Dec 6, 2018 at 9:56 PM | Phil Clarke

Yes, we need to burn more coal. The UK CCA has created an unreliable and expensive Grid that the Country cannot afford. It is costing everybody, but the poor and vulnerable are most likely to pay with their lives.

All you have done is proved why Green Unreliables should not be subsidised by UK Taxpayers.

Phil, a cherry-picked statistic from you there, relating to late spring/early summer. And your answer in winter is.....?

Golf C: I can only suggest you look at the Merit Order effect

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merit_order

The Telegraph story seems to be scaremongering: the £1000 figure refers to a bid of £995 per MWh from the Fiddlers Ferry coal plant. Given that other stations were offering power at a quarter of that price and the spot price is around £140, this seems to me like irresponsible journalism. Hardly a first for the Telegraph.

Calendar year 2017:

In 2017, gas accounted for 40 per cent of UK generation down from 42 per cent in 2016. Coal’s share declined further, accounting for only 6.7 per cent in 2017. Nuclear accounted for 21 per cent of generation, down marginally from 2016, with thermal renewables accounting for a record 9.4 per cent share. Generation from wind, hydro and solar photovoltaics rose by 27 per cent, to a record high level, due to increased wind and solar capacity as well as better weather conditions and accounted for a record 20 per cent of generation. Overall renewables’ share of generation was at a record high of 29.3 per cent in 2017

DUKES 2017

Electricity generation from coal has been in steep decline for several years. The last UK deep coal mine closed in 2015, and the last coal fired generator is scheduled to close in 2025.

Dec 7, 2018 at 8:15 AM | Phil Clarke

I would suggest you consider some real world factual information.

Electricity generation from coal has been in steep decline for several years. The last UK deep coal mine closed in 2015, and the last coal fired generator is scheduled to close in 2025.

Dec 7, 2018 at 8:38 AM | Phil Clarke

What are we going to do without reliable electricity supplies?

Is it just Macron's arrogance, or that of the World Wide Green Blob? Taxing CO2 destroys civilizations, and does not save Polar Bears. The Climate Change Act has failed the UK, and its example is failing France and Germany.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/07/macrons-arrogance-unites-us-on-the-barricades-with-frances-gilets-jaunes

From that DUKES Report:

"The UK has a varied mix of renewable technologies including biomass which is a key fuel source in both electricity generation and heat." And:

"6.4 The commodity balances tables for renewables (tables 6.1 to 6.3) show that a large proportion (87 per cent) of renewable fuel sources are produced domestically, largely due to the local nature of utilising natural resources such as wind, solar and hydro. However, bio energy fuels are transportable and a significant proportion is imported (24 per cent in 2017, including wood and liquid biofuels). Plant biomass showed the largest proportion of imports at 54 per cent, mainly wood pellets for electricity generation."

One of the problems with Phil's claims about declining coal use for electricity generation is that in significant part it isn't being replaced by solar or wind, but by burning biomass (wood pellets to you and me). I believe I'm right in saying that cutting down forests in the USA, turning that wood into pellets, and shipping it over the Atlantic to burn, releases more CO2 and causes more environmental destruction than would be the case if e.g. Drax just burned coal mined down the road.

Table 6.6.shows"Renewable sources used to generate electricity and heat and for transport fuels".

It gives the figures in "Thousand tonnes of oil equivalent". 2017 figures (most recently available) are:

Wind:
Onshore 2,501.1
Offshore 1,798.5

Solar photovoltaics 991.0

Co-firing with fossil fuels(!) 18.3

Plant biomass 4,234.6

So plant biomass exceeds Onshore & offshore wind and solar photovoltaics combined.

Admittedly in the paper biomass is defined as "Renewable organic materials, such as wood, agricultural crops or wastes, and municipal wastes. Biomass can be burned directly or processed into biofuels such as ethanol and methane." I'd wager that a significant proportion of that is wood pellets.

