03/04/2012 Newsnight Scotland


03/04/2012

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 03/04/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

claim the new rules lack any real teeth and won't stop the scandals.

:00:13.:00:19.

Tonight, �1 billion to compete for to encourage the old-style power

:00:19.:00:21.

generators to sink their greenhouse gases to the bottom of the North

:00:21.:00:25.

Sea, but the rules have changed and do the Scottish proposals for

:00:25.:00:29.

capture and storage now have any chance of winning? Good evening.

:00:29.:00:34.

The come tition to make it work is back on. The UK Government is

:00:34.:00:39.

offering �1 billion to the winner of a contest to develop the

:00:39.:00:42.

technology. A similar competition collapsed last year when all the

:00:42.:00:51.

companies pulled out. We have this report. The last time this

:00:51.:00:56.

competition was launched Scottish Power's plant in Fife had been the

:00:56.:01:00.

only remaining site in the running, but in 2011 the UK Government

:01:00.:01:08.

pulled the plug on it and no prize money was awarded. Now, five years

:01:08.:01:12.

later, the UK Government is launching the �1 billion

:01:12.:01:18.

competition again. It's for schemes to trap and buery Co2. Offering the

:01:18.:01:23.

same amount -- buerying Co2. Offering the same amount, �1

:01:23.:01:27.

billion. What is carbon capture and storage? Here's the science. Many

:01:27.:01:31.

factories and plants produce the gas. The idea here is that instead

:01:31.:01:36.

of releasing it into the atmosphere, it gets buried deep in the sea, in

:01:36.:01:40.

the old oil and gas fields, but the problem is how to make that viable

:01:40.:01:44.

on an industrial scale. It's a competition that has failed before,

:01:44.:01:50.

so why would it work this time? need to get on with CCS and to make

:01:50.:01:54.

it a reality in commercial terms as well as the theory, which we know

:01:54.:01:57.

can work and it was very disappointing what happened, but

:01:57.:02:00.

there is real potential. The Government needs to bring forward a

:02:00.:02:03.

bit more clarity about the amount of money that is available and

:02:03.:02:09.

exactly how many projects they are likely to support. The Department

:02:09.:02:12.

of Energy and Climate Change says the �1 billion in funding will be

:02:12.:02:16.

available to a wider range of projects, including gas power

:02:16.:02:20.

stations and even industrial plants involved as part of group schemes,

:02:20.:02:24.

to develop carbon capture storage on a commercial scale. Projects

:02:24.:02:32.

must be in the UK and operational between 2016 and 2020. Co2 storage

:02:32.:02:37.

is to be sited offshore. The UK Government also announced �125

:02:37.:02:42.

million for research and development of the technology. So,

:02:42.:02:46.

should Scotland have its eye on the prize this time? Well, we welcome

:02:46.:02:55.

the announcement today and Scotland is extremely well-placed to take

:02:55.:02:56.

forward CCS projects. We have had two disappointments in the past.

:02:56.:03:01.

2007 Peterhead and last year Longannet, but we have excellent

:03:01.:03:04.

projects and we have the ideas and people and place to store the

:03:04.:03:08.

carbon. In fact, we have half of the potential storage capacity in

:03:08.:03:15.

the whole of Europe as well as the pipelines, the industry and the

:03:15.:03:19.

expert, so Scotland is ideally placed to benefit from this and we

:03:19.:03:24.

very much hope that this time around Scotland's strengths will be

:03:24.:03:29.

recognised. Around four years' worth of work went into developing

:03:29.:03:34.

the project here at Longannet. It's the UK's second-largest coal-fired

:03:34.:03:39.

power station and one of the country's biggest producers of

:03:39.:03:43.

greenhouse gases. Every year it supplies energy to around two

:03:43.:03:47.

million people, but it emits between seven and eight million

:03:47.:03:56.

tonnes' worth of Co2. The idea was to pump lickified Co2 from here to

:03:56.:04:01.

depleted oil and gas fields in the North Sea. But, the project got

:04:01.:04:05.

abandoned when it got too expensive. Scottish Power estimated it would

:04:05.:04:10.

cost around �1.5 billion, but the UK Government didn't want to spend

:04:10.:04:17.

more than �1 billion it has set aside for the trial. Scottish Power

:04:17.:04:20.

say they'll be monitoring the competition closely, but Longannet

:04:20.:04:23.

will not be entering this time. However, there are other locations

:04:23.:04:30.

that might be thinking about it. Across the water at grangemouth a

:04:30.:04:33.

