What is going on? The environment is in the hands of surrealists

Wednesday, August 20, 2008

The government’s proposal to produce more electricity from coal thumbs its nose at action on climate change and proves that this government cannot be trusted on the environment. It is utter madness, says Nick Reeves, executive director of the Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management

Last August, at the site of the proposed coal-fired power station at Kingsnorth, Kent, the Climate Camp protestors articulated the challenge with pinpoint accuracy: everything hinges on stopping coal. It’s time to halt the idea that coal – along with nuclear – must be part of the energy mix. Coal is neither a clean nor sustainable resource. If we’re serious about climate change the best thing we can do is to leave carbon in the ground.

And if Business Secretary John Hutton gives the go ahead for the power station we will finally know that this government cannot be trusted on the environment or with action on climate change. And its much-lauded Climate Change Bill will be rendered worthless. How can a government that claims a serious leadership role in a world bent out of shape by rising global temperatures sanction energy from coal? The madness of it all is breathtaking. A coal-fired power station will emit around eight million tonnes of carbon dioxide every year. Coal is responsible for 25 per cent of global carbon emissions and a new generation of coal-fired power stations will guarantee runaway climate change on a scale we can only imagine and with consequences too scary to contemplate.

At a time when the Defra chief scientist Professor Bob Watson has warned of the need to prepare for a 4 degree Celsius rise in global temperatures – which signals the end of living and the beginning of survival – it’s hard to imagine that policy on the environment hasn’t been handed to the surrealists. What the government is proposing just doesn’t add up.

Attempts by energy companies to persuade ministers that new technology makes coal a clean and sustainable energy source are just greenwash and disingenuous. Even the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee knows that carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a myth. It is an expensive and unproven technology and nobody knows if it works. ‘Clean coal’ is like ‘friendly fire.’ Coal is dirty, finite and will add to the burden of carbon emissions which this government has committed to cutting by at least 60 per cent.

Like the Climate Camp protestors, we must all champion the belief that we have the power to transform our communities, challenge the power structures that prevent real action from taking place and bring about the profound and systemic changes to the fossil-fuelled growth model that is bringing us to the brink of ecological catastrophe. Energy from coal, along with plans for airport expansion, is yet another barmy idea that has no basis in science fact or common sense. As the organisers of the Climate Camp protest say: "How stupid can you be?"

But this is a government that is also in thrall to nuclear. Why? Between 80 per cent and 100 per cent of our electricity could be produced from renewables – wind, wave, tidal, solar, hydro and geothermal. These are all proven technologies that can power Britain, given the political will. Around 40 per cent of Europe’s wind blows across the British Isles yet we obtain a pitiful 1.5 per cent of our electricity from wind. The figures from Germany, Spain and Portugal are much higher while Denmark trumped them (and us) all with a creditable 19 per cent last year. Furthermore, we can meet carbon emissions targets without resorting to nuclear or coal if we invest in energy conservation.

But the real problems with nuclear are: reactor safety, waste disposal, and the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Nuclear power can act as a gateway to the development of nuclear weapons, which is why the US, Britain and others are eager to stop Iran and North Korea from developing further their nuclear programmes. Britain loses the moral argument against those countries and other countries wanting to develop nuclear and other forms of energy, like coal, that are environmentally damaging. But the biggest problem with nuclear is what to do with the waste. Britain, alone, is sitting on at least 3000 tonnes of high-level nuclear waste (HLW) and getting rid of it is a pressing problem. Without a viable and affordable disposal plan, the nuclear option is as irresponsible as coal.

We can only have genuine energy security when we produce energy from sustainable resources within our own borders.