DOCSLIB.ORG

UK Coal Phaseout to Be Introduced with Dangerous Loopholes and Delays

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
UK Coal Phaseout to Be Introduced with Dangerous Loopholes and Delays February 201 8 UK Coal Phaseout to be introduced with dangerous loopholes and delays The Government announced in 201 5 that it seeks to end coal burning for electricity within a decade, albeit only if “a shift to new gas can be achieved within these timescales”. It has now published its plan on how to achieve this: from October 2025, coal power stations will have to close unless their CO2 emissions are no higher than 450 kg/MWh at any time. By comparison, CO2 emissions from power stations that only burn coal are above 900 kg/ MWh. A coal phaseout is well overdue in the UK, and it is regrettable that the Government seeks to continue subsidising coal power until 2025, when, without subsidies, it might come to an end much sooner. However, there are two serious concerns about the Government’s decision even beyond 2025: firstly, power stations can continue to burn coal indefinitely, as long as they co-fire at least 54% biomass in each unit. This is based on flawed carbon accounting for biomass, using a methodology which ignores carbon emissions from burning biomass as most of those associated with logging and which has been denounced by hundreds of scientists worldwide. Whether companies can afford to co-fire that much biomass with coal remains to be seen. The second serious problem, however, is that the Secretary of State will be given powers to suspend the coal phaseout until such time as significant new gas power capacity has been built. It seems little coincidence that four of the companies operating coal power stations (Drax, RWE, Eggborough Power and SSE) have recently drawn up plans for major new gas power plants/units, ones which they are unlikely to afford without new or much higher subsidies for gas. They will now be in a position to tell the Government that without such subsidies, the coal phaseout cannot go ahead. The UK needs to urgently stop burning coal, and this needs to be part of a move away from fossil fuels and other high-carbon forms of energy, especially biomass electricity. Making a coal phaseout contingent on an expansion of gas burning will play into the hands of frackers and move us further away from avoiding the worst impacts of climate change. Finally, a coal phaseout must mean an end to coal mining, yet new destructive coal mines are proposed in the UK and the Government has so far failed to legislate against them. Coal phase out briefing • February 201 8 1 Introduction In November 201 5, Amber to set a maximum CO 2 Firstly, they will be able to keep Rudd, then Secretary of State emissions limit for existing coal their power stations open and for Energy and Climate Change, power plants – at less than half to keep burning coal provided announced that the the CO emissions from coal 2 that the co-fire it with more Government intends to become 3 power stations , but than 50% biomass. “one of the first developed significantly higher than the countries to deliver on a current average CO emissions 2 And secondly, the Secretary of commitment to take coal off per unit of electricity State will be given powers to the system” within one 4 generation in the UK . This new delay or suspend the emissions decade1 . Her promise came limit will be introduced from cap altogether if “too few” with one caveat: “We’ll only 1 st October 2025. Until then, new gas power stations are proceed if we’re confident that coal power plants can continue built. In theory, this power the shift to new gas can be 5 to draw subsidies . Those could also be used in the event achieved within these subsidies are in fact delaying a of any grid supply shortfall, for timescales”. much more rapid coal phaseout example caused by a shutdown which has been under way of nuclear power stations for Now, the Government has since 201 2. maintenance or repairs, or finally announced its plans for because of future shortfalls in ending coal burning for Worryingly, the Government’s electricity imports. electricity in the UK2. Rather decision leaves coal-burning than drawing up legislation companies with two get-out which would outlaw coal clauses even beyond 2025: power stations, it has decided Occupation of Ffos-y-Fran opencast coalmine, 201 6. Photo by Reclaim the Power Unnecessary delays Coal burning for UK electricity has been in steep decline in recent years: between 201 2 and 201 6, it fell by 72%. This fall was made possible largely by a tripling of wind and solar power and a reduction in electricity use6. In 201 7, it declined further7. However, between 201 7 and 2021 , seven coal power stations have been awarded a total of £453 million in subsidies8, paid through a surcharge on Drax Power Station. Photo by Andrew Whale electricity bills. Coal power station operators can continue 2025. Those subsidies are stations open which may to bid for such subsidies until artificially keeping coal power otherwise close earlier. 