EU funds demonstration project with €180m award to be matched by UK government for 900MW coal-fired power station
Alok Jha and Tim Webb
guardian.co.uk, Friday 16 October 2009 17.36 BST

Britain’s first carbon capture and storage demonstration plant will be built at Hatfield in Yorkshire, thanks to a €180m award from the European Union. The funds, announced today, will be matched by the UK government.
The money has been awarded to Powerfuel Power for a 900MW coal-fired electricity plant that could start operating as soon as 2014. The company will use “pre-combustion” CCS technology, which removes carbon dioxide from the coal before it is burned, and then pipes it to be buried in an offshore gas field 100 miles away. Pre-combustion CCS should trap more CO2 than post-combustion techniques.
Other shortlisted CCS projects in the UK, from Scottish Power at Longannet and E.ON at the now-delayed power station at Kingsnorth, will not receive money from the EU fund. But eight other CCS demonstration plants will be subsidised across Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain and Italy.
“CCS is moving off the drawing board and into practical application. It’s a technology that has the potential to reduce CO2 emissions into the atmosphere by a vast amount,” said Chris Davies, the Liberal Democrat Euro-MP responsible for moving CCS legislation through the European Parliament last year.
Powerfuel wants to build a integrated gas-combined cycle power station at Hatfield. Coal is first gasified to produce carbon monoxide and hydrogen. The former is reacted with water to produce CO2, which is captured, and more hydrogen. The hydrogen can be diverted to a turbine where it can be burned to produce electricity. Alternatively, some of this gas can be bled off to feed hydrogen fuel cells for cars.
Richard Budge, owner of Powerfuel, said he was confident of securing the £2.4bn total funding he would need to build the power stationand expects the project to be completed by the end of 2014. He said that unless more power plants were built, the UK would face a shortfall in electricity capacity by 2016. “We have to do something, otherwise we better all start buying candles.”
CCS is widely seen as a critical technology in delivering energy security at the same time as cutting greenhouse gas emissions. It would allow the world’s abundant coal reserves to be used to generate electricity but sequester the emissions. However, it has yet to be demonstrated at commercial scale anywhere in the world, a task that will cost billions of pounds.
A spokesperson for the Department for Energy and Climate Change welcomed the Hatfield funding: “The UK is in a strong position on CCS and we expect to be one of the first countries in the world to demonstrate this technology.”
Last week E.ON delayed plans to build its own CCS coal plant at Kingsnorth for up to three years, blaming reduced energy demand caused by the recession. The company denied the EU decision had been a factor. “Whether we did or didn’t win the funding played no part in the decision to delay Kingsnorth ,” said a spokesperson. “We remain a contender in the UK government’s CCS competition to build up to four demonstration plants.
In its report the EU said that Hatfield’s plan to use pre-combustion CCS was “a highly innovative concept”. In addition, the EU was impressed with plans to create a cluster of CCS projects in the area , allowing several projects to share pipeline and storage infrastructure in the Yorkshire and Humberside area.
Yorkshire Liberal Democrat MEP Diana Wallis said: “This announcement should be welcomed as being great news for the region’s economy and for combating global climate change. Hopefully, it will the first of many such projects as the idea is to develop a ‘Humber Cluster’ of CCS projects that within 15 years could curb the emission of up to 70m tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere.”
The EU wants up to 12 commercial CCS projects to be demonstrated around the continent by 2015. Funding will come from a €1bn economic recovery programme, with additional support of €6bn expected to be announced next year.

