A BBC article headline asked: ‘Carbon capture: What is it and how does it fight climate change?’ But a report last year found a Shell Oil project output more CO2 than it captured. The amount of CO2 such sites can capture is negligible anyway, and they’re relying on ‘hopium’ to bring the high costs down. Given the lack of evidence of success of CCS installations, why is the BBC – or anyone – promoting it as a climate benefit?
– – –
The UK government has announced that the first sites in the UK to capture greenhouse gases will be in Teesside, says BBC News.
The carbon capture plants are designed to prevent carbon dioxide (CO2) from industrial processes and power stations being released into the atmosphere.
The announcement was part of the government’s new Net Zero Strategy and aims to move the UK closer to meeting its legally-binding carbon commitments.
. . .
Why is carbon capture needed?
Carbon capture power plants are part of the government’s commitment to remove carbon from UK electricity production by 2035.
It hopes to build at least one by the mid 2020s, although that deadline now looks improbable.
There has been a big expansion in renewable energy in the last decade – in particular the use of offshore wind – but the unresolved question is how to keep the lights on when the wind isn’t blowing.
Carbon capture power stations are seen as part of the solution, along with the increased use of nuclear energy, and other rapidly-evolving technologies such as hydrogen.
. . .
How much CO2 will these plants remove?
In 2021, the UK emitted 425 million tonnes of CO2. That’s fallen by almost 50% since 1990.
The amount being captured at these proposed power stations is very small by comparison.
None of the proposed carbon capture plants claims to capture more than two million tonnes a year.
The government has set a target to capture between 20 and 30 million tonnes of CO2 a year by 2030. That could involve other industrial processes as well as power generation.
How much will carbon capture cost?
The technology has been around for decades. It’s mainly been used in industries where captured CO2 can be reused, for example to force out oil and gas from underground reserves.
There are no such plans to use the CO2 from the new proposed power stations.
The cost of a new gas power station, providing electricity for nearly a million homes, is around £350m.
Catherine Raw of energy company SSE told the BBC that building a similar sized gas power station with carbon capture would roughly double the cost.
The hope is that the price might fall over time. The cost of renewable energy for example has plummeted in the last decade.
There are those who see carbon capture as too expensive and believe the money would be better spent on renewables and power storage (like batteries).
“These power stations look like another excuse for the government to show preference to their friends in the oil and gas industry, making energy more expensive to everyone else’s disadvantage,” says Dr Doug Parr of campaign group Greenpeace UK.
Do other countries have carbon capture?
In September 2022 there were just 30 carbon capture facilities in the world, according to a report from the Global CCS Institute.
Almost all of these are attached to industrial plants carrying out activities such as natural gas processing or fertiliser production.
Once built, it is hoped other industries would use the UK power station’s pipeline to store CO2 under the North Sea.
Full article here.







Friend lives on the route of the Humber hydrogen and CC project
National Grid dug a huge hole there and put the pipelaying machines down
on the last day someone broke in and stole £1m worth of equipment.
Site now all covered up and finished now.
BTW the construction guys polluted the environment by leaving their cans and crisp packets along the road.
Each phase has a huge CO2 footprint to start off
#1 pipelines under Humber from Hull to Brigg PS to Scunthorpe Steelworks to Keadby PS to Drax PS
#2 Start producing hydrogen in Hull by steamtreating methane, then send it through pipeline to the power stations etc.
#3 Somehow capture CO2 at all the plants send it to Hull and North Sea caverns
#4 Unicorns develop magic way of making hydrogen by windfarm electricity economic ..and that replaces the stuff from methane.
Greens are not green
Carbon capture and Storage is just an energy expensive and costly means of throwing away irrelevant quantities of useful plant food.
Wow, more boondoggles to enrich friends pockets with. I am so disgusted with news media around the world. This nonsense about the Satanic Gases should have been shut down decades back. Yet, here we are with another snake oil fix for a non existent problem. Morals and ethics have gone right out the window. The media keep any number of boogeymen on the front page to alarm the NPC public with. Envision a scene from Shaun the Sheep as they rush about the pasture in high alarm. Welcome to our world.
————–
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.” – H.L. Menken
“The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is only 0.04 percent,” says Jon Hovland, who is a Chief Research Scientist at SINTEF Industry. “Because of this low concentration, a lot of energy is needed to extract the gas, and facilities require a large area. This makes the cost per ton of captured CO2 very high,” he says.
https://phys.org/news/2023-05-carbon-capture-atmosphere.html
Well, duh 🙄
The common theme with most green crackpot ideas is that they typically require a massive upfront use of fossil fuel energy, and then ongoing parasitic energy increases on top of the energy we wanted to use in the first place. They are scams that require the suspension of critical thinking.
Another green dud…
The heat pump rollout is an entirely predictable fiasco
The government wants us to rip out cheap and effective heating for expensive new hardware. It’s no wonder uptake is slow
ROSS CLARK
3 May 2023
‘If heat pumps are failing to capture public imagination now, with the government chipping in thousands of pounds towards the cost, what hope is there when the cash runs out?’
. . .
Delve into the government’s figures for the Boiler Upgrade Scheme and you can see the problem. Even with a £5,000 voucher, installing a heat pump is a fantastically expensive business.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/05/03/the-heat-pump-rollout-is-an-entirely-predictable-fiasco/
oldbrew one has to wonder just how much heat those heat pumps will pump during a sub zero winter. If my reading of their specifications is correct it will be nothing, so how do people keep warm then.
My experience with reverse cycle air conditioners is that when it gets very cold outside it also gets cold inside. A friend bought a house with reverse cycle air conditioning, excellent in the summer but in the winter they had to buy a couple of bottle gas heaters to keep warm – so much for heat pumps, they are a scam in cold climates.
To be fair, Greens mostly don’t want CC. Imagine if we invented a cheap technology that could remove and store CO2 quickly and easily?
We could all just get on with out lives. Which is the last thing Greens want.
Given the chances of beating these nutters otherwise, we ought to be huge supporters of CC. Indeed, it should be the thing governments pour most money into. Sadly it looks pretty difficult to achieve.
But the level of CO2 doesn’t matter. Anyway, 31% of carbon (dioxide) captured will be Chinese
liardetg … We can’t have that !! ‘Anyway, 31% of carbon (dioxide) captured will be Chinese’ It’s OUR money being wasted on this scam. Thanks for poining that out, .
[…] Carbon Capture (an essay) […]