Eggborough Power Station station set to close

York Press: Power station set to close Power station set to close

EGGBROUGH Power Station will have to close, with power supply stopping from 2015, its bosses have confirmed.

They said the first generator could cease production as early as next September, following the news yesterday that Eggborough has provisionally failed to secure Government funding for a biomass conversion project.

The announcement spells a shattering long-term blow for the 800 strong workforce at the North Yorkshire plant, which currently supplies four per cent of the UK’s power.

The plant, which will submit a formal Opt Out Notice from the Industrial Emissions Directive for one of its generators by the end of the year, has revealed that if it cannot find a solution with Government to secure a future in biomass then the plant does not have a future.

Eggborough chief executive Neil O’Hara said: “Unless a viable solution is found with Government, the most likely outcome now is that Eggborough will no longer be supplying electricity to the grid beyond 2015.

“Impending EU regulation and the escalating impact of the carbon price floor mean this is unfortunately the rational economic conclusion based on the information we have available at this time.”

For the past two years the plant, near Selby, had been working towards a conversion from burning coal to biomass.

The project was described as “shovel ready” with investment and key engineering and construction contracts in place, however was dependent upon public subsidies.

Yesterday the Government revealed Eggborough’s project was not on its provisional list for projects eligible for early support under the Final Investment Decision Enabling Process.

As a result of the news Mr O’Hara revealed the plant “is not in a position to move forward”, and a £17 million deal due to be signed yesterday for preliminary work on the conversion project has now been suspended pending further developments.

The Eggborough power chief also revealed that maintenance work due to be carried out next year on one of the generating units is no longer deemed economically viable, with that unit set to cease operation from September 2014, removing one per cent capacity from the UK electricity grid.

However Selby and Ainsty MP Nigel Adams said the fight to convert Eggborough to biomass is far from over.

He said: “I am very disappointed that Eggborough hasn’t made it through, and we will be working tirelessly to find a way round this problem. There is still every opportunity that we can get this project off the ground. This was only a provisional decision on funding, we will not get the final decision until March.

“I am still very hopeful that the Eggborough conversion project will go ahead.”

Meanwhile, neighbouring power station Drax was listed by the Government as the top ranking of the 16 qualifying projects in receipt of early support. The Government informed Drax that its plans to convert two coal units into biomass was “provisionally affordable”.

Dorothy Thompson, chief executive of Drax, said: “We are pleased with the news that the Government has provisionally ranked our two projects highest among qualifying projects.”

Comments (28)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:05pm Thu 19 Dec 13

Terry3 says...

Tell me, how many more miles of the beautiful English countryside will we lose to the monstrous "wind turbines"? There is barely any of England left as it is where you cannot see these ugly monster.. England will live to regret destroying the power stations.
Tell me, how many more miles of the beautiful English countryside will we lose to the monstrous "wind turbines"? There is barely any of England left as it is where you cannot see these ugly monster.. England will live to regret destroying the power stations. Terry3

4:13pm Thu 19 Dec 13

Igiveinthen says...

Another power station bites the dust; glad I didn’t brick up the old coal fire place at least I can keep warm.
So come on you eco-warriors, greens and friends of the earth, you don’t have a lot of time to answer how the lost mega-watts from this power generating source will be replaced with one of your sustainable energy pie in the sky ideas, so what’s your answer!
Another power station bites the dust; glad I didn’t brick up the old coal fire place at least I can keep warm. So come on you eco-warriors, greens and friends of the earth, you don’t have a lot of time to answer how the lost mega-watts from this power generating source will be replaced with one of your sustainable energy pie in the sky ideas, so what’s your answer! Igiveinthen

4:50pm Thu 19 Dec 13

Stevie D says...

Terry3 wrote:
Tell me, how many more miles of the beautiful English countryside will we lose to the monstrous "wind turbines"? There is barely any of England left as it is where you cannot see these ugly monster.. England will live to regret destroying the power stations.
I'm not sure that you can use the "aesthetics" argument in favour of coal-fired power stations over wind turbines – given how visually dominant the three brothers of Drax, Eggborough and Ferrybridge are over the surrounding landscape for miles and miles, I'm really not convinced that an army of wind turbines would be any less pleasant to look at!

On a clear day, you can see all three of those from the North York Moors or Ilkley Moor ... how many wind turbines can you see 40 miles away? None that I'm aware of!
[quote][p][bold]Terry3[/bold] wrote: Tell me, how many more miles of the beautiful English countryside will we lose to the monstrous "wind turbines"? There is barely any of England left as it is where you cannot see these ugly monster.. England will live to regret destroying the power stations.[/p][/quote]I'm not sure that you can use the "aesthetics" argument in favour of coal-fired power stations over wind turbines – given how visually dominant the three brothers of Drax, Eggborough and Ferrybridge are over the surrounding landscape for miles and miles, I'm really not convinced that an army of wind turbines would be any less pleasant to look at! On a clear day, you can see all three of those from the North York Moors or Ilkley Moor ... how many wind turbines can you see 40 miles away? None that I'm aware of! Stevie D

6:06pm Thu 19 Dec 13

Terry3 says...