Tesco, Coca-Cola and Reckitt Benckiser bosses press politicians for action and argue against need to curb economic growth
Patrick Wintour, political editor
guardian.co.uk, Friday 16 October 2009 18.07 BST
Climate change catastrophe can be averted by “greening” consumer behaviour rather than by curbing economic growth and mass consumerism, leaders of some of the world’s biggest businesses including Tesco, Coca-Cola and Reckitt Benckiser argued today.
They urged politicians to be braver at the Copenhagen talks on climate change in December, saying voters could be persuaded of the need to act. They were speaking, along with David Cameron and Professor Robert Puttnam, the sociologist and advocate of the importance of social capital, at a conference in London on the role of the consumer and business in combating climate change.
The degree of focus on climate change by the businesspeople would have been impossible five years ago. But some in the audience angrily insisted that they underestimated the need to slow consumerism.
Sir Terry Leahy, the chief executive of Tesco, told the conference that combating climate change was now the number one priority of his company, and announced that his multibillion-pound business would be zero-carbon by 2050. “Survival is the issue, not just for our business, but the entire planet,” he said.
The president of Coca-Cola, Muhtar Kent, warned politicians: “Act now or you will fail, and so will the world. Politicians need to think like businesses and think about the long term.” He claimed that consumers now put the environment at the top of their priorities in all of its customer surveys, including in developing countries such as Brazil and Mexico.
Bart Becht, the chief executive of Reckitt Benckiser, expressed his fear that a deal would not be made in Copenhagen. “Are we there yet? We are nowhere near. Government is not set up to handle global issues effectively. They have short time horizons, and elections, but we are institutions built to last.”
Paul Polman, of Unilever, said: “We need a whole new business model, but it takes time.”
The businessmen repeatedly argued that neither regulation nor government would be sufficient to bring emissions down, pointing out that 70% of emissions came from consumers.
Kent said Coca-Cola’s surveys suggested that as much as 70% of future advertising would have an environmental focus, and his aim was to reduce by 40% the energy footprint of its 10m refrigerators across 206 countries.
He said: “I think it is a fallacy to think growth and a sustainable world are mutually exclusive.”
Kent pointed out in the next decade there would be many millions more middle class people living in cities. “How can businesses continue to serve the needs of these new middle classes and yet embed sustainability into business plans? That is the goal.”
Leahy praised the carbon reduction targets being set by governments, but said: “It is only by realising our potential as people, citizens, consumers, as users that we can turn targets into reality. It will be a transition achieved not by some great invention or some great act of parliament, but through the billions of choices made by consumers every day all over the world.”
He warned that too often climate change was seen as a threat that “is turned into a demand for retreat. Consumers are told they must accept ever greater limits on their ambitions and a reduction on what they can desire all so their emissions may be cut. This is not just unrealistic, but also fails to see the enormous positive potential of consumers.”

President Obama must personally intervene to ensure the world reaches an ambitous deal to stop catastrophic global warming, according to British energy minister Ed Miliband.

By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent Published: 1:16PM BST 16 Oct 2009

The UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December is due to agree a replacement to the Kyoto Protocol.
However so far the 190 countries involved in the deal have failed to agree on how the world can keep temperature rise below two degrees C (3.6 degrees F).

Mr Miliband, the UK Energy and Climate Change Secretary, said it would help if world leaders attend the conference to ensure all countries take action on cutting carbon emissions.
Gordon Brown, the British Prime Minister, has already pledged to attend and President Obama is likely to be in the area having picked up his Nobel Peace Prize at around the same time.
Mr Miliband pointed out that the key decision to keep temperature rise below 2 degrees C (3.6 degrees F), at the G8 Summit in July, only happened because it was pushed by world leaders rather than just negotiators.
“I think the involvement of leaders is absolutely essential,” he said.
In a last-ditch attempt to ensure an ambitious deal is met, the UK is hosting the Major Economies Forum (MEF) next week that will bring together ministers and officials from around the world.
Mr Miliband said the Government was “determined to throw everything” at getting a successful deal.
“The day will concentrate minds, the MEF is bringing pieces together. We are throwing everything at it. We are determined to get a deal at Copenhagen,” he said.
He said rich countries must agree to legally binding mid-term targets to cut carbon emissions. At the moment this will be in the range of 25 and 40 per cent by 2020. This will be particularly difficult for the US where the President Obama is struggling to get through the necessary legislation.
“We are going all out to get an agreement with numbers. You cannot have success at Copenhagen without numbers,” he said. “Numbers are absolutely essential.”
Mr Miliband also said poorer countries like China and India need to agree to take action by agreeing to cut emissions against “business as usual”.
“We also need developing countries to take action because there is no solution to the problem of climate change – given that most of the emissions will come from developing countries in the future – unless they do something.”

