Subscribe below to recieve updates direct to your inbox
- or -
The roads programme RIS2 is being challenged. The initial letter in the Judicial Review process has gone in and the Department for Transport has responded, claiming the massive roads programme will have no effect on carbon emissions (even though the DfT has not calculated the effect). See: https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/stop-largest-ever-roads-programme/
Check the biodiesel production and transesterification process in the following link: https://blogmech.com/biodiesel-transesterification-reaction-biodiesel-materials-biodiesel-feedstocks-biodiesel-blends/
The UK Conservative Government gives 10.5 billion in subsidies from our taxes to fossil fuel companies each year, which equates to 16,153,846 per constituency. With an average of 70,530 constituents in each constituency this works out as 229 generously donated by our caring government per person which leads to more CO2 and more pollution. The project cost of a 3.5 MW Enercon E126 EP 3 wind turbine costs 3.13 million, and if the subsidies were diverted to renewables we could have an extra wind farm of 5.16 wind turbines in every constituency every year, generating 18.06 MW per hour per year. 34.82 MW per hour is used by the average person in the UK per year, so our wind turbines would provide clean electricity to 8,766 more people in every constituency every year, in eight years every constituency would have clean electricity provided locally. As nuclear and fossil fuel turbine generators use 50% of our fresh water in the process of generating electricity having such a policy will also double fresh water sources, that are being increasingly stretched by global weirding. Think Green. Think Clean.
Well that''s one way to do it! I remember while living in France there was a system where householders could host an Internet server in their home to benefit from the "heating" for a small fraction of their bandwidth. The company even paid you for the electricity the server used. This is scaling that idea up to the nth degree and is an excellent way of using the same energy more than once. I''d still host a couple of Facebook et al servers either under my stairs or even under my floors to benefit from the warmth the average server pumps out daily
I guess there''s nothing here to stimulate the market for heat pumps other than the RHI which only runs for a few more months. If it''s just insulation people will have done that already.
The Passat GTE is not an EV, its a plug in hybrid. VW make this sound like a complete cessation of internal combustion engines at this plant, however in reality even in 2026 and thereafter, they will still be putting petrol (or diesel) engines in cars manufactured there, albeit alongside a small electric motor
The time to consider these matters is when all primary generators of electricity are non CO2 emitters; and generators on demand. Only one generator fits this definition, NUCLEAR fission or fusion. Batteries have to charged, hydrogen or ammonia have to be produced. Planners in this sphere have to be inclusive of the scientist, its not all economics and administration. But when I fell into conversation with a school leaver behind the counter, and I mentioned chemistry, physics and maths, she replied "Oh, the hard ones"!!!!!!!!! Richard Phillips
As I have said before Heat Pumps without proper insulation are pointless so don''t think retrofitting these into social rental properties (or even private rental properties) will save the occupants any money. Experience from colleagues who live in such a property and had an ASHP fitted are the house is damp and it costs 3x as much to heat. The local Housing Association ticked a box but didn''t improve the insulation at all. Don''t let this opportunity go to waste by failing to make whole scale improvements across the board and without properly managing the technologies and installations. All installers and suppliers MUST be properly screened and Quality Controlled (preferably to an ISO standard) to ensure the householder and taxpayer are not ripped off by cowboys.
Anyone for the return of the sailing Clippers?
All new build (and I mean absolutely every single new build) housing and commercial/retail construction project should now be planned and completed with a centralised heat network at its heart. The economies of scale make this kind of heat infrastructure so much more efficient than individual heat sources. Ground Source, Water Source and even large scale Air Source heat pumps tied in to well insulated, underfloor heated buildings will make a massive difference to the UK energy demand. At the large scale using all 3 Heat Pump sources makes sense as does drilling deep boreholes to tap into "geothermal" heat. In the post Covid-19 New Normal we should not be building inefficient, poorly insulated, badly heated buildings nor allow them to continue to be built if they are already in progress. There needs to be a proper, formal, certified QAQC of all new builds to ensure they are being built to the highest standards and not just a "tick box" operation with Friday 4:30pm gaps and holes in insulation as is so often the case. There''s no more room for "snags".
Hopefully this kind of initiative is a great success and can be replicated across regions. It tick many boxes in terms of net-zero targets, biodiversity and the response to the impacts of the climate crisis.
