Biomass standards - Greenpeace response

Last edited 22 August 2013 at 3:11pm
22 August, 2013

For immediate release - 22/08/2013

In response to the government publishing their sustainability standards for energy generation from biomass, Dr Doug Parr, Chief Scientist at Greenpeace UK, said -

“The loopholes in these sustainability standards are big enough to drive a logging truck through. Having learnt nothing from the biofuels debacle, the Government has ignored the latest scientific research and produced standards that will take a potentially sustainable industry and transform it into one more way to greenwash environmental destruction. The climate isn’t going to fall for creative accounting and neither should the public.”


When is a coal plant not a coal plant?

Posted by jossc — 21 May 2008 at 4:23pm - Comments

Drax from a distance: the UK's biggest source of CO2 pollution

Drax from a distance: the UK's biggest source of CO2 pollution

Silly question I know. A coal plant is a coal plant is a coal plant - still the dirtiest form of power generation known to us, no matter which way you look at it. But now that more and more people are uneasily waking up to the fact that the government are about to sanction a new generation of the things, suddenly we're knee-deep in spin about how environmentally friendly they could become. How surprising.

First there's been a great slew of CCS 'clean coal' stories. Carbon capture and storage may be theoretically feasible but it's expensive (up to twice the cost of unabated coal), technically complicated (involving deep cooling the CO2 into liquid form and creating a network to pump it out back under the North Sea where our oil and gas reserves originally resided) and commercially untried (so far no one is keen to pay for it themselves).

Follow Greenpeace UK