@stevie D
Thousands of wind turbines versus a few power stations?.. no contest Stevie.. give me back my lovely countryside any day.. do you travel much Stevie?? I guess not or you would realise what a plague has been created on the beautiful UK (yes, Scotland, Ireland, and all the islands too.. Shameful)
@stevie D Thousands of wind turbines versus a few power stations?.. no contest Stevie.. give me back my lovely countryside any day.. do you travel much Stevie?? I guess not or you would realise what a plague has been created on the beautiful UK (yes, Scotland, Ireland, and all the islands too.. Shameful) Terry3

6:06pm Thu 19 Dec 13

the butler says...

It is rather strange that the government are dragging their heels at the conversion costs, It seems to me to be the proper thing to do since as remarked above the ghastly sight of smoke and fumes are and have been visible and disgraceful since they were put in commission!
As for those wind turbines, such a sad invention. there are some generators designed to work with the power of wave flows, perhaps this would be the answer to the NIMBY crowd? 'the Butler'
It is rather strange that the government are dragging their heels at the conversion costs, It seems to me to be the proper thing to do since as remarked above the ghastly sight of smoke and fumes are and have been visible and disgraceful since they were put in commission! As for those wind turbines, such a sad invention. there are some generators designed to work with the power of wave flows, perhaps this would be the answer to the NIMBY crowd? 'the Butler' the butler

6:10pm Thu 19 Dec 13

Terry3 says...

@stevie D
Just re read your post.. and I have to add.. tell me where there is 40 square miles of the country where you can NOT see turbines?
@stevie D Just re read your post.. and I have to add.. tell me where there is 40 square miles of the country where you can NOT see turbines? Terry3

6:15pm Thu 19 Dec 13

Terry3 says...

@the Butler
What you see coming from cooling towers is steam, not smoke, and seeing fumes? i think not..The press must bear some responsibility too..using a photo that gives an impression of thick black smoke pouring from the power station at Eggborough.. once again..It is steam.
@the Butler What you see coming from cooling towers is steam, not smoke, and seeing fumes? i think not..The press must bear some responsibility too..using a photo that gives an impression of thick black smoke pouring from the power station at Eggborough.. once again..It is steam. Terry3

6:45pm Thu 19 Dec 13

Igiveinthen says...

Terry3 wrote:
@the Butler
What you see coming from cooling towers is steam, not smoke, and seeing fumes? i think not..The press must bear some responsibility too..using a photo that gives an impression of thick black smoke pouring from the power station at Eggborough.. once again..It is steam.
I would bet a pound to a penny that none of them have ever set foot in a coal fired power generating station, I have been involved with works at both Eggborough and Drax and despite the unpopularity of these types of power generating stations, they still contribute the giants share of power generation in this country, and it makes me angry that they can be dismissed so flippantly in favour of unreliable wind and wave power generation.
[quote][p][bold]Terry3[/bold] wrote: @the Butler What you see coming from cooling towers is steam, not smoke, and seeing fumes? i think not..The press must bear some responsibility too..using a photo that gives an impression of thick black smoke pouring from the power station at Eggborough.. once again..It is steam.[/p][/quote]I would bet a pound to a penny that none of them have ever set foot in a coal fired power generating station, I have been involved with works at both Eggborough and Drax and despite the unpopularity of these types of power generating stations, they still contribute the giants share of power generation in this country, and it makes me angry that they can be dismissed so flippantly in favour of unreliable wind and wave power generation. Igiveinthen

8:01pm Thu 19 Dec 13

Terry3 says...

Igiveinthen wrote:
Terry3 wrote:
@the Butler
What you see coming from cooling towers is steam, not smoke, and seeing fumes? i think not..The press must bear some responsibility too..using a photo that gives an impression of thick black smoke pouring from the power station at Eggborough.. once again..It is steam.
I would bet a pound to a penny that none of them have ever set foot in a coal fired power generating station, I have been involved with works at both Eggborough and Drax and despite the unpopularity of these types of power generating stations, they still contribute the giants share of power generation in this country, and it makes me angry that they can be dismissed so flippantly in favour of unreliable wind and wave power generation.
At last, someone with some common sense.. Well said.
Now tell me, what the H*** is wrong with the people that are driving this push to destroy the power stations?? is it that they have a vested interest? I believe so.
[quote][p][bold]Igiveinthen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Terry3[/bold] wrote: @the Butler What you see coming from cooling towers is steam, not smoke, and seeing fumes? i think not..The press must bear some responsibility too..using a photo that gives an impression of thick black smoke pouring from the power station at Eggborough.. once again..It is steam.[/p][/quote]I would bet a pound to a penny that none of them have ever set foot in a coal fired power generating station, I have been involved with works at both Eggborough and Drax and despite the unpopularity of these types of power generating stations, they still contribute the giants share of power generation in this country, and it makes me angry that they can be dismissed so flippantly in favour of unreliable wind and wave power generation.[/p][/quote]At last, someone with some common sense.. Well said. Now tell me, what the H*** is wrong with the people that are driving this push to destroy the power stations?? is it that they have a vested interest? I believe so. Terry3

10:05pm Thu 19 Dec 13

piemagico says...

