Once again environmentalists are clashing with Government over the issue of carbon capture and storage as a sensible means of reducing greenhouse gases.
Greenpeace and others argue that carbon capture is a scam whose sole purpose is to keep the coal industry alive. This assumes that coal should be excluded from our energy future even though, while our oil and gas reserves are rapidly running out we still have enormous reserves of coal that could keep us in power for decades to come.
Their argument also seems to ignore the fact that once the UK has mastered carbon capture technology this will become a major revenue earner as we export our expertise to emerging countries such as India and China. China alone is currently opening between one and two coal-fired plants a week and with a lifetime of 40 years, carbon capture technology will allow these plants to be retro fitted and the carbon stored. Without this technology, any advances made in Europe or the US will be offset by the increasing CO2 emissions from emerging economies.

Clean Coal to reduce UK emissions?

A review of emissions data since the emissions trading scheme came into being in 2005 shows that the UK has been found wanting. In 2005, across the EU as a whole, allowances exceeded carbon dioxide emissions by around 80 million tonnes. However, in just six of the then, 25 member states, emissions exceeded allowances. One of these was the UK.

For 2006, carbon emissions from British businesses participating in the scheme increased by 3.6% to a total of 251.1 million tonnes of carbon dioxide. A major culprit was the power sector and particularly increases from coal-fired power stations.

For 2006, carbon emissions from British businesses participating in the scheme increased by 3.6% to a total of 251.1 million tonnes of carbon dioxide. A major culprit was the power sector and particularly increases from coal-fired power stations.

Clean coal technology (CCT) could solve the problem. The question is why is it not being implemented?

Capturing carbon dioxide and storing it underground rather than allowing it to enter the atmosphere is technically feasible. Coal washing, gasification, reduction of sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides are all available to the industry. 

The real issue is cost. It is currently more economic for the industry to pay its fines than to reduce pollution. While a number of companies are paying lip service to the idea of lower levels of pollution the reality is that our coal reserves are finite, EU legislation will close down the worst offenders and, in all probability, an expanding nuclear industry will bring our emissions down to acceptable levels before the coal-fired power industry gets round to cleaning up its act.

As always, it will have to be government that takes the lead if the problem is to have short term solutions.