2 Coal phase out briefing • February 201 8 The biomass loophole A power station burning the UK since 201 1 is just 40 renewable electricity subsidies 1 0 1 2 biomass emits no less CO2 than g/kWh , although Drax, the for co-firing biomass . Drax one burning coal for every unit world’s biggest wood burners promptly announced that it of electricity it generates. The for electricity, cites a figure would convert a fourth of its Government has decided to three times as high1 1 . If the units to burning wood pellets, 1 3 ignore those CO2 emissions on Government’s figure is albeit at reduced capacity . the assumption that trees accurate, then plants could stay However, there will be no legal which are cut down and burned open and burn 46% coal and or technical reasons to stop for energy will in future be 54% biomass indefinitely. They Drax from using the subsidies replaced by new trees. It allows will even be able to attract to co-fire biomass with coal, energy companies to essentially subsidies in the form of even beyond 2025, something account only for the fossil fuel Capacity Market Payments if that would make economic emissions associated with their those offer a better deal than sense given that coal prices are biomass, e.g. fuel used for their renewable electricity lower than those for wood shipping9. The assumption subsidies for co-firing biomass. pellets. Companies will be able behind the Government’s to switch between renewable carbon accounting rules for Just a few days after the coal electricity subsidies and biomass have been condemned phaseout decision was Capacity Markets, depending by 800 scientists, who explain: published, the Government on which are more generous at “Cutting down trees for announced that coal power the time1 4. bioenergy releases carbon that stations can in future get would otherwise stay locked up around £6m in additional in forests… Even if forests are allowed to regrow, using wood deliberately harvested for burning will increase carbon in the atmosphere and warming for decades to centuries – as many studies have shown – even when wood replaces coal, oil or natural gas.” The Government states that the average CO2 emissions reported by biomass-burning plants in Forest campaigners in Wilmington, North Carolina. Photo by Dogwood Alliance Linking the coal phaseout to new gas power stations being built True to Amber Rudd’s words in response1 5 does not inspire such taking account of expected 201 5, the Government’s coal confidence. This states: new wind power projects (with phaseout decision confirms that solar and most onshore wind the Secretary of State will have The impacts on coal plant power now frozen due to “the power to suspend or retirements and subsidy cuts). amend the arrangements in requirements for new case there were significant and builds under the preferred This means that unless new imminent concerns about policy option are given in 3 fossil fuel power stations are security of supply.” It claims which shows that around built – ones which would be 5.5GW of new build that those powers are unlikely emitting large quantities of CO2 to be invoked because it is capacity will be needed in for decades to come – the confident that existing coal 2026. Government can allow coal power station capacity will be power stations to keep burning replaced by 2025. However, a The statement specifically refers coal and get subsidies for it closer look at the Impact to new fossil fuel power well beyond 2025. Assessment published together stations, i.e. the “minimum with the consultation need” has been calculated Coal phase out briefing • February 201 8 3 More subsidies for gas or no end to coal? The 5.5 GW of new gas power to get planning consent for by the Czech company EPH): 2.5 stations which the Government new gas power stations. GW, and SSE: 2 GW1 8. expects to be up and running According to research by by 2025 is less ambitious than Friends of the Earth, 22 GW of Yet so far, the dash for gas the 26 GW which George new gas capacity was either power station consents has not Osborne envisioned back in approved, in planning or in the been accompanied by a dash to 201 21 6. But it could hardly be advanced “pre-planning” stages invest in such plants. According reconciled with the aims of the by May 201 51 7. Since then, large to the Financial Times, just one Paris Climate Agreement to new proposals have been new gas power station, with a keep global warming to within published, the largest of them capacity of 0.88 GW, was built 1 .5oC.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • State of the Energy Market 2017 REPORT
    State of the energy market 2017 REPORT State of the energy market report Foreword The energy sector is changing rapidly, with significant • Third, the dramatic progress to ensure potential benefits for consumers. clean and secure electricity supplies has sometimes come at a higher cost to • In generation, new technologies, encouraged consumers than necessary. On average, by regulation and financial support, mean that consumers currently pay about £90 each year pollution is falling rapidly. Renewable power towards environmental policies. This will rise as sources now provide around a quarter of total low-carbon generation increases. Rapid falls electricity generation, compared to 5% in 2006. in the costs of wind and solar generation show • In retail markets, the number of accounts, not the scope for competition and innovation to limit including prepayment, on poor-value standard future cost increases. But consumers will lose variable tariffs has fallen from 15 million in April out if there isn’t effective competition for low- 2016 to 14 million only 12 months later (which we carbon support schemes and for measures to estimate to be around 12 million households). This help the energy system to work effectively. is because of near-record switching rates in 2017 so far. There are two major challenges to ensure that a transformed energy market works for all consumers. These changes are exciting, but looking at the state • Vulnerable consumers must be protected, of energy markets, we have three concerns about and able to engage in the market more how they currently work for consumers: effectively. We are consulting on extending our • First, the market works well for those who safeguard tariff to a further 1 million vulnerable engage.