Campaigners claim police have stepped up intimidation in week in which four activists were detained on way to Copenhagen
Adam Vaughan
guardian.co.uk, Friday 16 October 2009 13.04 BST
An environmental activist has been arrested in advance of a protest planned at a Nottinghamshire coal power station this weekend. As the unnamed campaigner was arrested yesterday on suspicion of conspiracy to commit criminal damage, it also emerged that a total of four climate activists have been detained this week attempting to travel to Copenhagen.
Climate activists including members of campaigning groups Climate Camp and Plane Stupid have pledged to shut down the Ratcliffe-on-Soar coal power station run by German energy giant E.ON. The arrests follow an injunction taken out by E.ON against protesters that will allow police to arrest anyone who enters the plant’s grounds. A large police and private security presence is expected at the site, which has upped its security measures, including the erection of a new electric fence.
The campaigner charged yesterday has been released and bailed to return to a police station on Saturday, when the power station protests are due to take place. On Tuesday this week, 31-year-old office worker Chris Kitchen was prevented from travelling to Copenhagen to take part in events around the UN climate talks this December. Three other activists are now understood to have been detained and searched this week while attempting to travel to Copenhagen, though they have subsequently completed their journeys.
Activists for Plane Stupid also claimed they were phoned yesterday by Nottinghamshire police and told “they would be arrested” if they came to Ratcliffe-on-Soar. Tracy Singh from Plane Stupid said “the police are acting like hoodlums. We are absolutely disgusted.” A press spokesperson for Nottinghamshire police said it would be facilitating lawful protest around the power station and denied activists would be arrested simply by coming to the site.
Richard Bernard, a spokesperson for Climate Camp, added: “They’re threatening and arresting people for just thinking and talking about taking meaningful action. This is clear intimidation — they’re just trying to scare us. But what’s really scary is climate change, and that’s why we’re going to take control of Ratcliffe on Saturday.”
E.ON has responded to the planned protest by placing a series of videos on its YouTube channel with comments from its press team, the power station manager and protestors.
A spokeswoman for E.ON, said: “We respect the right of people to have their say as long as it’s peaceful and lawful. [The planned action] is incredibly dangerous and irresponsible. What I would say is by all means come, but don’t try to break into the power station.”
Activists have been sharing satellite maps and photos of the power station online, which they plan to travel to by train and bus. The Ratcliffe-on-Soar power station emits 12.8m tonnes of CO2 a year and is Britain’s third largest source of direct greenhouse gas emissions. E.ON says it is one of the UK’s most efficient coal power stations.
In April this year, 114 people were arrested at a Nottingham school on suspicion of planning a direct action on the power station. At least 25 of the activsts have been subsequently charged with conspiracy to commit aggravated trespass, a charge which places restrictions on communications with friends and family and potentially carries a sentence of six months.
E.ON has also been the subject of an ongoing campaign by climate activists for its plans to build a new coal-fired power station at Kingsnorth in Kent. Last week the company said Kingsnorth had been postponed because of the global recession, an annoucement that campaigners viewed as a victory for the climate movement.

BB1 concept might make production, says the French manufacturer.

By Andrew EnglishPublished: 4:00PM BST 16 Oct 2009

A decision on production of the BB1 is expected within four months

Carbon-fibre construction makes the BB1 light but costly to produce
Peugeot may put its extraordinary little electric concept car, the BB1, into production.
The 8ft 2in four-seater has a lithium-ion battery-powered driveline with two 20bhp in-wheel electric motors. Instead of a steering wheel, it has handlebars and passengers sit on bicycle-style saddles.

“We will make a decision in three to four months,” says Jean-Marc Gales, Peugeot’s director general. “It depends on price. The BB1 weighs about 650kg (1,432lb), and we need to keep the mass under control. If we do that, we will keep costs under control.”
With its carbon-fibre bodywork, the BB1 will not be cheap, but Gales says it should sell for less than 12,000 euros (£11,140). With such a lightweight construction, Peugeot claims its range will be about 75 miles.
It might also mean the vehicle could be homologated under the quadricycle rules, which will mean cheaper tax and insurance.