Terry3 wrote:
@the Butler
What you see coming from cooling towers is steam, not smoke, and seeing fumes? i think not..The press must bear some responsibility too..using a photo that gives an impression of thick black smoke pouring from the power station at Eggborough.. once again..It is steam.
Hopefully the Butler will be reassured that burning coal does not give off smoke or fumes.
[quote][p][bold]Terry3[/bold] wrote: @the Butler What you see coming from cooling towers is steam, not smoke, and seeing fumes? i think not..The press must bear some responsibility too..using a photo that gives an impression of thick black smoke pouring from the power station at Eggborough.. once again..It is steam.[/p][/quote]Hopefully the Butler will be reassured that burning coal does not give off smoke or fumes. piemagico

10:25pm Thu 19 Dec 13

Garrowby Turnoff says...

Nuclear power stations are the most sensible solution. Not ideal, but the right way forward for England.
Nuclear power stations are the most sensible solution. Not ideal, but the right way forward for England. Garrowby Turnoff

10:52pm Thu 19 Dec 13

Terry3 says...

Garrowby Turnoff wrote:
Nuclear power stations are the most sensible solution. Not ideal, but the right way forward for England.
Right on. Teecee.
[quote][p][bold]Garrowby Turnoff[/bold] wrote: Nuclear power stations are the most sensible solution. Not ideal, but the right way forward for England.[/p][/quote]Right on. Teecee. Terry3

1:23am Fri 20 Dec 13

Magicman! says...

SO let me just get the facts clear... a coal fired power station, something which operates continuously 24 hours a day 365/6 days a year to provide uninterrupted electricity to the grid will be decommissioned because the EU (i all its 'wisdom') decided to instead grant funding for several hundred turbines that will, at best, whirr around non-stop for up to 12 days in a month if the wind is coming from the right direction and at the right speed (remember if there is too much wind the turbine has to be mechanically stopped) and provide intermittent power at less than half what Eggborough provides?? Can somebody please find the logic in there, because I am seriously struggling on this one.

Now I am in favour of generating electricity in a way that doesn't rely on something that everntually we won't find any more of, just as much as the next guy.... but electricity generation must be done by means of a constant medium that can be relied on - relying on the wind going at more than 5mph but less than 30mph (I believe that's the upper limit) to generate our electricity demands 24 hours a day and 365/6 days a year is the feebled dream of a meth addict. There is only one sustainable thing we have in the UK that will never run out: water. use the tide to generate electricity and fit hydro turbines to the outlets of every reservoir in the country. Build an underwater line of hydro turbines going across The Wash so that it doesn't stop wildlife but harnesses the water as it goes in and out; and then do the same somewhere along the Humber and the Severn and the Forth.