    [Show full text]
  • Coal Production
    Coal Production A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA AB AC AD AE AF AG AH AI AJ AK 1 2 Summary of coal production entered on entity worksheets 3 Richard Heede 4 Climate Mitigation Services 5 22-May-13 6 7 8 1850s 1860s 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 9 Coal 10 11 12 13 1 Alpha Natural Resources, USA 14 15 2 Anglo American, UK 16 17 3 Arch Coal Company, USA 18 19 4 British Coal Corporation, UK 20 21 5 BP Coal, UK 22 23 6 BHP Billiton, Australia 24 25 7 China, Peoples Republic 26 27 8 Coal India, India 28 29 9 ConocoPhillips, USA 30 31 10 Consol Energy, USA 0.03 0.05 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0 0 32 33 11 Cyprus Amax, USA 34 35 12 Czechoslovakia 36 37 13 Czech Republic + Slovakia 38 39 14 ExxonMobil, USA 40 41 15 FSU (Former Soviet Union) 42 43 16 Kazakhstan 44 45 17 Kerr-McGee Coal (Anadarko), USA 46 47 18 Kiewit Mining Group, USA 48 49 19 Luminant, USA 50 51 20 Massey Energy, USA 52 53 21 Murray Coal, USA 54 55 22 North American Coal Corp., USA 56 57 23 North Korea 58 59 24 Occidental, USA 60 61 25 Peabody Energy, USA 62 63 26 Pittsburgh & Midway Coal (Chevron) 64 65 27 Poland 66 67 28 Rio Tinto, Australia 68 69 29 RAG (Ruhrkohle AG), Germany 70 71 30 Russian Federation (not including FSU) 72 73 31 RWE, Germany 74 75 32 Sasol, South Africa 76 77 33 Singareni Collieries Company, India 78 79 34 UK Coal, UK 80 81 35 Ukraine 82 83 36 Westmoreland Coal, USA 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 84 85 37 Xstrata, Switzerland
    [Show full text]
  • Cerrejón Coal Mine Colombia
    Cerrejón coal mine Colombia Sectors: Coal Mining Active This profile is actively maintained Send feedback on this profile By: BankTrack Created before Nov 2016 Last update: May 19 2021 Contact: Alex Scrivener, Policy Officer, Global Justice Now Project website Status Planning Design Agreement Construction Operation Closure Decommission Sectors Coal Mining Location Status Planning Design Agreement Construction Operation Closure Decommission Website http://www.cerrejon.com/site/ About Cerrejón coal mine The Cerrejón coal mine in La Guajira, Colombia, is the largest in Latin America and one of the largest in the world. Its steady expansion since its founding in 1976 has led to the destruction of whole villages populated by local indigenous and Afro-Colombian people. The extracted coal is almost exclusively for export to rich countries with local people seeing few benefits. The mine is owned by three giant UK-listed mining companies: BHP Billiton, Anglo American and Glencore. All of which receive billions of pounds in finance from UK banks and pension funds. Roche, Chancleta, Tamaquitos, Manantial, Tabaco, Palmarito, El Descanso, Caracoli, Zarahita, Patilla. These are the names of just some of the communities that have been devastated or simply wiped off the map by the Cerrejón mining project. Latest developments Anglo American to exit from Cerrejon shareholding, BHP Group to follow Feb 25 2021 Glencore leaving, passing mining contracts to Republic of Colombia Feb 4 2021 Impacts Social and human rights impacts While the Cerrejón mining company's promotional material gives the impression that it is helping the displaced communities, the reality is that the mining company has used underhand tactics to buy off individuals and sow internal division within the communities.
