geonic
Interesting that noone in the media has yet pointed out that either a 15% or 20% commitment to 'renewable energy' by 2020 probably still means an absolute increase ( from present levels) in carbon
dioxide emissions at that time. Furthermore a commitment to 80% reduction of emissions (from present levels)by 2050 surely suggests that all further additions to the energy use marix should be emission free to give any credence to achieving this goal. The two goals seem irreconciable under the BAU regime beloved by our present political masters.
Even more interesting is the emphasis placed on 'clean coal' Two proposed largescale power generation/gasification/sequesteration experiments proposed for Scotland and Fremantle (WA) seem to have sunk without trace.
The data I have seen suggest an energy penalty of 20-40%( which probably does not include the extra mining and transport)so this means a substansial expansion of the coal industry. What is fascinating is the fixation on reporting the 'successes' of the injection of the carbon dioxide into depleted hydrocarbon traps.I would have thought that this was by far the best understood part of
the process, requiring little further research. The difficulties of extracting carbon dioxide from hot dilute waste gas streams for retrofitting power stations seems to be much less commented on or studied- although techniques obviously exist.
It seems pretty clear that either a very expensive messy retrofitting programme, or a generation of completely new power units will be required. Will gas fired stations need to do the same thing? It aint going to be cheap.