Carbon capture is vital to meeting climate goals, say scientists – but industrial-scale wood burning is OK?

Posted: January 19, 2021 by oldbrew in Emissions, greenblob, ideology, opinion
Tags: ,

Drax power station, generating 7% of Britain’s needs, is partly converted to burning imported woodchips.


More climate doublethink here. While supporting the burning of wood pellets to generate electricity, thereby creating massive carbon dioxide emissions that may reside in the atmosphere for a number of years, some climate obsessives insist that removing such emissions from the atmosphere is ‘desperately needed’. The illogicality of this has been largely ignored, but now Friends of the Earth Scotland and others have complained that CCS has a “history of over-promising and under-delivering”. Will CCS ever be viable either in terms of cost or practicality? If anything, current evidence points in the other direction.
– – –
Supporters insist that storage technology is not a costly mistake but the best way for UK to cut emissions from heavy industry, says The Guardian.

Engineers and geologists have strongly criticised green groups who last week claimed that carbon capture and storage schemes – for reducing fossil fuel emissions – are costly mistakes.

The scientists insisted that such schemes are vital weapons in the battle against global heating and warn that failure to set up ways to trap carbon dioxide and store it underground would make it almost impossible to hold net emissions to below zero by 2050.

“Carbon capture and storage is going to be the only effective way we have in the short term to prevent our steel industry, cement manufacture and many other processes from continuing to pour emissions into the atmosphere,” said Professor Stuart Haszeldine, of Edinburgh University.

“If we are to have any hope of keeping global temperature [increases] down below 2 degrees C then we desperately need to develop ways to capture and store carbon dioxide.”

Full article here.

Comments
  1. Chaswarnertoo says:

    What ‘scientists’ ? And they can tell the Chinese, not me.

  2. Ilma says:

    The CCS supporters seem to think that ‘heavy industry’ can soak up the high CCS (up to 50% of energy) costs and still be competitive. Naivety in the extreme!!

  3. ivan says:

    Another case of the right hand not knowing, or wanting to know, what the left hand is doing, and non of them want to talk to real engineers, i.e. not wackademics.

  4. hunterson7 says:

    Since there is no carbon capture technology beyond growing plants that amounts to anything substantial, this is just more Monty Python scale of blah-blah talk.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s