Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) plans to go ahead in Scotland regardless of UK Government support

peterhead-st-fergus-gas-terminal-refinery-11149309

(c) aboutbritain.co.uk

Readers may remember the UK government pulling out of funding for the scheme at Peterhead, in 2015, despite evidence that CCS will become an important technology around the world and the willingness of partners in Canada and Europe to work with the UK. The UK position remains uncertain so the Scottish Government is to push on alone and has announced funding for a feasibility study St Fergus.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a means of catching and storing harmful emissions before they get into the atmosphere and is seen as an important contribution to the fight against global climate change.

If Scotland can develop expertise in this field it would also enable us to become a ‘key player’ and to export that expertise to other parts of the world.

https://www.energyvoice.com/other-news/150777/scottish-government-willing-go-alone-carbon-capture-reveals-energy-minister/

Advertisements

16 thoughts on “Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) plans to go ahead in Scotland regardless of UK Government support

      • Bugger (the Panda) September 16, 2017 / 4:05 pm

        Not sure the energetics are favourable. If the CO2 is used to generate H2 which is burnt, the same CO2 is produced but maybe we get extra energy generated, if it is energy +ve.

        Liked by 1 person

    • lynnecopland September 16, 2017 / 5:47 pm

      As with any project of this nature the challenge is the scale- up of the process. Also, as it is a biological system involving bacteria , the yields of branched chain fatty acids and alcohols would be difficult to predict

      Liked by 1 person

      • Bugger (the Panda) September 16, 2017 / 7:20 pm

        like the mouth of the Amazon but, they can all be burned in petrol or in diesel engines.

        Like

      • johnrobertson834 September 16, 2017 / 7:25 pm

        Not sure why this comment doesn’t appear withot me replying.

        Like

      • Bugger (the Panda) September 16, 2017 / 7:25 pm

        because I just did it?

        Like

      • Bugger (the Panda) September 16, 2017 / 7:21 pm

        Don’t forget, genetic engineering would be acceptable here as none of it is passing into food chain if it is going into carburants

        Like

  1. Bugger (the Panda) September 16, 2017 / 4:10 pm

    So for same CO2 we get more energy and technically reduces CO2 for a given quantity of energy and overall CO2 goes down relatively. Bit of a circular argument but maybe efficiency of generation .

    Typo above, not H2 generation probably alcohols or alkane gases

    Like

    • johnrobertson834 September 16, 2017 / 7:22 pm

      Thanks Lynne
      Interesting
      Could the parameters have changed in some way?

      Like

  2. Gordon G September 16, 2017 / 6:15 pm

    John, I just wanted to thank you for all these news items. Listening to GMS in the mornings (which I’m increasingly unable to do as I end up shouting at the radio…), and comparing what you have found to report on, well, one might think the reports were from two completely different countries. I don’t know what your webstats are like, but I hope these news item are reaching out widely. Thank you for this excellent work.

    Like

    • johnrobertson834 September 16, 2017 / 7:21 pm

      Thanks Gordon
      According to my blog stats, I’m averaging about 1200 reads per day with hot topics getting sometimes 8 or 9 000.
      I hope more are at least seeing the headlines in Twitter and Facebook
      John

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Legerwood September 18, 2017 / 9:25 am

    Carbon capture and sequestration
    Longannet power station was the site of a pilot project for CCS and, after other sites pulled out, hoped to get the funding to proceed to a full scale scheme but the Coalition Government pulled the plug on the project

    https://sequestration.mit.edu/tools/projects/longannet.html

    This is in stark contrast to the situation in Canada where the coal-fired Boundary Dam power station was refurbished and converted to a CCS power station.

    http://www.saskpower.com/our-power-future/carbon-capture-and-storage/boundary-dam-carbon-capture-project/

    It has not been without problems since it went live in 2014 but what new technology when first introduced is without problems? It sells some of the CO2 to the oil companies who use it to extract oil once the free flowing oil has been extracted from the wells thus increasing the yields.

    When you look at the dollar cost of the project and convert it to GBP it comes in at less than the projected cost for the Longannet project

    https://sequestration.mit.edu/tools/projects/boundary_dam.html

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s