Rowan Williams’s call to eat local ignores the plight of producers – and doesn’t necessarily help the environmental cause
James MacGregor
guardian.co.uk, Friday 16 October 2009 09.00 BST
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, has urged UK consumers to reduce their carbon footprint by shunning fruit and vegetables that have been flown from Africa.
But while many of his comments on climate change are sensible, this one is not. If followed, it could condemn hundreds of thousands of Africans to poverty.
Williams is well-meaning but he has fallen into a classic trap in treating the environment as sacrosanct, and worse, seeing simple solutions to complex environmental problems.
Stopping this trade would make hardly any impact on climate change but would harm over one million people in sub-Saharan Africa who depend on it for their livelihoods, and to pay for healthcare and the education of their children, girls in particular.
Air-freighted fruit and vegetables contribute less than one-tenth of one percent of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions.
Air freight is easy to demonise but even with transport included, African fruit and vegetables largely result in lower emissions than European ones that are grown in heated greenhouses. Far greater emissions result from the domestic transport of food goods within the United Kingdom than from flying them here in the first place, as the vast majority of African produce (over three-quarters) arrives in the UK in the belly of scheduled passenger planes.
Kenya’s per capita emissions are just 0.2 tonnes per person per year. The average UK citizen emits 50 times more. Is it ethical to penalise Kenyan farmers for our excesses?
I worry that simplistic reactions to climate issues, such as counting “food miles”, might change people’s behaviour in ways that are actually bad for global sustainable development. We need to stop thinking about “food miles” and start thinking about “fair miles” (pdf), focusing less on how far food has travelled and more on how it has been produced and by whom.
On this occasion, I fear that Williams’s comments might inspire a boycott of African products, with repercussions across the continent.
It is clear we are going to be living in a world increasingly dictated by climate. How we act now and in the near future will determine how quickly we hit climate change that is catastrophic.
Williams is missing a potential win-win which would have appeal across his global flock. Our consumption of African produce injects some £200m per year into rural areas of sub-Saharan Africa, where poverty is most acute.
The purchase of African produce is the single most important way that UK consumers engage with sub-Saharan Africa. Solidarity between UK consumers and African farmers should be at the cornerstone of our consumption patterns, mixing local and global social justice across the seasons.
I suggest Williams adopts a more nuanced approach that encourages UK consumers to eat local in season, and eat development-friendly out of season. In this way, they’ll be supporting some of the world’s poorest farmers by continuing to buy the food they produce.

Almost all climatologists expect warming to continue in the long term, but – because of natural fluctuations – they disagree about the immediate future, writes Geoffrey Lean.

By Geoffrey LeanPublished: 6:08PM BST 16 Oct 2009
Recent media reports suggested that global temperatures have not increased since 1998. Some sceptics say this proves that global warming has stopped, or reversed. I wish it were so. Alas, no such hopeful conclusion can be drawn.
Temperatures don’t go steadily up or down, they naturally fluctuate around a trend: a cold week in April does not mean that winter will come in June. In any general trend, there will periods when they seem to go the other way.

Besides, it all depends on the dates picked: 1998 was anomalously hot because of an exceptionally strong El Nino, which always warms up the weather. Using it as a starting point produces a very different result than choosing the much cooler 1996, 1997, 1999 or 2000. On any long-term basis, temperatures have risen fast. The hopeful theory relies on Met Office temperature measurements. Nasa, which also takes readings, has the thermometer going up since 1998, with 2005 even warmer. The difference? The Met Office excludes the Arctic Ocean – the fastest-warming area on Earth.
Almost all climatologists expect warming to continue in the long term, but – because of natural fluctuations – they disagree about the immediate future. Part of the conclusion of one paper – “global surface temperatures may not increase over the next decade…” – is often cited by the sceptics. They rarely quote the rest of sentence “…as natural climate variations in the North Atlantic and tropical Pacific temporarily offset the projected anthropogenic warming”.