"Renewable energy includes solar power, wind, wave and tide, and hydroelectricity. Solid renewable energy sources consist of wood, straw, short rotation coppice, other biomass and the biodegradable fraction of wastes."

I was intrigued by this statistic:

"1.24 Of the total final expenditure on energy in 2017 (£119 billion), the biggest share, 51 per cent, fell to the transport sector. Industry purchased 10 per cent (£12 billion), the domestic sector purchased 27 per cent (£32 billion), with the remaining 12 per cent (£14 billion) purchased by the service sector."

With more than half of energy costs in the UK being borne by the transport sector, I'm curious to know how that this can be turned "renewable", because it seems to me that the "low-hanging fruit" of "decarbonisation" has already been plucked, and it's all about to get a lot more complicated and expensive from hereon in.

By the way, to avoid it being overlooked: Phil - your solution in winter is...?

One of the problems with Phil's claims about declining coal use for electricity generation is that in significant part it isn't being replaced by solar or wind, but by burning biomass (wood pellets to you and me). I believe I'm right in saying that cutting down forests in the USA, turning that wood into pellets, and shipping it over the Atlantic to burn, releases more CO2 and causes more environmental destruction than would be the case if e.g. Drax just burned coal mined down the road.

Well, no, coal is a lot worse in climate terms, and you've ignored footnote (5). However I certainly would agree that burning wood pellets is perverse and counterproductive (imported or otherwise). There's been some pretty disgusting sleight of hand; the EU Renewable Energy Directive classes all biomass as renewable (although biomass lost its climate change levy exemption in 2015 - Drax shares dropped 25% on the news) and indeed in principle biomass can be good - so called 'second generation' biofuels. Younger trees, crop residues, sawmill waste etc. But there's a wealth of evidence that what Drax is burning is high quality old wood specifically clearcut-harvested for the purpose. Indeed I think I am right in saying no UK power station is geared up to burn 'residue wood'.

The Ecologist on Drax.

By the way, to avoid it being overlooked: Phil - your solution in winter is...?

Personally, hearty soups and a good single malt.

You could start by ignoring the Telegraph's scaremongering and put your faith in gas, nuclear and renewables. Coal-fired electricity will soon be history in the country.

Phil,good to see some agreement (and some humour) there. I'm certainly with you on heart soups and the good single malt. I would put my faith in gas and nuclear (but not in renewables, given their unpredictability and therefore unreliability), except for a couple of rather fundamental problems.

The nuclear programme is currently a shambles; and I'm pretty sure the CCC thinks we should scale down gas use if we're to hit our CCA targets - no doubt, as always, you'll correct me if I'm wrong ;-)

And thanks for the link to the Ecologist article on Drax- my sentiments exactly!

By the way, to avoid it being overlooked: Phil - your solution in winter is...?

"Personally, hearty soups and a good single malt.
Dec 7, 2018 at 8:23 PM | Phil Clarke"

How do you heat the soup? A little spirit burning stove?

How do you distill the Malt? Burning peat?

"It should be noted that such calculations of cost-effectiveness do not take into account the economic benefits of avoiding climate change impacts"

So the assumption is that nothing positive comes from some mild warming? Sounds cr*p to me.

MH, I admire your patience. If PC wishes to scare himself witless over the big warming monster, that's his choice.

You trust a 'report' from the GWPF?

How quaint.

Some argue that free speech does not extend to misleading the public by making factually inaccurate statements. But it does. [..] The important point, and it took millennia and many lives to attain it, is that the freedom of speech principle does not mean that you have to be factually accurate.

David Whitehouse, GWPF Science Editor.

http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/science-and-technology-committee/science-communication/written/34673.html

Fuelled by a dramatic reduction in the costs of wind and solar technology, both China and India have raced ahead with installing renewable power as they look to build on their impressive economic growth. The pace of this new installation of renewable power sources has cheered defenders of the Paris climate agreement even after President Donald Trump withdrew the US from the accord. “The magnitude of the technology cost deflation is way ahead of anything forecast by anyone in the world,” says Tim Buckley, director at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. Last year, China added 50 gigawatts of solar power capacity, according to the International Energy Agency — more than it added for coal, gas and nuclear power capacity put together, and equivalent to the combined solar capacity of France and Germany.