@stevie D - Normally I find your comments very reasonable. However I would rather look at an active power station than bunches of wind turbines, simply because when I look at a power station there is a sense of security within it, something within it's brutalistic concrete conical towers which suggests it being there for generations - always there in the background giving us the juice so we can watch TV. Whilst seeing half a dozen turbines gently turning in the distance might seem nice, those hollow steel tubes just don't give that same sense of security. As an example, the wind farm at Knabs Ridge on the A59 west of Harrogate had a term in the application which means it'll have to be packed away and moved elsewhere soon - as I recall it won't be there by 2015; you just don't get that with a proper power station!
Also, I have stood on the moors on the top of Blakey Ridge (having cycled there from home) and looked back, and those power stations are the only 'locators' on the landscape by which a person can work out what is where (especially as York is in a slight dip, and so is invisible from the Moors), they add something interesting to what would otherwise be flat fields; not to mention the work they give to railfreight companies.
SO let me just get the facts clear... a coal fired power station, something which operates continuously 24 hours a day 365/6 days a year to provide uninterrupted electricity to the grid will be decommissioned because the EU (i all its 'wisdom') decided to instead grant funding for several hundred turbines that will, at best, whirr around non-stop for up to 12 days in a month if the wind is coming from the right direction and at the right speed (remember if there is too much wind the turbine has to be mechanically stopped) and provide intermittent power at less than half what Eggborough provides?? Can somebody please find the logic in there, because I am seriously struggling on this one. Now I am in favour of generating electricity in a way that doesn't rely on something that everntually we won't find any more of, just as much as the next guy.... but electricity generation must be done by means of a constant medium that can be relied on - relying on the wind going at more than 5mph but less than 30mph (I believe that's the upper limit) to generate our electricity demands 24 hours a day and 365/6 days a year is the feebled dream of a meth addict. There is only one sustainable thing we have in the UK that will never run out: water. use the tide to generate electricity and fit hydro turbines to the outlets of every reservoir in the country. Build an underwater line of hydro turbines going across The Wash so that it doesn't stop wildlife but harnesses the water as it goes in and out; and then do the same somewhere along the Humber and the Severn and the Forth. @stevie D - Normally I find your comments very reasonable. However I would rather look at an active power station than bunches of wind turbines, simply because when I look at a power station there is a sense of security within it, something within it's brutalistic concrete conical towers which suggests it being there for generations - always there in the background giving us the juice so we can watch TV. Whilst seeing half a dozen turbines gently turning in the distance might seem nice, those hollow steel tubes just don't give that same sense of security. As an example, the wind farm at Knabs Ridge on the A59 west of Harrogate had a term in the application which means it'll have to be packed away and moved elsewhere soon - as I recall it won't be there by 2015; you just don't get that with a proper power station! Also, I have stood on the moors on the top of Blakey Ridge (having cycled there from home) and looked back, and those power stations are the only 'locators' on the landscape by which a person can work out what is where (especially as York is in a slight dip, and so is invisible from the Moors), they add something interesting to what would otherwise be flat fields; not to mention the work they give to railfreight companies. Magicman!

3:55am Fri 20 Dec 13

ColdAsChristmas says...

Good comment magicman. Glad you mentioned the hydro the land owners have less interest for a fast buck in. Then remember the shale gas revolution that should be interesting once the Queen claims all of the mineral rights via the duchy of Lancaster. You heard it here first.
We are just being softened up for the lights going out. Lucky anyone with a log or coal burner, especially on a frosty night like tonight. A growing population is not going to help either, more energy users and less energy produced. Is it any wonder why insulation and dim lights are being pushed but just remember that it is Government policy that has got us in this position (Thanks Ed Miliband) and I don't yet see any policies that will get us out of the mess. Eggborough closure? It just gets worse.
Good comment magicman. Glad you mentioned the hydro the land owners have less interest for a fast buck in. Then remember the shale gas revolution that should be interesting once the Queen claims all of the mineral rights via the duchy of Lancaster. You heard it here first. We are just being softened up for the lights going out. Lucky anyone with a log or coal burner, especially on a frosty night like tonight. A growing population is not going to help either, more energy users and less energy produced. Is it any wonder why insulation and dim lights are being pushed but just remember that it is Government policy that has got us in this position (Thanks Ed Miliband) and I don't yet see any policies that will get us out of the mess. Eggborough closure? It just gets worse. ColdAsChristmas

8:42am Fri 20 Dec 13

Igiveinthen says...

Given that Eggborough is a 2000 MW power station, how many wind turbines would be required to acheive that figure?, and how much land would it take to site them all?
Given that Eggborough is a 2000 MW power station, how many wind turbines would be required to acheive that figure?, and how much land would it take to site them all? Igiveinthen

9:06am Fri 20 Dec 13

myselby says...

This is a private company, it use to be owned by the nation, but was privatised by the Tories to help it flourish in the free market. So why should it receive any support from public finances. The free market is just that, free to succeed and free to fail. Why don’t all those people who bought shares and sold them for a quick profit put there collective hands in their pockets and drum up the investment required? Or is it the free market only works when profits and dividends are to be paid. They wanted a free market well you have got one .
This is a private company, it use to be owned by the nation, but was privatised by the Tories to help it flourish in the free market. So why should it receive any support from public finances. The free market is just that, free to succeed and free to fail. Why don’t all those people who bought shares and sold them for a quick profit put there collective hands in their pockets and drum up the investment required? Or is it the free market only works when profits and dividends are to be paid. They wanted a free market well you have got one . myselby

10:42am Fri 20 Dec 13

Bigwood says...

http://www.withoutho
tair.com/c26/page_18
6.shtml

Pg190 Onwards discusses 'pumped storage' which is a way with dealing in fluctuations in supply and demand.

The energy mix in the country is still far to much in favour of unsustainable fossil fuels and investment needs to be channelled into renewable technologies. The amount of government investment into R&D of renewables is minuscule when compared to fossil fuel subsidies. Perhaps if renewables were subsidised in the same way then the energy renewables produce would be much more economically economically viable.