Seattle-based power station is planning to build a coal-fuelled

:04:33.:04:38.

station. The plant could use the technology in a bid to release e--

:04:38.:04:45.

reduce emissions by more than 90%. Could the plant in Ayrshire be in

:04:45.:04:53.

line? Councillors voted to reject the plans to build on the site.

:04:53.:04:56.

They said it would experimental carbon capture and storage

:04:56.:05:04.

technology at the site. And some are tipping Peterhead Power Station.

:05:04.:05:06.

Shell and Scottish and Southern Energy want to develop the

:05:06.:05:10.

technology there. The competition is open now and of course epbt

:05:10.:05:13.

entries are expected from all over -- entries are expected from all

:05:13.:05:18.

over the UK. I'm joined now from Inverness by Stuart Haszeldine,

:05:18.:05:20.

Professor of Carbon Capture and Storage. In Edinburgh is David

:05:20.:05:23.

Hunter, an energy industry analyst with the M&C Group and Rob Edwards,

:05:23.:05:32.

the environment correspondent of the Sunday Herald. David, Fergus

:05:32.:05:37.

Ewing there was saying Scotland is ideally placed to take advantage of

:05:37.:05:41.

this technology. That's not necessarily the case, though, is it,

:05:41.:05:46.

particularly given that the rules have now changed and that gas-fired

:05:46.:05:51.

power stations can take part? In areas like Teesside are arguably in

:05:51.:05:56.

as good, if not, a better position, aren't they? Scotland's in a good

:05:56.:06:00.

position. You are right that the Teesside and Yorkshire and Humber

:06:00.:06:07.

cluster has a number of two or three consortiums looking at it,

:06:07.:06:12.

but if you look at Peterhead with SSE and Shell, that is a gas-fired

:06:12.:06:16.

power station, but also using Scotland's North Sea infrastructure

:06:16.:06:23.

to provide the pipeline and outlet there's a lot for Scotland to be

:06:23.:06:25.

positive about. We need to go into this. Isn't one of the arguments

:06:25.:06:32.

now that you want ideally to have a cluster of things that can use CCS,

:06:32.:06:38.

so if you have an area that has a big, heavy steel plant and a large

:06:38.:06:43.

coal-fired power station, then - and the west of Scotland may in

:06:43.:06:47.

some respects come into that, but Yorkshire and Teesside certainly

:06:47.:06:50.

does and also it's on the east coast, therefore it's not that far

:06:50.:06:54.

from the North Sea Oil fields, that that would give it an advantage?

:06:54.:06:57.

Yes, absolutely. There will be competition. What we don't know yet

:06:57.:07:04.

is how many projects might attract funding. There are specific fors

:07:04.:07:07.

and against, including Peterhead, but also if you look at the

:07:07.:07:11.

potential plans for grangemouth and then you have long ganget, where

:07:11.:07:15.

Scottish Power are monitoring the situation, so that can be defined

:07:15.:07:20.

as a cluster d Longannet. Scotland has the North Sea infrastructure

:07:20.:07:26.

and industry that I think could play a big role, so I don't think

:07:26.:07:32.

we should do ourselves down. Stuart, again, the worry here that the hope

:07:32.:07:38.

has always been that the UK/Scotland could develop an

:07:38.:07:43.

industrial lead in this technology. Things again have slightly changed

:07:43.:07:49.

since the Longannet change. The proposal by an American company to

:07:49.:07:53.

build a coal-fired power station is using technology, as I understand

:07:53.:07:57.

it, which they've been subsidised by the American Government to

:07:57.:08:01.

develop in Texas, so it's slightly unclear why allowing them to build

:08:01.:08:05.

a similar plant in Scotland would in anyway give Scotland the

:08:05.:08:10.

