CAMERON CONTRAST WITH GOVERNMENT’S RUNWAY DECISION
16 January 2009
24 hours after the Government's runway decision, Cameron has pledged that the Conservatives would scrap the third runway if they won the next election, citing the environmental case against it.
Speaking to the Guardian he also set out his vision for a low-carbon Britain. This would include a £1bn investment in a high-tech National Grid that would put “smart meters” in every UK home. Cameron described smart grid technology as the equivalent of “the internet for electricity…the thing that brings all our plans together, that makes it all possible and will deliver a genuinely low carbon world”.
Talks had been held with the National Grid, and Conservatives would approve the investment as soon as they came to power. The smart meters would also allow consumers to feed the electricity they generate through solar panels into the grid.
Smart grid technology is also central to Obama’s planned multibillion dollar infrastructure investment programme.GOVERNMENT BACKS THIRD RUNWAY AT HEATHROW
16 January 2009
BAA is expected to fast track a third runway after Geoff Hoon recommended on 15th January that BAA the airport owners “brought forward” a planning application for the runway.
The £8bn development would add an estimated 350 flights a day , increase annual passenger numbers from 66 million to approximately 82 million, and add thousands more vehicles to the already congested roads around Heathrow.
The decision was opposed by at least 6 ministers including Ed Milliband, energy, and Hilary Benn, environment. Some concessions were won by the opposers. These were,
1. The runway would operate at half capacity when opened
2.Aircraft would meet strict greenhouse gas emission standards.
3. Carbon dioxide emissions from UK aviation would be limited to 2005 levels by 2050.
Hoon said that taking the runway to full capacity could not happen before 2020 and had to be approved by the Climate Change Committee, who could block the increase if insufficient progress towards the 2050 carbon dioxide target was being made.
The government plans also included a £6bn increase in road capacity, involving motorway hard shoulder use, and a new company High-speed 2 working on the development of a high speed rail-link scheme from London to Birmingham via Heathrow.
Anger and concern over increased emissions, noise and pollution, and the demolition of 700 homes has resulted in one of the largest coalitions against a building project. It includes 20 local authorities, 6 unions, nearly all mainstream environment and development groups, west London residents, more than 50 MP’s and radical direct action groups. Protests, court challenges and planning delays are being planned and Greenpeace has bought an acre of land in the heart of the proposed development.IS RED TAPE HOLDING UP WINDFARM REVOLUTION?
08 January 2009
According to the British Wind Energy Association (BWEA), 262 different projects are stuck in the planning stages, and the rate of approvals is slowing. It seems that the government ‘s Planning Act to speed the process has not cured the problem.
Britain is committed to producing 15% of its energy from renewable sources by 2020 to meet EU targets, but BWEA said the government would need to intervene more robustly if the target was to be met.
The Planning Act at present applies only to schemes in England, and only those under 50 MW. As eighty to 90% of English schemes are under 50 MW, the Planning Act does “virtually nothing”, says a BWEA spokesman.What do we think at Green Essentials? Provided the rules concentrate on rational argument applied to long-term carbon reduction goals, there is still a role for good planning in order to achieve effectiveness. Not all windfarm sites are well chosen. Site effectiveness (in terms of potential to generate from predicted wind), the carbon cost of building new infrastructure and the amenity and local environmental impact all need to be weighed in the balance. See, for example, the arguments made by the John Muir Trust
NASA CLIMATE EXPERT IN PERSONAL APPEAL TO OBAMA
07 January 2009
Professor James Hansen, head of Nasa’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Has written to Barack and Michelle Obama warning of the “profound disconnect” between public policy on climate change and the size of the problem.
Hansen criticises the current international approach of setting targets through “cap and trade schemes” as ineffectual . He says it “is not commensurate with the climate threat, and could waste another decade, locking in disastrous consequences for our planet and humanity “
Hansen advocates a three pronged attack:
1. A phasing out of coal-fired power stations, that do not incorporate carbon capture..
2. A carbon tax and 100% dividend. Carbon is taxed at source, and the revenue redistributed equally among taxpayers, so that high carbon users are penalised and low users rewarded.
3. Urgent renewed research into “fourth generation “ nuclear plants, which can use nuclear waste as fuel. This offers one of the best options for nearly carbon-free power.
Hansen has been a prominent advocate of climate change since the 1980’s. His testimony to the Senate featured in Al Gore’s film An Inconvenient Truth, and he has received numerous honours for his work including the WWF’s top conservation award.
