

Turner advice would kill coal plans, says Greenpeace

1 Dec 2008

Lord Turner's Committee on Climate Change today recommended that new coal plants are not built in the UK unless they can capture all of their emissions by the early 2020s. If accepted by the Government, the proposal would kill controversial plans by German energy giant Eon to build a new coal-fired power station at Kingsnorth in Kent. 

John Sauven, the executive director of Greenpeace - which has led the campaign against Kingsnorth - said today: 

"Assuming the Government accepts the advice of its own climate change committee, Kingsnorth is dead in the water. Eon's investors and the company's executives will read the Turner report with sweaty palms, as their coal plans don't even come close to satisfying the new standards the committee is demanding." 

He added: "It is incredibly significant that Turner says we can't deliver a low-carbon energy system by relying on the European emissions trading scheme alone. For too long ministers have treated the ETS like a magic box - you put a polluting industry in there and it disappears. Now the climate change committee is saying we need extra regulation to combat unacceptably high emissions from coal." 

He continued: "The quickest, cheapest and fastest way to slash emissions and meet the country's energy demands is to invest in efficiency, renewable energy and super-efficient combined-heat-and-power plants on the Scandinavian model. The Government should adopt Turner's suggestion of tough emissions standards for power stations that would ensure only cleaner technologies are used to power Britain, while ruling out the dirtiest fuels like unabated coal." 

In a key recommendation Turner proposes closing coal plants that don't capture and bury their emissions by the early 2020s at the latest. 

The proposal for a new coal-fired power station at Kingsnorth does not include plans for any carbon capture. Therefore, the Kingsnorth plans would fall foul of Turner's recommendations that coal plants must be fully CCS (carbon capture and storage) by the early 2020s at the latest. 

However, Eon has submitted an application to the government's CCS competition (by which government funds are made available for a demonstration plant). But even if Kingsnorth won the competition, Eon would be required to capture just 30 megawatts of emissions at the new 1600mw plant by 2014 at the earliest. After that the proposal is to scale up carbon capture at Kingsnorth to 300mw by 2020 (in other words, just 20 per cent abatement). There is no plan - or current technological pathway - for Eon to scale up that 20 per cent by a factor of 5 in just five years (the only way it could meet Turner's new standard). 

Powerpoint presentations by senior Eon executives, acquired by Greenpeace, show the company describes CCS for coal as a ‘developing technology' with ‘technical risk'. The presentations also show that by the early 2020s Eon's proposed Kingsnorth plant would only capture a small percentage of its emissions - while Turner is demanding full CCS. 

Assuming the government accepts Turner's advice, it is very unlikely that Eon and other utilities would submit new plans to build conventional coal plants - because there are huge uncertainties around the technological feasibility and commercial viability of CCS. It is highly unlikely, therefore, that investors will take the risk of investing in a new coal plant in the UK based on the huge uncertainties that CCS would be available on Turner's timescale. Adding to investor uncertainty, Turner also proposes additional measures including an Emissions Performance Standard (EPS) for power stations. 

Until government crystallises its coal policy - based on Turner - no utility will risk billions building new plants. For example, an EPS of 350g of CO2 per kilowatt hour of electricity generated (the joint NGO proposal) would rule out every coal plant currently proposed. 

There are now eight proposed new coal plants across the UK. Kingsnorth is the most advanced proposal, followed by Tilbury and Longannet. 

ENDS 

Greenpeace press office - 0207 865 8255 

Note - Eon powerpoint presentations on Kingsnorth and CCS on request.