In the short term if we are going to still use fossil fuels then it must be with carbon capture and storage (CCS), which Drax are in the process of developing.
http://www.whiterose
ccs.co.uk

If you take into account life cycle analysis of biomass burning and the displacement of agricultural land then the time taken to gain a net carbon benefit can be decades to centuries.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think shutting Eggborough so soon is the right decision but this country and the world has to make some brave decisions very soon if we want to stand any chance of creating a sustainable energy industry.
http://www.withoutho tair.com/c26/page_18 6.shtml Pg190 Onwards discusses 'pumped storage' which is a way with dealing in fluctuations in supply and demand. The energy mix in the country is still far to much in favour of unsustainable fossil fuels and investment needs to be channelled into renewable technologies. The amount of government investment into R&D of renewables is minuscule when compared to fossil fuel subsidies. Perhaps if renewables were subsidised in the same way then the energy renewables produce would be much more economically economically viable. In the short term if we are going to still use fossil fuels then it must be with carbon capture and storage (CCS), which Drax are in the process of developing. http://www.whiterose ccs.co.uk If you take into account life cycle analysis of biomass burning and the displacement of agricultural land then the time taken to gain a net carbon benefit can be decades to centuries. Don't get me wrong, I don't think shutting Eggborough so soon is the right decision but this country and the world has to make some brave decisions very soon if we want to stand any chance of creating a sustainable energy industry. Bigwood

11:35am Fri 20 Dec 13

old_selebian says...

myselby wrote:
This is a private company, it use to be owned by the nation, but was privatised by the Tories to help it flourish in the free market. So why should it receive any support from public finances. The free market is just that, free to succeed and free to fail. Why don’t all those people who bought shares and sold them for a quick profit put there collective hands in their pockets and drum up the investment required? Or is it the free market only works when profits and dividends are to be paid. They wanted a free market well you have got one .
I don't think you actually understand what has happened at this power station. The 'private' company already has the investment in place because the market HAS worked but they have failed in this round of funding to get a guaranteed price for the renewable energy they produce. #factcheck
[quote][p][bold]myselby[/bold] wrote: This is a private company, it use to be owned by the nation, but was privatised by the Tories to help it flourish in the free market. So why should it receive any support from public finances. The free market is just that, free to succeed and free to fail. Why don’t all those people who bought shares and sold them for a quick profit put there collective hands in their pockets and drum up the investment required? Or is it the free market only works when profits and dividends are to be paid. They wanted a free market well you have got one .[/p][/quote]I don't think you actually understand what has happened at this power station. The 'private' company already has the investment in place because the market HAS worked but they have failed in this round of funding to get a guaranteed price for the renewable energy they produce. #factcheck old_selebian

11:42am Fri 20 Dec 13

old_selebian says...

old_selebian wrote:
myselby wrote:
This is a private company, it use to be owned by the nation, but was privatised by the Tories to help it flourish in the free market. So why should it receive any support from public finances. The free market is just that, free to succeed and free to fail. Why don’t all those people who bought shares and sold them for a quick profit put there collective hands in their pockets and drum up the investment required? Or is it the free market only works when profits and dividends are to be paid. They wanted a free market well you have got one .
I don't think you actually understand what has happened at this power station. The 'private' company already has the investment in place because the market HAS worked but they have failed in this round of funding to get a guaranteed price for the renewable energy they produce. #factcheck
Furthermore, you don't mention Drax which is a 'private' company which is functioning perfectly well having been 'privatised by the Tories'.
Drax succeeded in getting its contract this time around, hopefully Eggborough will soon.
[quote][p][bold]old_selebian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]myselby[/bold] wrote: This is a private company, it use to be owned by the nation, but was privatised by the Tories to help it flourish in the free market. So why should it receive any support from public finances. The free market is just that, free to succeed and free to fail. Why don’t all those people who bought shares and sold them for a quick profit put there collective hands in their pockets and drum up the investment required? Or is it the free market only works when profits and dividends are to be paid. They wanted a free market well you have got one .[/p][/quote]I don't think you actually understand what has happened at this power station. The 'private' company already has the investment in place because the market HAS worked but they have failed in this round of funding to get a guaranteed price for the renewable energy they produce. #factcheck[/p][/quote]Furthermore, you don't mention Drax which is a 'private' company which is functioning perfectly well having been 'privatised by the Tories'. Drax succeeded in getting its contract this time around, hopefully Eggborough will soon. old_selebian

11:47am Fri 20 Dec 13

old_selebian says...

Bigwood wrote:
http://www.withoutho

tair.com/c26/page_18

6.shtml

Pg190 Onwards discusses 'pumped storage' which is a way with dealing in fluctuations in supply and demand.

The energy mix in the country is still far to much in favour of unsustainable fossil fuels and investment needs to be channelled into renewable technologies. The amount of government investment into R&D of renewables is minuscule when compared to fossil fuel subsidies. Perhaps if renewables were subsidised in the same way then the energy renewables produce would be much more economically economically viable.