technological lead in anything? think there's two or three good

:08:10.:08:16.

reasons for welcoming that, because if we still need to have low-carbon

:08:16.:08:19.

electricity in Scotland to achieve our overall climate change

:08:19.:08:24.

objectives, remember, even if we meet the objectives of building all

:08:24.:08:29.

the wind power we plan to, we'll still need fossil fuel for about

:08:29.:08:33.

two thirds of the time in varying amounts and still need to generate

:08:33.:08:37.

electricity from those sources. One of the key things there is if the

:08:37.:08:42.

summit power develop their plant in Texas they'll build a second plant

:08:42.:08:45.

here in Scotland, with the Caledonian projects, so we'll be

:08:45.:08:47.

able to have the benefit of learning from the mistake they may

:08:47.:08:52.

or may not have made there, so it will be a lot easier and less risky

:08:52.:08:56.

to build it there and that then does form the basis of a cluster.

:08:56.:09:01.

You are right to point to that. Yorkshire is the group to beat and

:09:01.:09:06.

we can beat Peterhead out to Shell's storage site, which was

:09:06.:09:12.

evaluated. That's ready to go. That's a gas plant. We then link in

:09:12.:09:16.

the summit power plant from Grangemouth with the pipeline,

:09:16.:09:21.

which was evaluated for Longannet and we can build on that and the

:09:21.:09:24.

summit power can link in gradually with the refinery and start to take

:09:24.:09:34.
:09:34.:09:35.

away some of the carbon from those He have not answered my point about

:09:35.:09:42.

the technological lead. It is a bit like wind turbine. We may seem to

:09:42.:09:44.

have that all over the place generating renewable energy, but we

:09:44.:09:49.

do not have the technology to called the lead in building them.

:09:49.:09:53.

They are largely built by companies elsewhere. My point is that if the

:09:53.:10:00.

so that -- summit project goes ahead, it is American technology

:10:00.:10:05.

whereas the politicians in Scotland and London are presenting the CCS

:10:05.:10:09.

as a technology they want Britain Stroke Scotland to lead him.

:10:09.:10:15.

matter which of these projects we look at whether its Peterhead or

:10:15.:10:20.

Grange Merthyr or any of the Yorkshire projects, they will all

:10:20.:10:24.

be using large amounts of components and quite big components

:10:25.:10:30.

derived from outside of the UK. Because we are part of an

:10:30.:10:33.

international playing field there. What we to also bring to that is we

:10:33.:10:39.

can offer cover a be will develop the storage sites the minister was

:10:39.:10:43.

correct and that, we have that unique attribute and if we can

:10:43.:10:48.

develop storage sites in Scotland in one, two or three sites, that

:10:48.:10:53.

will attract him more investment. Not just for Scotland, but also for

:10:53.:10:59.

England than the rest of Europe. Rob Edwards, I am curious of your

:10:59.:11:02.

take on this. For the Environment will point of view, that other

:11:02.:11:07.

thing that changed is that Longannet was an existing power

:11:07.:11:11.

stage chair which is belching out C02 into the atmosphere and those

:11:11.:11:14.

people were say that if you could develop technology to stop that,

:11:14.:11:21.

five. We now seem to have moved him to all proposals to build new coal-

:11:21.:11:24.

fired power stations with the promise that at some point, copper

:11:24.:11:29.

and capture will take away some of the greenhouse gases. That is

:11:29.:11:35.

different, isn't it? What was it does today was very different. We

:11:35.:11:39.

all know that sequels are not as often as good as the originals.

:11:39.:11:45.

That is the case here. We have a sequel that is not as good as the

:11:45.:11:49.

plan last year. The money is going to be spread over more people.

:11:49.:11:56.

don't know that, do we? Probably. It is some way in the future, maybe

:11:56.:12:03.

be on the next election. So there is a lot of doubt about the actual,

:12:03.:12:07.

whether this actually will lead to anything. That is the problem. I

:12:08.:12:10.

notice from reading this stuff put out today that they call this whole

:12:10.:12:15.

thing a road map. Maybe I am cynical, but when things are called

:12:15.:12:19.

road that it is where there is no plan and the government do not

:12:19.:12:22.

really want to invest substantial sums of money to do really good

:12:22.:12:28.

things. I fear that is where we are with this today. That is a danger,

:12:28.:12:33.

