[image credit: latinoamericarenovable.com]
All these political climate fantasies will get rumbled in the end. The cracks between the ‘ambitions’ and reality just keep getting wider, and that’s not just the SNP in Scotland, it’s everywhere you look.
– – –
EXPERTS have warned the Scottish Government’s strategy for hitting ambitious climate targets by 2030 is based on “wishful thinking” amid fears there is no plan B in the event untested technology cannot be scaled up, says The Herald (via Latest News Post).
Scottish Government ministers have published their climate change update after MSPs pledged to reduce 1990 levels of carbon emissions by 75 per cent by 2030 on the way to becoming carbon neutral by 2045.
But experts have raised concerns that using carbon capture and storage (CCS) and negative emissions technology (NET) to decarbonise heavy industry such as the oil and gas sector are not based on evidence it can be done in time.
Dr Rachel Howell, lecturer in sociology and sustainable development at Edinburgh University, told Holyrood’s Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee that she was “very, very concerned about the reliance on negative emissions technologies”.
She added: “The justification that’s given for this is that we know this is important because of detailed modelling – that isn’t evidence that it is going to be possible to meet the targets for negative emissions technologies by the dates set.
“That looks to me as if scenarios have been examined and there has been concern about the fact that the plans and policies for actually reducing emissions through other kinds of technologies and behaviour change don’t meet the necessary targets – so people have said ‘right we’re going to need NET’.”
Dr Howell called on MSPs to “press the Scottish Government on its evidence that it will actually be possible to roll out NETs at scale”, stressing that there is “no capacity in the UK at all at the moment” for CCS technology.
Full article here.
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
The main problem is all the various requirements about reducing CO2 in the atmosphere are all based on computer models produced in ivory towers by wackademics that do not understand atmospheric dynamics or how the weather works.
There isn’t one of those models that has been verified with real world data but yet the stupid politicians believe in them and the so called ‘science’ they represent and so call for stupid unnecessary cuts based on expensive unproven technology.
What a way to run a country!
Wackademics indeed: lecturer in sociology and sustainable development …. depends on what you call sustainable, but Sociology ? and this is what eejitz get themselves elected and highly paid for?
I’m impressed that Dr Rachel Howell can’t see the emperor’s clothes. I don’t think we are on the same side, but God bless for speaking up.
But experts have raised concerns that using carbon capture and storage (CCS) and negative emissions technology (NET) to decarbonise heavy industry such as the oil and gas sector are not based on evidence it can be done in time.
How’s that ‘net zero’ North Sea oil and gas going in Scotland?
not based on evidence it can be done in time
Or done at all.
US firm running eco grants scheme has won multiple UK government contracts
Virginia-based ICF has been awarded more than 80 government contracts in the last five years
ICF recently advertised for a senior role to help run the green home grants scheme. The post for a customer experience coordinator stated: “This role is not for the faint-hearted…”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jan/26/us-firm-running-eco-grants-scheme-has-won-multiple-uk-government-contracts
‘customer experience coordinator’ — 😂
@oldbrew
That Western Link FoI came back.
“we don’t have to tell you anything – unless we want to”
It may well be that it’s a matter of sliding timelines on a big project and that it’s firing on all cylinders and working at full design spec – I hope it is.
The reticence though… it’s all too easy to think otherwise – why no “its wunnerful” PR?
Tom – time for an inquiry into the length and non-transparency of the OFGEM Western Link inquiry?
If they have no findings after a year, why might that be — as if we can’t guess? Suspicious, and the ongoing large constraint payments to the wind energy biz may be giving the game away.
From the OFGEM website:
Notifications
Would you like to be kept up to date with Investigation into National Grid Electricity Transmission plc and SP Transmission plc and their compliance with obligations relating to the Western HVDC subsea link? subscribe to notifications:
HideNotify me +form
Email *
https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publications-and-updates/investigation-national-grid-electricity-transmission-plc-and-sp-transmission-plc-and-their-compliance-obligations-relating-western-hvdc-subsea-link
– – –
I came across this just now (dated one year ago)…
National Grid: We need 65,000 data analysts and renewables engineers
By Brendan Coyne -January 28, 2020
National Grid says the UK needs tens of thousands of data analysts and renewable energy engineers over the next ten years to stand a chance of hitting net zero.
. . .
In a system dominated by distributed renewable power and storage, and with reduced spinning reserve, forecasting and matching supply and demand will become even more crucial. Hence, at least 65,000 new workers will be needed “to fill new roles such as data analytics to forecast energy demand and engineers with expertise in renewables”, states the report.
https://theenergyst.com/national-grid-we-need-65000-data-analysts-and-renewables-engineers/
‘data analysts’…so that’s where all the ‘green jobs’ are 😆
‘to stand a chance of hitting net zero’ – oh my aching sides 🤣
@oldbrew
given what we know of the usual suspects lurking around the assorted blogs …
From National Grid’s “65000 needed” document ( page 5
– they commission “independents” – maybe we can organise something to tender for the work?
I’d wager that National Grid partners Development Economics are not billing in increments below £700 per person per day 🙂
– I’m not being entirely frivolous about this 🙂
The renewables engineers will largely be maintenance staff out in the cold, wind and choppy seas, fixing turbines.
National Grid: BUILDING THE NET ZERO ENERGY WORKFORCE
Designing and implementing new technologies:
The Net Zero Energy Workforce will require highly skilled
scientists, engineers and designers to design, test and
maximise the potential for new technologies such as
effective carbon capture, hydrogen gas, and to enable
growth in networks that deliver energy from source to
people’s homes
https://www.nationalgrid.com/document/126256/download
– – –
Corporate mumbo-jumbo.
Isn’t this exactly what the critic in the post is complaining about? Why is it up to the UK to try to invent stuff for net zero? They are making policy with no existing means of implementing it.
Everybody knows CCS is nearly all talk and no action, apart from expensive trials that were abandoned. Only projects where the captured CO2 was then used in oil recovery have been able to survive the chop.
$100 Million From Elon Musk Won’t Enable Carbon Capture
Jan 24, 2021
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brentanalexander/2021/01/24/100-million-from-elon-musk-wont-enable-carbon-capture/
The basic idea there being to make not doing CCS more expensive than doing it. At least Musk has highlighted the fact that he’s going to need fossil fuels for a long time to come, hence the cry for CCS help.
The Net Zero Economy won’t be able to feed highly skilled scientists, engineers and designers.
People’s homes will be abandoned.
Until the invaders arrive.