In the short term if we are going to still use fossil fuels then it must be with carbon capture and storage (CCS), which Drax are in the process of developing.
http://www.whiterose

ccs.co.uk

If you take into account life cycle analysis of biomass burning and the displacement of agricultural land then the time taken to gain a net carbon benefit can be decades to centuries.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think shutting Eggborough so soon is the right decision but this country and the world has to make some brave decisions very soon if we want to stand any chance of creating a sustainable energy industry.
Agreed with most of what you said but you appear to misunderstand where the biomass used in power stations comes from. No agricultural land is displaced at all, the pellets come from managed forests that also supply the pulp and paper industries
[quote][p][bold]Bigwood[/bold] wrote: http://www.withoutho tair.com/c26/page_18 6.shtml Pg190 Onwards discusses 'pumped storage' which is a way with dealing in fluctuations in supply and demand. The energy mix in the country is still far to much in favour of unsustainable fossil fuels and investment needs to be channelled into renewable technologies. The amount of government investment into R&D of renewables is minuscule when compared to fossil fuel subsidies. Perhaps if renewables were subsidised in the same way then the energy renewables produce would be much more economically economically viable. In the short term if we are going to still use fossil fuels then it must be with carbon capture and storage (CCS), which Drax are in the process of developing. http://www.whiterose ccs.co.uk If you take into account life cycle analysis of biomass burning and the displacement of agricultural land then the time taken to gain a net carbon benefit can be decades to centuries. Don't get me wrong, I don't think shutting Eggborough so soon is the right decision but this country and the world has to make some brave decisions very soon if we want to stand any chance of creating a sustainable energy industry.[/p][/quote]Agreed with most of what you said but you appear to misunderstand where the biomass used in power stations comes from. No agricultural land is displaced at all, the pellets come from managed forests that also supply the pulp and paper industries old_selebian

12:15pm Fri 20 Dec 13

Bigwood says...

Some food crops are displaced by purpose grown energy crops such as miscanthus (elephant grass). If biomass could rely on waste or by-products as the sole feed stock then it would be a much more attractive prospect (with the addition of CCS).

More power plants are looking towards burning 100% biomass to obtain the required ROCs (Renewable Obligation Certificates), which are not given for co-firing with coal. This will increase demand for biomass crops will put pressure on limited land for food crops. With a growing population this will only become more of an issue.

Interestingly a huge amount of the biomass used at Drax are energy crops, grown and shipped all the way from North America. How Drax fit this into any kind of sustainability policy is beyond me?
Some food crops are displaced by purpose grown energy crops such as miscanthus (elephant grass). If biomass could rely on waste or by-products as the sole feed stock then it would be a much more attractive prospect (with the addition of CCS). More power plants are looking towards burning 100% biomass to obtain the required ROCs (Renewable Obligation Certificates), which are not given for co-firing with coal. This will increase demand for biomass crops will put pressure on limited land for food crops. With a growing population this will only become more of an issue. Interestingly a huge amount of the biomass used at Drax are energy crops, grown and shipped all the way from North America. How Drax fit this into any kind of sustainability policy is beyond me? Bigwood

12:22pm Fri 20 Dec 13

maybejustmaybe says...

Being pedantic, steam isn't visible. Its water vapour that you can see.
Being pedantic, steam isn't visible. Its water vapour that you can see. maybejustmaybe

12:28pm Fri 20 Dec 13

invisibleman says...

Nobody seems to be commenting on the fact that 800 people will lose thier jobs, not to mention the supporting firms such as the one I work for that will also lose out on maintenance contracts. This green energy policy is giving work away to countries in Europe where the UK will have to buy its electricity from. As said above, this stinks of corruption.
Nobody seems to be commenting on the fact that 800 people will lose thier jobs, not to mention the supporting firms such as the one I work for that will also lose out on maintenance contracts. This green energy policy is giving work away to countries in Europe where the UK will have to buy its electricity from. As said above, this stinks of corruption. invisibleman

12:41pm Fri 20 Dec 13

Brighouse Lad says...

Some people need to take a step back and look at the wider picture. If Eggborough closes how are we going to replace the generation capacity? Wether people like it or not we need coal, gas and nuclear to provide electricity when there is no wind to turn the wind turbines. We are looking at biomass, we have to import it. Gas? We have to import most of that. Coal, we import 60 million tonnes a year, half of which comes from Russia. Electrical interconnectors, France provides that one. The simple fact is that even with wind the country cannot produce enough electricity with its own resourses.

Is wind energy green? Well some people should maybe go and visit China and look at the pollution and water contamination from metal mining that makes the rare earth metal used in the turbine motors. Nuclear? Well look at the pollution that comes from uranium mining. Biomass? shipping 16 million tonnes a year from the USA makes it dirty, as does stripping millions of tree's to make the pellets.