So much greenwashing here, as expected with anything connected to A Plastic Planet. Where to start. Recyclable and home compostable? Can the cellulose acetate visor really be recycled? By what method? At least a conventional PET visor has a potential recycling pathway. These are destined for incineration just like any other PPE. What is the point of composting cardboard and cellulose acetate? They have no value as a soil improver which is why none of these visors will ever be composted. So you''re left with a cardboard strap which can be recycled and a plastic visor which has to be incinerated. i.e. no different to any of the existing disposable visors on the market.
What a laugh, BP CEO Looney well aware of Hydrogen Zero emissions Rotary engine = No discussions Sheer Hypocrisy
Spot on Kieron!!!! Whatever did science have to do with anything?? Richard Phillips
I have to admit that I am a little puzzled! I have spent my life as a research scientist, professionally qualified as a chemist. Carbon dioxide is present in the atmosphere at about 0.04%, 400 ppm. Water vapour. our most abundant greenhouse gas has a mean abundance of about 2.5%, some 60 times greater. The greenhouse importance of these gasses, molecule for molecule, is quite comparable. Why is, therefore, carbon dioxide given such prominence; could it be that we have some control over man made CO2, and this gives us the chance to lavish large amounts of money on its control??? "Follow the money" !!!!!!! Richard Phillips
What a waste of energy! Firstly to crack the hydrogen atoms from the Methane takes more than you get back from burning the Hydrogen, then all the extra energy needed to capture and compress the Carbon Dioxide and pump it into storage. Methane has far more important industrial uses than just being burnt, be that as Methane or as Hydrogen. A total waste of time and effort and a classic example of when a "green" idea really is turd brown
Now, is that the same Barratt Developments that I met in Newcastle mid 2011? We were there to offer our non-chemical simple solution to treating hard water that wastes so much energy. He asked me the price than said "If I told you that we save 1 on each house we build by not putting a number on the door you will realise we are also not interested in water treatment" John Thompson Environmental Treatment Concepts Ltd
Surely they should be installed in every McD''s car park regardless of if it has a Drive Thru or not. Aren''t Drive Thru meant to be just that, drive through, purchase, drive off, consume? What Drive thru customer is going to drive in, sit in the line, get their burger then sit in the car park plugged into the mains for 20 mins? If you are going to have to sit around you might as well just park up, go in and order then sit at a table to eat.
Hi Sarah, Is there a link to the published briefing?
This is admiral sentiment and an honest goal to which we should all aspire. Anything and everything that reduces our energy wastage, particularly heating, has to be investigated and implemented where it is proven to be effective. But, and it''s a big but, we can not blindly replace existing, effective, heating with often ineffective Heat Pumps in older housing. I know many people who have had this done by local housing authorities who now have fuel bills 3x higher than previously AND damp homes. That is simply unacceptable and is purely because of "box ticking" by organisations.
phase 2 of this project would make this possible - so ignore the misinformed comments! https://orsted.co.uk/media/newsroom/news/2020/02/gigastack-phase-2
If we are honest, most scope 3 emissions are outside the control of oil companies unless they pivot away from oil completely as Orsted have done, but that''s a lot easier for a relatively small company operating mainly in Northern Europe. Scope 3 emissions are largely driven by demand for oil from consumers, and although at the margins Big Oil can help them use it more efficiently, they have a lot less control over demand that the major car companies or Government in driving changes to demand. So the second best approach is to look at offsets - which may work in the short term but cannot be a long-term solution. If Shell and BP miraculously sold all their oil & gas assets tomorrow and invested them in renewables, that would have little short term effect on demand, yet might open the oil industry to less ethical players from Russia and the Middle East. Real progress has to be led by Government creating structural demand changes - carbon taxes will help but so will investment in public infrastructure (and that is one place where Big Oil should be looking rather than continuing to invest in fossil production assets). BTW, a higher percentage of scope 3 emissions often means that the company is using less energy in its own operations, and so is being more efficient - so is actually a good sign!
At its most (unrealistically) optimistic assessment, "blue" hydrogen, derived from wind power, is 40% efficient as a store of electricity. Your article says nothing about actual capex and opex. Without the radical breakthrough which has eluded hydrogen enthusiasts (nut cases) these last 150 years, the whole thing will turn out to be yet another disgraceful, green boondoggle! Theadora Smith is right on as regards, "grey" hydrogen!
More of the same --- what about support and funding for new hydrogen innovation Good money after bad $$ Billions on Fusion over 20 30 years --- Carbon Capture and Store Why not Hydrogen a different way ??? 10 mill and by 2032 by restrofitting on the road diesel trucks and other vehicles perhaps 50% of daily emissions can be stopped Sorry if the Policy makers cannot take time to research new innovation then their policy decision is flawed.