David, isn't it that this is a fig- leaf for building the dirtiest form

:12:33.:12:41.

of power generation that we know of with more of it, with the promise

:12:41.:12:45.

that in some unspecified time, technology that has not yet been

:12:45.:12:51.

proven might do something to abate the impact? In terms of the plans

:12:51.:12:54.

announced today, what you can say is that the Government would argue

:12:54.:12:59.

they listen to industry and learn the lessons from last time which,

:12:59.:13:05.

let's be honest, wasn't a roaring success. We have to accept, as the

:13:05.:13:11.

country, that we need a Secure energy source of the future. It has

:13:11.:13:17.

to be sustainable, affordable and secured. Hang on, but the point I'm

:13:17.:13:22.

making is a distinction between same that you will develop CCS

:13:22.:13:27.

technology at a coal fire power station - most people say brilliant,

:13:27.:13:31.

that. Pollution from that power station - what we now have is a

:13:31.:13:37.

raft of proposals to build coal- fired power stations which was not

:13:37.:13:41.

on the agenda a few years ago with this promise that sometime in the

:13:41.:13:46.

future greenhouse gases would be shipped under the North Sea. To a

:13:46.:13:52.

degree look at the Kingsnorth power station in Kent. The plans are not

:13:52.:13:57.

precisely new. Kingsnorth was cancelled, wasn't it? It was, but

:13:57.:14:02.

it was in play recently. I would say it is important that the

:14:02.:14:06.

abatement strategy is Clear in order for these to get off-plan a

:14:06.:14:11.

into production. Yes it is new stations, but by 2015 at the latest

:14:11.:14:17.

we are closing a whole raft of all dirty power stations. It is not

:14:17.:14:22.

ideal, but we have to accept that, are we going to get this off the

:14:22.:14:28.

ground, are we going to become the leader? One of the problems not

:14:28.:14:33.

mention so far is that hunters there is a bad proposal. It

:14:33.:14:37.

proposes to capture a quarter or less of the carbon that it produces

:14:37.:14:41.

so the vast majority will still go into the atmosphere even if the

:14:41.:14:45.

technology works and, you know, helped to wreck our climate. I

:14:45.:14:49.

think that all to be ruled out straight away because in the vast

:14:49.:14:55.

majority, pollution will go into the sky. It is self-defeating.

:14:55.:15:03.

on Stewart. It is a disadvantage being far away. We have to focus on

:15:03.:15:07.

two more things one that looked all of these plants were with. Some

:15:07.:15:13.

packages are better than others. We get about a third or maybe half of

:15:13.:15:17.

our electricity at the time from gas burning in the UK. We will get

:15:17.:15:22.

a lot more from gas burning. There is a gas plant at Peterhead. It is

:15:22.:15:29.

not true to say that all of these plants will develop. Peter head is

:15:29.:15:34.

existing American develop that. The Grangemouth proposition is

:15:34.:15:43.

potentially a new build. Peterhead is a desperate? Back is

:15:43.:15:48.

correct. So it was the Coal plans I was suggesting that were new, not

:15:48.:15:52.

the gas plants. A I'm trying to point out there are a range of

:15:52.:15:55.

different packages on offer so it is a mistake to say it is all new

:15:56.:16:03.

coal. A related David Hunter, but relevant issue, is that this has

:16:03.:16:08.

been a complete disaster by the government, hasn't it? In the four

:16:08.:16:14.

years that it has taken the government is spent something like

:16:14.:16:19.

�65 million are rubbing this competition which failed, both the

:16:19.:16:23.

American government other Canadian government have set up and got

:16:23.:16:29.

running projects for CCS in America - one in Mississippi award included

:16:30.:16:34.

debt - which will go to come on- stream in 2016. So far hit we have

:16:34.:16:40.

managed to do nothing whatsoever. think that is very valid criticism.

:16:40.:16:45.

