from Sunday Herald, 11 January 2009
A controversial plan by a Danish energy company for a new coal-fired power station in Scotland would not be permitted in Denmark because it causes too much climate-wrecking pollution.
Environmentalists, experts and Danish politicians say that DONG Energy, based in Copenhagen, would not be allowed to build the kind of carbon-emitting plant it is proposing for the North Ayrshire port of Hunterston in its home country.
As a result the company has been accused of “hypocrisy” and Scottish ministers are coming under increasing pressure to reject its plans. But the company says it will pursue its scheme for Hunterston, though it has no plans for new coal stations in Denmark.
DONG, with an annual revenue of €5.6 billion, is Denmark’s largest energy company involved in oil, gas and electricity generation. Before Christmas, it announced that it was developing a £2 billion proposal for a 1,600 megawatt coal-fired power station at Hunterston.
If built, this would be the first new fossil fuel power station in Scotland for thirty years. Without abatement technology, it would also hugely boost the country’s carbon dioxide emissions, and jeopardise the government’s targets to cut climate pollution.
DONG insists the plant will be “carbon capture ready”, enabling its pollution to be trapped and stored. But critics argue that this is a meaningless promise while carbon capture technology is still in its infancy.
“It is hypocritical and unacceptable for DONG to propose a plant in Scotland that would not win approval in their home country,” said Dr Richard Dixon, director of WWF Scotland. He is urging ministers to block polluting coal-fired power stations by imposing tough emission limits on new plants.
“The Danish government strongly backed European Parliament standards for power stations that would have meant you couldn't build this plant anywhere in the 27 member countries," argued Dixon. "That political commitment means this plant would have little chance if proposed in Denmark, especially since DONG is mostly state owned.”
In December, Denmark came out in favour of a carbon emission limit of 500 grams per kilowatt hour for new power stations. This effectively rules out any plant that relies on burning coal for 70% or more of its operation.
According to DONG, the Hunterston plant will rely on coal for at least 86% of its operation. The rest will come from burning biomass like wood and plants alongside coal.
“If Denmark keeps to a 500-gram emissions standard, this Hunterston plant couldn’t be operated in DONG's home country,” said Stuart Haszeldine, an expert on carbon capture from the University of Edinburgh.
It would be easy not to build the plant, he argued, but it would be better to insist that it was only operated with carbon capture technology installed. Otherwise it could increase carbon emissions for the next 15 years.
DONG pointed out that the 500-gram standard had been discussed but not implemented by the European Union. “The EU rules on this subject are the same, whether you build a power plant in Denmark or in Scotland,” said a company spokesman.
“We have sufficient capacity in Denmark, which is why we have no intention of building a new power plant in Denmark. However, the UK will shortly be needing capacity and that is why we take an active interest in the UK market, both for renewable and conventional power generation.”
A leading Danish MP, however, took issue with the company. “We wouldn't permit such a coal-fired power plant in Denmark,” said Mette Gjerskov, the climate and energy spokeswoman for the opposition Social Democrats.
“We do not build new coal-powered plants at all - and haven't done that in many years. We have only permitted power plants with other energy sources such as gas.”
She added: “Coal is an energy source of the past, not the future. New power plants will be in use for 50-70 years, and for that time coal should not be used at all.”
Backing for a new coal plant at Hunterston was included in the Scottish government’s national planning framework, published in December. “As part of a balanced energy mix, new coal fired power stations have a long-term future in Scotland,” said a government spokesman.
New stations would be required to be “ready to incorporate” carbon capture technology, he stressed. “Any application will be treated on its merits and we will take into account the views of consultees and the public.”
The following letter from Dr Richard Dixon, the director of WWF Scotland, Duncan McLaren, the chief executive of Friends of the Earth Scotland and Liz Murray from the World Development Movement, was published in the Sunday Herald on 25 January 2009:
"The letter from Dong Energy (Mail, January 18) tries to split hairs over whether the company could build a coal-fired power station like the one it proposes for Hunterston in Ayrshire in its home country of Denmark. While it is correct that such a plant would not be actually illegal in Denmark, the original assertion (News, January 11) was that it would be utterly politically unacceptable, since Denmark has been a strong supporter of proposed European emissions standards which would rule it out as too polluting. This idea was supported by a Danish opposition MP in your original article.
"Given that Dong Energy is mostly owned by the Danish government it is doubly hypocritical for it to try to foist a bog-standard, climate-wrecking coal plant on Scotland, which would cause strong political embarrassment at home.
"Dong also claims it will be ready to implement carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology at Hunterston "as soon as the regulatory framework requires". If, as it claims, the company is a world leader on this technology, surely it should propose to build it in from the start, not wait until the law forces it to retrofit it. Otherwise Scottish ministers should call its bluff, and make it clear that there will be no approval for a coal-fired power station at Hunterston unless it meets a tough emissions performance standard that would require full-scale CCS from day one of operation.
"Finally, Dong claims the plant will be needed because the "UK and Scotland have an urgent and critical need for new base-load for security of supply reasons". In fact, recently published research by Pöyry energy consultants has demonstrated that the UK faces no generating gap before at least 2020 if it meets its targets for renewables and energy-efficiency. Scotland should be concentrating on improving energy efficiency and delivering renewable energy, and not be distracted by unfounded scaremongering about security of supply."
http://www.sundayherald.com/oped/opinion/display.var.2484255.0.playing_politics_with_power.php
Posted by: Rob Edwards | 27 January 2009 at 12:27 PM
The following letter from Jens Kragholm, project manager for Dong Energy in Denmark, was published in the Sunday Herald on 18 January 2009:
"The claim that the power station proposed at Hunterston would not gain permission in Denmark, Dong Energy's home country (Sunday Herald, January 11) is familiar to us, as it is also being brought forward by the same organisation (WWF) in relation to a similar proposal that we are developing in Germany. However, it is not founded on fact and is highly misleading.
"As a member of the European Union, Denmark is subject to exactly the same EU-led environmental standards as the UK. However, the issue does not arise in Denmark because we currently have no need for additional base-load generation. In contrast, the UK and Scotland have an urgent and critical need for new base-load for security of supply reasons.
"DONG Energy, 73% owned by the Danish government, has both the experience and technology to reduce C02 emissions to a minimum compared to the present UK fleet of coal-fired power stations. We are also a world leader in carbon capture technology, as already acknowledged by the UK government, and it will be inherent in the forthcoming application that we will be ready to implement that technology at Hunterston, as soon as the regulatory framework requires us to do so."
http://www.sundayherald.com/oped/opinion/display.var.2482521.0.power_station.php
Posted by: Rob Edwards | 20 January 2009 at 11:04 AM