Financial Times.

Although China promised under its commitment to the Paris Agreement to ‘peak’ emissions around 2030, to decrease carbon dioxide emissions per unit of economic output and to use more green energy, China’s greenhouse gas emissions increased by 1.7% in 2017 and are projected to grow by 4.7% in 2018

GWPF.

Somebody needs to lend the GWPF a dictionary. And a less onesided 'report' might have mentioned the 4% rise follows a 4% fall in Chinese CO2 from 2014-2016.

Situation normal.

Dec 13, 2018 at 11:56 AM Phil Clarke

China burns more coal every year. What are you failing to prove?

Maybe the FT is schizophrenic. I too can quote from it:

"China’s carbon emissions set for fastest growth in 7 years
Blow for global climate change effort as Greenpeace data show 4% rise in first quarter"

https://www.ft.com/content/98839504-6334-11e8-90c2-9563a0613e56

Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.
https://www.ft.com/content/98839504-6334-11e8-90c2-9563a0613e56

China’s carbon emissions are on track to rise at their fastest pace in more than seven years during 2018, casting further doubt on the ability of the Paris climate change agreement to curb dangerous greenhouse gas increases, according to a Greenpeace analysis based on Beijing’s own data.

Carbon emissions in the country, the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases, rose 4 per cent in the first quarter of this year, according to calculations by the environmental group based on Chinese government statistics covering coal, cement, oil and gas. If that pace continues it would be the fastest increase since 2011.

The latest finding comes as climate researchers express concern over rising emissions in China, which accounts for more than a quarter of global carbon dioxide output.

Global emissions were flat from 2014-16 but began rising again in 2017 as the Chinese economy recovered and as emission grew in the EU and the rest of Asia. Scientists are concerned the trend in China will continue this year.

“China is fundamentally critical for what happened to global emissions,” said Niklas Höhne, a partner at the New Climate Institute and one of the scientists who contributes to Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports.

“The outlook for 2018 is actually bad,” he said, pointing to Chinese planning data that indicated the country’s consumption of coal, oil and gas would grow this year.

“One major goal of the Paris agreement is that global emissions peak as soon as possible, and China is the one that determines in the end whether global emissions will peak soon or not. That is why all eyes are on China.”

[Date of article, 29th May 2018].

Or you could try this:

https://gbtimes.com/china-aims-to-develop-over-200-new-airports-by-2035

"China aims to develop over 200 new airports by 2035"

The Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) published a development report on Monday that aims to add 216 new airports by 2035 and develop a number of regional transport hubs.

According to the CAAC, China had 234 civil airports as of October this year and is expected to have around 450 by 2035, China Daily reports.

Further, the demand for passenger transport in China will account for a quarter of the world's total and exceed that of the US by 2035, making China the largest air passenger market in the world.

It also says that world-class airports will be built in the Yangtze River Delta region, the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macau Greater Bay Area and the Chongqing and Chengdu city cluster.

"Service has improved substantially, but existing airports are far from adequate and are unevenly distributed throughout the country," said Dong Faxin, director of the administration's development and planning department.

China's airports are expected to handle 720 million trips by 2020 - up from 552 million last year - according to the the administration.

Dec 13, 2018 at 8:06 PM | Mark Hodgson

China are very good at building coal fired power stations. Chinese expertise is wanted by developing countries, to get their economies powered up, and the UN's IPCC has decreed that world banks can not lend money for coal fired power stations.

In the future, it won't just be the amount of coal burned in China, but the amount of coal burned by Chinese designed, built, and funded power stations, in other parts of the world.

tomo,

https://www.esi-africa.com/zimbabwe-china-promises-1-2bn-loan-for-hwange-thermal-power-plant-upgrade/