from Sunday Herald, 07 March 2010
Plans for a new gas-fired power station in Scotland have run into major opposition from environmental groups concerned about the climate pollution it will produce.
Spanish-owned Scottish Power wants to replace the dirty old coal plant at Cockenzie near Edinburgh with a cleaner gas plant. But it will still emit millions of tonnes of the greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, and could end up wasting vast amounts of heat.
Three major environmental groups have lodged objections to the plant, which is currently being considered by the Scottish government. It is not needed, they argue, and will conflict with ministers’ plans to “decarbonise” electricity generation.
“This proposal is just not good enough to be built in Scotland,” said Dr Richard Dixon, the director of WWF Scotland. “With our tough climate targets we cannot afford to be locking ourselves into new power stations that will be major carbon emitters for many years to come.”
He pointed out that the Cockenzie gas plant, if built as planned, would waste enough heat to continuously boil a quarter of a million kettles. Ministers should force Scottish Power to make use of the heat by piping it to nearby communities and businesses, he argued.
Dixon also suggested that, if the plant is built, at least some of its carbon should be captured and stored from the start. This is already the rule for new coal-fired power stations.
According to Duncan McLaren, the chief executive of Friends of the Earth Scotland, the gas plant was not the best environmental choice, and wasn’t necessary. “It isn't in Scotland’s best interest to rely on gas reserves or imports to generate electricity,” he told the Sunday Herald.
“Our analysis shows that Scotland can wholly decarbonise its energy system and meet over 100% of its projected electricity demand by renewable energy before 2030. Rather than new fossil-fuelled power stations, the best way to back up those renewables is through more electricity storage, better demand management and improved interconnection.”
The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds in Scotland has also objected to the proposed gas station. “The current proposal is contrary to Scottish government policy which acknowledges the electricity sector must be virtually decarbonised by 2030,” said Mike Fraser, the society’s conservation officer for Lothian and Borders.
The existing coal plant at Cockenzie is so polluting that it is being forced by European law to close by the end of 2015. The proposed gas replacement has also provoked controversy locally in East Lothian because it involves laying a 17-kilometre underground gas pipeline to East Fortune.
The government’s environmental watchdog, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa), has expressed concern that the plans for the gas plant may not meet UK government guidance for carbon capture and storage. It also wants several conditions imposed, including one to ensure that the plant is designed to be capable of exporting heat to nearby communities.
Sepa, however, has not objected in principle, and neither has the wildlife conservation agency, Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH). “This change will reduce emissions and so is something we welcome,” said Iain Rennick, SNH’s area manager for Forth and Borders.
“From the information we have seen, we think that the project can go ahead without affecting the internationally important wildlife sites of the Firth of Forth provided certain conditions are attached.”
Scottish Power pointed out that the new plant would cut carbon dioxide emissions from Cockenzie by over 50%. “We need new power generation that is more efficient and more environmentally friendly,” said a spokesman for the company.
“The Scottish government recognises this and its National Planning Framework has confirmed Cockenzie’s importance as a site for continued electricity generation. With this in mind, we are proposing a new combined cycle gas turbine plant.”
He added: “We have conducted an extensive consultation exercise around our new proposals and a planning application was submitted to the Scottish Government at the start of the year.”
Comments