Photosynthesis: nature requires carbon dioxide
The Environmental Protection Agency will set limits on power plants’ emissions, forcing them to ‘clean up’ (as they erroneously describe it) or shut down. But carbon capture is energy-intensive and expensive, so the idea doesn’t really work – hence the very low or often non-existent level of adoption even in climate-obsessed countries, and burning hydrogen has its own scientifically proven pollution issues, contrary to popular belief.
– – –
The Biden administration unveiled a sweeping plan to slash greenhouse gas emissions from the nation’s power industry on Thursday, one of the biggest steps so far in its effort to decarbonise the American economy to fight climate change, says Climate Home News.
The proposal would limit the amount of carbon dioxide that power plants, which are the source of more than a quarter of U.S. emissions, can send into the atmosphere, putting the industry on a years-long course to install billions of dollars of new equipment or shut down.
Environmental groups and scientists have long argued that such steps are crucial to curb global warming, but fossil-fuel-producing states argue that they represent government overreach and threaten to destabilise the electric grid.
The Environmental Protection Agency projects the plan would cut carbon emissions from coal plants and new gas plants by 617 million tonnes between 2028 and 2042.
That’s around 44m tonnes a year, about the same as the nation of Denmark pumps out.
CCS or hydrogen
The proposal sets standards that would push companies to install carbon capture equipment that can siphon the carbon dioxide from a power plant’s smokestack before it reaches the atmosphere, or use super-low-emissions hydrogen as a fuel.
“EPA’s proposal relies on proven, readily available technologies to limit carbon pollution and seizes the momentum already underway in the power sector to move toward a cleaner future,” Administrator Michael Regan said in a statement.
Full article here.
– – –
Talkshop comment: ‘carbon pollution’ is a misnomer.
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
It is obvious the EPA has no idea what they are talking about or they are just following the latest political leanings. They need to learn two things, 1- carbon is usually a black solid, unless it is a diamond, and 2- if they mean carbon dioxide then it is a necessary plant food – no CO2 = no plants = no food.
Maybe they should talk to some of the commercial growers that use green houses and poly tunnels in which to grow food and find out why they increase the CO2 in the air for the plants.
The other thing to note is if they are looking for ‘a cleaner future’ then they should be pushing for nuclear power stations.
Reblogged this on Climate Collections.
And another thing…
Hydrogen ‘twice as powerful a greenhouse gas as previously thought’: UK government study
Report highlights importance of preventing leakage from future H2 infrastructure
8 April 2022
A study released on Friday by the UK government’s Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) has found that hydrogen is twice as powerful a greenhouse gas as previously thought.
The 75-page report, Atmospheric Implications of Increased Hydrogen Use, explains that H2 is an indirect greenhouse gas, which reacts with other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere to increase their global warming potential (GWP).
. . .
In other words, the study says the GWP figure is somewhere between six and 16, with 11 being the average — whereas the GWP of CO2 is one. A previous study from 2001, which has been frequently cited ever since, put the GWP of hydrogen at 5.8.
And perhaps more importantly for the race to net zero, it adds: “For a 20-year time horizon, we obtain a GWP(20) for H2 of 33, with an uncertainty range of 20 to 44.” [bold added]
https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/hydrogen-twice-as-powerful-a-greenhouse-gas-as-previously-thought-uk-government-study/2-1-1200115
– – –
Hydrogen in pipes and containers is notoriously leaky, with no detectable odour.
The US government and its agencies now simply lie, pretty much every day about pretty much everything.
“Hydrogen ‘twice as powerful a greenhouse gas as previously thought’”
Don’t you just love all this “settled science”!
What happens if the companies running power plants decide that the costs would be too great and just shut down the power plant?
Graeme – isn’t that what the EPA want? They don’t seem to care whether the country runs out of electricity on a regular basis.
forcing us into Middle Ages lifestyles is one of the goals
Another way CCS is too expensive…
MAY 17, 2023
EPA’s crackdown on power plant emissions is a big first step—but it will be hard to ensure captured carbon stays put
— The Conversation
To avoid dubious methods, corner-cutting and greenwashing, carbon storage will have to be held to high standards. The U.S. can’t afford to pin a large chunk of its climate strategy on carbon storage without proof.
https://phys.org/news/2023-05-epa-crackdown-power-emissions-big.html
May 18, 2023
World’s largest carbon capture plant running at a third of its planned capacity
Critics say that the failure of the carbon capture plant undermines the push for CSS technology.
https://www.offshore-technology.com/news/worlds-largest-carbon-capture-plant-running-at-a-third-of-its-planned-capacity/
[…] From Tallbloke’s Talkshop […]