The truth is we should stop the EU from meddling in our affairs. We need coal, the greens don't want to admit it but they know its true. Someone somewhere will be making a lot of money out of the UK's energy crisis and it wont be the general public.
Some people need to take a step back and look at the wider picture. If Eggborough closes how are we going to replace the generation capacity? Wether people like it or not we need coal, gas and nuclear to provide electricity when there is no wind to turn the wind turbines. We are looking at biomass, we have to import it. Gas? We have to import most of that. Coal, we import 60 million tonnes a year, half of which comes from Russia. Electrical interconnectors, France provides that one. The simple fact is that even with wind the country cannot produce enough electricity with its own resourses. Is wind energy green? Well some people should maybe go and visit China and look at the pollution and water contamination from metal mining that makes the rare earth metal used in the turbine motors. Nuclear? Well look at the pollution that comes from uranium mining. Biomass? shipping 16 million tonnes a year from the USA makes it dirty, as does stripping millions of tree's to make the pellets. The truth is we should stop the EU from meddling in our affairs. We need coal, the greens don't want to admit it but they know its true. Someone somewhere will be making a lot of money out of the UK's energy crisis and it wont be the general public. Brighouse Lad

12:48pm Fri 20 Dec 13

myselby says...

old_selebian wrote:
old_selebian wrote:
myselby wrote:
This is a private company, it use to be owned by the nation, but was privatised by the Tories to help it flourish in the free market. So why should it receive any support from public finances. The free market is just that, free to succeed and free to fail. Why don’t all those people who bought shares and sold them for a quick profit put there collective hands in their pockets and drum up the investment required? Or is it the free market only works when profits and dividends are to be paid. They wanted a free market well you have got one .
I don't think you actually understand what has happened at this power station. The 'private' company already has the investment in place because the market HAS worked but they have failed in this round of funding to get a guaranteed price for the renewable energy they produce. #factcheck
Furthermore, you don't mention Drax which is a 'private' company which is functioning perfectly well having been 'privatised by the Tories'.
Drax succeeded in getting its contract this time around, hopefully Eggborough will soon.
I do understand the free market- its a private company wanting pubilc money they should stand or fall by the market. or bring back in to public ownership. Drax only function well on public cash. its just one big con with the public being asked to pay over and over again, to private sector compaines do well.
[quote][p][bold]old_selebian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]old_selebian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]myselby[/bold] wrote: This is a private company, it use to be owned by the nation, but was privatised by the Tories to help it flourish in the free market. So why should it receive any support from public finances. The free market is just that, free to succeed and free to fail. Why don’t all those people who bought shares and sold them for a quick profit put there collective hands in their pockets and drum up the investment required? Or is it the free market only works when profits and dividends are to be paid. They wanted a free market well you have got one .[/p][/quote]I don't think you actually understand what has happened at this power station. The 'private' company already has the investment in place because the market HAS worked but they have failed in this round of funding to get a guaranteed price for the renewable energy they produce. #factcheck[/p][/quote]Furthermore, you don't mention Drax which is a 'private' company which is functioning perfectly well having been 'privatised by the Tories'. Drax succeeded in getting its contract this time around, hopefully Eggborough will soon.[/p][/quote]I do understand the free market- its a private company wanting pubilc money they should stand or fall by the market. or bring back in to public ownership. Drax only function well on public cash. its just one big con with the public being asked to pay over and over again, to private sector compaines do well. myselby

12:48pm Fri 20 Dec 13

myselby says...

old_selebian wrote:
old_selebian wrote:
myselby wrote:
This is a private company, it use to be owned by the nation, but was privatised by the Tories to help it flourish in the free market. So why should it receive any support from public finances. The free market is just that, free to succeed and free to fail. Why don’t all those people who bought shares and sold them for a quick profit put there collective hands in their pockets and drum up the investment required? Or is it the free market only works when profits and dividends are to be paid. They wanted a free market well you have got one .
I don't think you actually understand what has happened at this power station. The 'private' company already has the investment in place because the market HAS worked but they have failed in this round of funding to get a guaranteed price for the renewable energy they produce. #factcheck
Furthermore, you don't mention Drax which is a 'private' company which is functioning perfectly well having been 'privatised by the Tories'.
Drax succeeded in getting its contract this time around, hopefully Eggborough will soon.
I do understand the free market- its a private company wanting pubilc money they should stand or fall by the market. or bring back in to public ownership. Drax only function well on public cash. its just one big con with the public being asked to pay over and over again, to private sector compaines do well.
[quote][p][bold]old_selebian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]old_selebian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]myselby[/bold] wrote: This is a private company, it use to be owned by the nation, but was privatised by the Tories to help it flourish in the free market. So why should it receive any support from public finances. The free market is just that, free to succeed and free to fail. Why don’t all those people who bought shares and sold them for a quick profit put there collective hands in their pockets and drum up the investment required? Or is it the free market only works when profits and dividends are to be paid. They wanted a free market well you have got one .[/p][/quote]I don't think you actually understand what has happened at this power station. The 'private' company already has the investment in place because the market HAS worked but they have failed in this round of funding to get a guaranteed price for the renewable energy they produce. #factcheck[/p][/quote]Furthermore, you don't mention Drax which is a 'private' company which is functioning perfectly well having been 'privatised by the Tories'. Drax succeeded in getting its contract this time around, hopefully Eggborough will soon.[/p][/quote]I do understand the free market- its a private company wanting pubilc money they should stand or fall by the market. or bring back in to public ownership. Drax only function well on public cash. its just one big con with the public being asked to pay over and over again, to private sector compaines do well. myselby