    [Show full text]
  • A Last Chance for Coal Making Carbon Capture and Storage a Reality
    a last chance for coal making carbon capture and storage a reality foreword by Rt Hon Margaret Beckett MP Jon Gibbins & Hannah Chalmers David Hawkins Graeme Sweeney Jules Kortenhorst Linda McAvan MEP Alain Berger Ruud Lubbers Frances O’Grady Mike Farley Matthew Lockwood Ben Caldecott & Thomas Sweetman Keith Allott Karla Hill & Tim Malloch Sheryl Carter compiled and edited by Chris Littlecott This publication is part of Green Alliance’s climate change theme (www.green-alliance.org.uk/climatechange), which is kindly supported by Shell. Green Alliance’s work on the financing of CCS demonstration projects is kindly supported by BP. The views expressed in this publication remain those of the individual authors alone, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Green Alliance or its sponsors. Acknowledgments Many thanks to all those who have advised and assisted in the preparation of this publication, particularly Rebecca Collyer, Mark Johnston and Jesse Scott. Special thanks are due to Catherine Beswick, Karen Crane, Maureen Murphy, Rebekah Phillips and Faye Scott for their invaluable editorial input. a last chance for coal making carbon capture and storage a reality Edited by Chris Littlecott ISBN 978-1-905869-15-2 © Green Alliance 2008 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Green Alliance. Within the UK, exceptions are allowed in respect of any fair dealing for the purposes of private research or study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Design and Patents Act, 1988, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms of the licenses issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency.
    [Show full text]
  • The Economics of the Green Investment Bank: Costs and Benefits, Rationale and Value for Money
    The economics of the Green Investment Bank: costs and benefits, rationale and value for money Report prepared for The Department for Business, Innovation & Skills Final report October 2011 The economics of the Green Investment Bank: cost and benefits, rationale and value for money 2 Acknowledgements This report was commissioned by the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS). Vivid Economics would like to thank BIS staff for their practical support in the review of outputs throughout this project. We would like to thank McKinsey and Deloitte for their valuable assistance in delivering this project from start to finish. In addition, we would like to thank the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), the Carbon Trust and Sustainable Development Capital LLP (SDCL), for their valuable support and advice at various stages of the research. We are grateful to the many individuals in the financial sector and the energy, waste, water, transport and environmental industries for sharing their insights with us. The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors and not those of BIS or any other party, and the authors take responsibility for any errors or omissions. An appropriate citation for this report is: Vivid Economics in association with McKinsey & Co, The economics of the Green Investment Bank: costs and benefits, rationale and value for money, report prepared for The Department for Business, Innovation & Skills, October 2011 The economics of the Green Investment Bank: cost and benefits, rationale and value for money 3 Executive Summary The UK Government is committed to achieving the transition to a green economy and delivering long-term sustainable growth.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Energy Bill: Pre–Legislative Scrutiny
    House of Commons Energy and Climate Change Committee Draft Energy Bill: Pre–legislative Scrutiny First Report of Session 2012-13 Volume III Additional written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be published on 24 May, 12, 19 and 26 June, 3 July, and 10 July 2012 Published on Monday 23 July 2012 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited The Energy and Climate Change Committee The Energy and Climate Change Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department of Energy and Climate Change and associated public bodies. Current membership Mr Tim Yeo MP (Conservative, South Suffolk) (Chair) Dan Byles MP (Conservative, North Warwickshire) Barry Gardiner MP (Labour, Brent North) Ian Lavery MP (Labour, Wansbeck) Dr Phillip Lee MP (Conservative, Bracknell) Albert Owen MP (Labour, Ynys Môn) Christopher Pincher MP (Conservative, Tamworth) John Robertson MP (Labour, Glasgow North West) Laura Sandys MP (Conservative, South Thanet) Sir Robert Smith MP (Liberal Democrat, West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) Dr Alan Whitehead MP (Labour, Southampton Test) The following members were also members of the committee during the parliament: Gemma Doyle MP (Labour/Co-operative, West Dunbartonshire) Tom Greatrex MP (Labour, Rutherglen and Hamilton West) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House.
