This snapshot, taken on
07/01/2011
, shows web content acquired for preservation by The National Archives. External links, forms and search may not work in archived websites and contact details are likely to be out of date.
 
 
The UK Government Web Archive does not use cookies but some may be left in your browser from archived websites.
Advanced search
Top image
Global conversations
David Miliband
(Archived), London

Carbon capture and storage

Posted 15 December 2008 by David Miliband  |  4 comments

One of the last but most important questions to be resolved in the climate and energy deal just agreed at the European Council was how to finance the demonstration of carbon capture and storage (CCS), the technologies that remove carbon emissions from fossil power plants and bury them indefinitely in geological reservoirs underground. In the event we managed to secure a package that will fund the construction of the 10 or so plants we will need in order to discover if we can make CCS work safely and affordably at scale. This fulfils the commitment European leaders made at their Summit last spring.

This is a breakthrough agreement. Coal is a reality. China has in recent years been building 2 new coal plants a week. The US and Germany get 50% of their electricity from coal. Unless we can find a way of ensuring that the coal that is inevitably going to be burned is emission free, there will be no chance of avoiding dangerous climate change.

Today's deal in effect establishes one of the most transformational technology partnerships ever seen. It brings us a big step closer to establishing the zero emission power systems we urgently need, not only in the EU but also in the US, China and elsewhere. It will help those in the US Congress like Senator Kerry who have been pressing for a similar package to change the game on coal in the US. It thereby puts in place a critical precondition for the agreement we need to reach at Copenhagen next year on a new international framework for climate change. That will now take centre stage.  



David Miliband
15 December 2008
Tags: ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  , 

Share this with:


Recent comments

>> Coal is one of Britain's biggest resources, and investing in more coal plants would make us...<<
jojo
15 December 2008

>> Jojo, coal and oil are used to feed very different markets. If 'Clean Coal' became a reality then...<<
Francis J.L. Osborn
16 December 2008

See all comments (5) ›

Have an opinion?




Comments:

1
>> Coal is one of Britain's biggest resources, and investing in more coal plants would make us independent of middle-east oil and Russian gas. And it is a lot less dangerous than nuclear. Britain should scrap the nuclear option and concentrate on coal. <<

jojo
15 Dec 2008

2
>> Jojo, coal and oil are used to feed very different markets. If 'Clean Coal' became a reality then it would help our energy situation and could give room for an export coalmining industry, but unless we can run our road, air and sea transport systems off North Sea Oil alone impossible! then we will not be independent of other oil producing countries. <<

Francis J.L. Osborn
16 Dec 2008

3
>> Sooner or later, natural resources will be depleted in all countries. In this case, I'd advice the developed countries to seek safe alternative substitutions to hydrocarbon seams. For example, Russia invests actively into the latest technologies NANO technologies. it's a huge scientific project considered to be one of the Russian economical and technological priorities for this moment. <<

Louisa
17 Dec 2008

4
>> "Coal is a reality." That's not a reason not to rule out dirty coal stations in the UK. If Britain's to be a world leader on climate change, you can't burn THE dirtiest fuel available in THE least efficient power stations there are. Thats not scientifically literate or good politics. CCS is years off commercial viability and Lord Turner and Lord Stern both made clear that the ETS alone isn't going to guide the decarbonisation of the power sector on the time scale required. Four US states have already introduced green standards for power plants that rule out dirty coal stations and theyre simultaneously driving forward the low-carbon options. It makes perfect sense to complement the ETS with a similar measure here, and it seems to me that the only reason you're not is that you're playing party politics over climate change and don't want to have to follow the Tories on this. This is too serious an issue for that game. Blair would say 'If it works, it works.' Green standards are already working in California with no detrimental effects on either economic growth or energy security. Why not here? <<

Joss
27 Dec 2008

Add a Comment *Required fields
Comments are closed for this entry.