If carbon capture works we will be doing the world a favour

Pioneering new technology will capture and store 20% of the carbon emissions from a new generation of coal power stations

Bryony Worthington
The Guardian, Friday 24 April 2009

The government has finally come up with a clear policy about new power stations. It wants them to use coal and be at least 20% cleaner than they would be otherwise. This won't be enough for deep green environmentalists but it is nevertheless a significant step forward.
Before, the mantra had been "let the market decide" but yesterday's announcement admits we can't rely on markets alone to tackle climate change or to stop us becoming too reliant on imported gas - the government has acknowledged it has a duty to regulate.
This will, of course, cost more and we the consumers will be footing the bill. Though, to be fair, we have been required to do this in the past for nuclear and are already doing the same for renewables now, so it is one we should bear if we want to live in a country that is taking the issue of climate change seriously - finally.
The public and opposition parties have been very vocal in pointing out that, given the significant role coal plays in climate change, it would be madness to embark on a programme of building traditional coal-fired power stations, as many companies appeared to want to do. And it seems their calls have been partially heeded.
Assuming the policies go ahead (they still have to be consulted on over the summer) it will no longer be possible to build a coal power station in the UK without capturing, from the outset, about a fifth to a quarter of the carbon emissions. Many will say this is too low and will seek to use the consultation to increase the ambition.
In addition, once the technology is deemed to be commercially proven - a definition that will be likely fought over - it will then become mandatory to retrofit it to all stations built between now and then. The government estimates that this will be the case by 2020. It will also consult on back-up measures should this not happen.
So why the apparent change of heart? The current structure of the Department of Energy and Climate Change has something to do with it, enabling differences of opinion between energy and climate officials to be settled internally rather than escalating to the cabinet. The composition of the cabinet has also helped: Ed Miliband has been much more receptive to the arguments of the NGOs than previous secretaries of state for energy. Treasury officials will have no doubt tried hard to defend the free market line, but Darling and presumably also Brown have clearly overruled them. Mandelson too is currently touting the need for a refreshed industrial policy that embraces future industries rather than protecting incumbents. So the stars were finally favourably aligned. With both Greenpeace and E.ON welcoming the announcement, it seems the new team has successfully dug itself out of a political hole.
And not a moment too soon. Industry needs to know what to build and the previously announced demonstration competition, which ruled out the best projects, was widely perceived to be a mess. The scaling up of ambition signalled today, backed by secure funding sources and tighter regulation, will increase confidence among investors and may just be enough to make the UK a global hub for this technology.
Of course it's important to point out these measures will not actually save a single extra tonne of carbon from entering the atmosphere because all power stations already have caps on their emissions and until these are tightened we are just shuffling pollution permits around. It is therefore more an industrial policy for Britain than a directly effective climate policy. That said, if it works, we will be doing the world a favour in proving this technology can be part of the global solution. Committing to pay for this in a recession is especially significant and proof that green and growth are now seen as compatible.