The Audit Office looked at this in terms of the plans that were in

:16:45.:16:49.

place and simply didn't work. We were looking at being critical of

:16:49.:16:53.

the new plans will have to consider that, at least they have listened

:16:53.:16:58.

to the industry and decided to be more flexible. At this stage we

:16:58.:17:02.

can't be judgmental. We have to get real and that if we want to be at

:17:02.:17:06.

the forefront of this technology, we are playing catch-up already and

:17:06.:17:10.

I think we have to be serious about the investment and the energy

:17:10.:17:16.

report behind this to make sure we are at the forefront of what has to

:17:16.:17:20.

be a very important contribution to low carbon energy. Stuart

:17:20.:17:25.

Haszeldine, why do you think this has been such a catalogue of... I

:17:25.:17:29.

may Britain is not the only place where CCS technology has been

:17:29.:17:34.

delayed, but there seems to be a catalogue of errors here. It should

:17:34.:17:38.

I think the Government's, successive governments don't like

:17:38.:17:43.

taking any source of risk. They have not been able to interface

:17:43.:17:47.

with the industry very well and the Government has been fixated on coal,

:17:47.:17:52.

you are correct there, and are gradually coming out of that. The

:17:52.:17:57.

good thing here is it emits a set of different technologies. Scotland

:17:57.:18:01.

has a good chance of making a strong bid here and I think it is

:18:01.:18:05.

important to say. The other thing that everyone has missed is that

:18:05.:18:10.

the been empowered is only the start of what is on offer. For a

:18:10.:18:13.

successful project, it will be supported by a higher price just

:18:13.:18:18.

like we support Wim projects with a higher price for electricity. The

:18:18.:18:23.

winning project will get an extra �3 billion to cover operating costs.

:18:24.:18:28.

Rob Edwards, would you accept the argument that despite your doubts

:18:28.:18:33.

about building coal-fired power stations, the reality is that in

:18:33.:18:36.

the forest, for example, of hundreds of these things are going

:18:36.:18:40.

to be built therefore if we can quickly develop the technology at

:18:40.:18:46.

the cost of one or two more in Western Europe, but that could

:18:46.:18:50.

Denby fitted to places in China or India the game might be worth a

:18:50.:18:57.

candle? Yes. That is a very fair point. Technology that is

:18:57.:19:04.

successful in capturing carbon would be very important globally in

:19:04.:19:10.

beating the problem we have, but the, you know, I do wonder whether

:19:10.:19:16.

because of their doubts and the sort of real note, there is a

:19:16.:19:21.

retread we are doing other carbon capture. There is a powerful lobby

:19:21.:19:26.

of people within the environmental movement, some think it is a good

:19:26.:19:31.

thing, some think they are sceptical and should invested

:19:31.:19:35.

energy renewables. We are out of time. Thank you all very much

:19:35.:19:41.

indeed. We are so out of time we do not have time for any papers today.

:19:41.:19:51.
:19:51.:19:55.

That is it. I will be back tomorrow, What a day it has been. The day

:19:55.:20:00.

that winter a bit back with worse conditions heading south. Snow up

:20:00.:20:02.

conditions heading south. Snow up over the high ground causing major

:20:02.:20:08.

problems. That snow blowing around a gale-force wind. No great

:20:08.:20:13.

improvements across England and Wales. Snow over the high ground

:20:13.:20:20.

with her raw feeling. Southern counties looking relatively mild.

:20:20.:20:26.

Shop showers, so do not get caught out. But we run back into the cold,

:20:26.:20:31.

a wintery weather again. Most of the snow over the highest ground

:20:31.:20:35.

where it will cause problems locally. Brightest prospects in

:20:35.:20:39.

Northern Ireland. Don't expect a heat wave, but in the sunshine and

:20:39.:20:45.

out of the breeze it will not feel too bad. Scotland, a better day

:20:45.:20:51.

apart from the far north. Looking ahead to Thursday, across northern

:20:51.:20:56.

areas, again a lot of dry weather. It will cloud over across the far

:20:56.:21:01.

north-west. Further south, a fair bit of cloud but Hill snow will

:21:01.:21:05.

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS