I agree that there might be sensible exceptions. What I'm getting at is that the announcement smacks of election-year propaganda, rather than any sort of well thought out strategy.
There has been some discussion recently of making power sources more environmentally friendly. Our main one is coal (brown in Victoria, black in NSW and Qld). Victoria has the dubious distinction of having the most polluting (CO2 per MWh) power station in the industrialised world. We have hundreds of years coal supply and the output from coal burning could be made much cleaner by trapping the CO2 and not letting it into the atmosphere. However, this would push up the cost of electicity by about 25%. While it mightn't be as immediately popular, building or retrofitting power stations would be far more useful than forcing everyone to do what most people are doing already.
It's a very sensible idea. Trapping CO2 at the power station allows it to be stored somewhere safe (maybe in old underground rocks that used to have natural gas).
If it only adds 25% to the cost of power generation, then it could be a viable option, especially as there would be major reluctance not to use the coal.
If we can use fossil fuels without the associated CO2, then I'm all for it.
Some doubt has been expressed about geosequestration of coal-derived CO2 of late, though, on the grounds that it can exacerbate local fault lines. Coming from Newcastle, as I do, I know I never want to experience an earthquake greater than 5.5. That was scary enough. Not that this means it is impossible, but just that some areas cannot embrace the idea as whole-heartedly as others.
It would certainly have to be areas with apropriate geology. Natural gas (as far as I'm aware) tends to occur in pretty much fault-free areas (otherwise it would have escaped long ago).
But one of the ongoing problems is that fossil fuels will run out sooner or later -we will eventually need alternative sources - be they nuclear or based on "renewables" such as wind and water. Additionally, we are dependent on oil resources for other products besides energy - it may make some sense long term to conserve these resources for those products!
Additionally, do we want to be reliant on other countries for our fuel. Whilst there may still be a fair amount of gas and oil in "offshore Britain" the amount is finite and will run out eventually.
It also opens the argument about the benefits of nuclear power - whilst spent nuclear fuel is not nice, there is a negligible carbon footprint from nuclear power stations.
Some countries are very dependent on nuclear power - ISTR that something like 70% of France's electricity is from atomic energy.
Is the penalty (and problems) of spent fuel (and the security problems as well!) worth the saving of the greenhouse gases?
There has been some discussion recently of making power sources more environmentally friendly. Our main one is coal (brown in Victoria, black in NSW and Qld). Victoria has the dubious distinction of having the most polluting (CO2 per MWh) power station in the industrialised world. We have hundreds of years coal supply and the output from coal burning could be made much cleaner by trapping the CO2 and not letting it into the atmosphere. However, this would push up the cost of electicity by about 25%. While it mightn't be as immediately popular, building or retrofitting power stations would be far more useful than forcing everyone to do what most people are doing already.
Reply
If it only adds 25% to the cost of power generation, then it could be a viable option, especially as there would be major reluctance not to use the coal.
If we can use fossil fuels without the associated CO2, then I'm all for it.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Additionally, do we want to be reliant on other countries for our fuel. Whilst there may still be a fair amount of gas and oil in "offshore Britain" the amount is finite and will run out eventually.
Alastair
Reply
Some countries are very dependent on nuclear power - ISTR that something like 70% of France's electricity is from atomic energy.
Is the penalty (and problems) of spent fuel (and the security problems as well!) worth the saving of the greenhouse gases?
Alastair
Reply
Leave a comment