7:08pm Fri 20 Dec 13

old_selebian says...

myselby wrote:
old_selebian wrote:
old_selebian wrote:
myselby wrote: This is a private company, it use to be owned by the nation, but was privatised by the Tories to help it flourish in the free market. So why should it receive any support from public finances. The free market is just that, free to succeed and free to fail. Why don’t all those people who bought shares and sold them for a quick profit put there collective hands in their pockets and drum up the investment required? Or is it the free market only works when profits and dividends are to be paid. They wanted a free market well you have got one .
I don't think you actually understand what has happened at this power station. The 'private' company already has the investment in place because the market HAS worked but they have failed in this round of funding to get a guaranteed price for the renewable energy they produce. #factcheck
Furthermore, you don't mention Drax which is a 'private' company which is functioning perfectly well having been 'privatised by the Tories'. Drax succeeded in getting its contract this time around, hopefully Eggborough will soon.
I do understand the free market- its a private company wanting pubilc money they should stand or fall by the market. or bring back in to public ownership. Drax only function well on public cash. its just one big con with the public being asked to pay over and over again, to private sector compaines do well.
Having previously worked in the power generation industry both under public and private ownership, I've probably got a slightly more informed idea of how this industry works but I don't think it is worth me trying to explain how inaccurate your comments are.
[quote][p][bold]myselby[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]old_selebian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]old_selebian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]myselby[/bold] wrote: This is a private company, it use to be owned by the nation, but was privatised by the Tories to help it flourish in the free market. So why should it receive any support from public finances. The free market is just that, free to succeed and free to fail. Why don’t all those people who bought shares and sold them for a quick profit put there collective hands in their pockets and drum up the investment required? Or is it the free market only works when profits and dividends are to be paid. They wanted a free market well you have got one .[/p][/quote]I don't think you actually understand what has happened at this power station. The 'private' company already has the investment in place because the market HAS worked but they have failed in this round of funding to get a guaranteed price for the renewable energy they produce. #factcheck[/p][/quote]Furthermore, you don't mention Drax which is a 'private' company which is functioning perfectly well having been 'privatised by the Tories'. Drax succeeded in getting its contract this time around, hopefully Eggborough will soon.[/p][/quote]I do understand the free market- its a private company wanting pubilc money they should stand or fall by the market. or bring back in to public ownership. Drax only function well on public cash. its just one big con with the public being asked to pay over and over again, to private sector compaines do well.[/p][/quote]Having previously worked in the power generation industry both under public and private ownership, I've probably got a slightly more informed idea of how this industry works but I don't think it is worth me trying to explain how inaccurate your comments are. old_selebian

1:34am Sat 21 Dec 13

Magicman! says...

invisibleman wrote:
Nobody seems to be commenting on the fact that 800 people will lose thier jobs, not to mention the supporting firms such as the one I work for that will also lose out on maintenance contracts. This green energy policy is giving work away to countries in Europe where the UK will have to buy its electricity from. As said above, this stinks of corruption.
Well it was Ed Milliband who set this ball rolling with his Climate Act (which is ironic as just a few weeks ago in parliament there he was criticising the Tories about all the 'green taxes' on energy bills, taxes which he himself put in place), and so it wouldn't suprise me if he has done some sort of backroom deal. I wouldn't trust that slimy weasel as far as I can spit, and because I'm not a chav I am lousy at trying to projectile spit.
[quote][p][bold]invisibleman[/bold] wrote: Nobody seems to be commenting on the fact that 800 people will lose thier jobs, not to mention the supporting firms such as the one I work for that will also lose out on maintenance contracts. This green energy policy is giving work away to countries in Europe where the UK will have to buy its electricity from. As said above, this stinks of corruption.[/p][/quote]Well it was Ed Milliband who set this ball rolling with his Climate Act (which is ironic as just a few weeks ago in parliament there he was criticising the Tories about all the 'green taxes' on energy bills, taxes which he himself put in place), and so it wouldn't suprise me if he has done some sort of backroom deal. I wouldn't trust that slimy weasel as far as I can spit, and because I'm not a chav I am lousy at trying to projectile spit. Magicman!

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree