UKCCSC News 10 June 08

Hi Folks,

This is the BIG money issue, with more zeros than the Eurovision Song Contest. But first, a forthcoming meeting that’s getting close already:

1) The Hydrogeological Group of the Geological Society host the 2008 Darcy Lecture, given this year by Prof. Michael Celia from Princeton University. There are 2 supporting lectures including one by Mike Bickle. 11 July 2008, The Roberts Lecture Theatre, UCL.

There is no registration fee, but pre-registration is required. Please send an email to william.burgess@ucl.ac.uk entitled ‘Darcy 2008 Registration’ indicating: (i) name, (ii) affiliation.

http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/gsl/groups/specialist/hydro/pid/3948;jsessionid=D9BB17EC74D490E1D758BEC3C0C26B0A

2) “New study calls for $45 trillion to cut greenhouse gases in half by 2050” International Herald Tribune

“The report by the Paris-based International Energy Agency envisions a “energy revolution” that would greatly reduce the world’s dependence on fossil fuels while maintaining steady economic growth.”

Well, that’s my idea of a lot of money! There are 2 scenarios, the second involves a 50% cut in emissions by 2050:

“The second scenario also calls for an accelerated ramping up of development of so-called “carbon capture and storage” technology allowing coal-powered power plants to catch emissions and inject them underground.

The study said that an average of 35 coal-powered plants and 20 gas-powered power plants would have to be fitted with carbon capture and storage equipment each year between 2010 and 2050.”

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/06/06/news/Japan-IEA-Climate-Change.php

The report itself costs a minimum of 80 Euros (that’s my idea of quite a lot of money if it’s coming out of my pocket) from:

http://www.iea.org/w/bookshop/add.aspx?id=330

For a free 2 page summary ‘roadmap’ try (scroll down for link):

http://www.iea.org/Textbase/techno/etp/index.asp

3) Not terribly surprisingly, Greenpeace aren’t too keen on the nuclear and CCS option:

“the IEA’s vision of increasing nuclear power by a factor of four and relying on carbon capture and storage to meet greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets should be rejected as an expensive and dangerous distraction.”

http://www.energyblueprint.info/

As a response, Greenpeace have launched “Energy (R)evolution – A Sustainable Japan Energy Outlook”. Similar documents are available for other countries on the same site, with the UK as part of EU 25, I think.

http://www.energyblueprint.info/japan.0.html

4) G8 meetings are thick on the ground at the moment. In the last News, the outcome of the meeting of Energy Ministers at Kobe, Japan (24 – 26th May) was reported. There was a meeting that started this weekend (7 – 8th June) in Aomori, N Japan that might still be on-going (see below). The big one, however, is a meeting of G8 leaders in Japan some time in July. The release of the IEA report was timed to predate the latter meeting.

5) “AOMORI, Japan – The Group of Eight industrial powers said Sunday they hoped to launch 20 large projects to bury greenhouse gas by 2010 and aimed to broadly deploy the technology a decade later.” (Thomson Financial) Interactive Investor

Again, this has been barely reported, if at all. The article doesn’t give any more details.

http://www.iii.co.uk/news/?type=afxnews&articleid=6751063&action=article

6) “£30bn bid to bury carbon waste in North Sea” Yorkshire Post

“The full scale of plans for a world-leading £30bn scheme to capture two-thirds of the region’s CO2 emissions and store them under the North Sea is unveiled today.”

This ambitious capture-transport plan makes the Canadian and Australian plans look small. Thar has to think big in Yorkshire, lad (where all the ducks play football)!

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/30bn-bid-to-bury-carbon.4159319.jp

For the full blurb, check out the promotional document:

http://www.yorkshire-forward.com/asset_store/document/carboncapturebros7_mr_8556.pdf

7) No great surprise this one… the USA Climate Bill got thrown out of the Senate:

“As efforts to pass a global warming bill collapsed in the Senate last week…” New York Times

The article is actually about the problem of getting CCS going commercially and is worth reading:

“The point was illustrated by a recent decision by the Virginia State Corporation Commission, which regulates utilities, to turn down an application by the Appalachian Power Company to build a plant that would have captured 90 percent of its carbon and deposited it nearly two miles underground”

“And in a Catch-22 that plagues the whole effort, the commission said A.E.P. should not build a commercial-scale plant because no one had demonstrated the technology on a commercial scale.”

8) Someone’s been stirring again:

“The UK will fall behind the rest of the world in developing one of the key technologies in the fight against climate change because of “incoherence and timidity” by the government, according to a leading expert.” Guardian

You get 1 guess as to whom the ‘expert’ may be. Hint, he’s from Edinburgh University, and this possibly qualifies NERC points as ‘public dissemination’. More likely to qualify for a knife between the shoulder blades, methinks?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jun/09/climatechange.scienceofclimatechange

9) The Policy Exchange has released a report about CCS which includes the following:

“It is not happening: The UK CCS effort is slowing down, whilst other countries are speeding up”

If this sounds similar to item (8) above then that may not be a coincidence! Authored by Stuart Haszeldine and Gil Yaron.

The report is currently on the Policy Exchange homepage, but will presumably be relegated to the archives in the fullness of time.

Policy Exchange Home

That’s all Folks

Mark