    [Show full text]
  • A Holistic Framework for the Study of Interdependence Between Electricity and Gas Sectors
    November 2015 A holistic framework for the study of interdependence between electricity and gas sectors OIES PAPER: EL 16 Donna Peng Rahmatallah Poudineh The contents of this paper are the authors’ sole responsibility. They do not necessarily represent the views of the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies or any of its members. Copyright © 2015 Oxford Institute for Energy Studies (Registered Charity, No. 286084) This publication may be reproduced in part for educational or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgment of the source is made. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies. ISBN 978-1-78467-042-9 A holistic framework for the study of interdependence between electricity and gas sectors i Acknowledgements The authors are thankful to Malcolm Keay, Howard Rogers and Pablo Dueñas for their invaluable comments on the earlier version of this paper. The authors would also like to extend their sincere gratitude to Bassam Fattouh, director of OIES, for his support during this project. A holistic framework for the study of interdependence between electricity and gas sectors ii Contents Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................................. ii Contents ...............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Members Directory | World Coal Association
    Become a member Search Coal Reducing CO2 emissions Environmental protection Sustainable societies About WCA News & opinion Resources Members area Members Directory The World Coal Association is the global network for the coal industry. Information on all WCA members is available in this B E C O M E A M E M B E R directory. Corporate Member Anglo American Arch Coal Inc Aurizon Banpu BHP Billiton Bowie Resource Partners Caterpillar Global Mining China National Coal Group Glencore Joy Global Karakan Invest LLC Vostsibugol Mitsubishi Development Pty Ltd Orica Ltd Peabody Energy Rio Tinto Energy (MDP) Shenhua Group Corporation Limited Whitehaven Coal Limited Xcoal Energy and Resources Associate Member Andi Assocarboni Associação Brasileira de Carvão Association of British Mining Mineral Equipment Companies (ABMEC) China National Coal Association Coal Association of Canada (CAC) Coal Association of New Zealand Coallmp - Association of Uk Coal Importers Fossil Fuel Foundation German Coal Association (GSVt) Indonesian Coal Mining Association Iranian Mines & Mining Industries (APBI-ICMA) Development & Renovation Organization (IMIDRO) Japan Coal Energy Center (JCOAL) Minerals Council of Australia Mongolian Coal Association National Mining Association (NMA) Queensland Resources Council (QRC) Shaanxi Institute of Geological Survey Svenska Kolinstitutet MOU Coal Utilization Research Council European Association for Coal and VGB Powertech e.V. (CURC) Lignite (EURACOAL) World Coal Association Helpful links Explore Email. [email protected] Reducing CO2 emissions F I N D U S O N Tel. +44 (0) 20 7851 0052 Platform for Accelerating Coal Efficiency Fax. +44 (0) 20 7851 0061 Carbon capture, use and storage Contact us About WCA T H E J O U R N A L O F T H E C O A L I N D U S T R Y Terms & Conditions Media information Cookie policy Unless otherwise specified, images courtesy of Accessibility Shutterstock © 2015 World Coal Association.
    [Show full text]
  • Carbon Disclosure Project 2011
    CDP 2011 Investor CDP 2011 Information Request Carbon Disclosure Project Centrica Module: Introduction Page: Introduction 0.1 Introduction Please give a general description and introduction to your organization About Centrica Our vision is to be the leading integrated energy company in our chosen markets. We source, generate, process, store, trade, save and supply energy and provide a range of related services. We secure and supply gas and electricity for millions of homes and business and offer a range of home energy solutions and low carbon products and services. We have strong brands and distinctive skills which we use to achieve success in our chosen markets of the UK and North America, and for the benefit of our employees, our customers and our shareholders. In the UK, we source, generate, process and trade gas and electricity through our Centrica Energy business division. We store gas through Centrica Storage and we supply products and services to customers through our retail brand British Gas. In North America, Centrica operates under the name Direct Energy, which now accounts for about a quarter of group turnover. We believe that climate change is one of the single biggest global challenges. Energy generation and energy use are significant contributors to man-made greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, a driver of climate change. As an integrated energy company, we play a pivotal role in helping to tackle climate change by changing how energy is generated and how consumers use energy. Our corporate responsibility (CR) vision is to be the most trusted energy company leading the move to a low carbon future.
    [Show full text]
  • The Black Box
    SO M O The Black Box Obscurity and Transparency in the Dutch Coal Supply Chain SOMO January 2012 (Updated March 2013) The Black Box Obscurity and Transparency in the Dutch Coal Supply Chain Every year more than 50 million tonnes of coal fl ow into the Netherlands, destined either for combustion in coal-fi red power plants in this country or for re-export to other European countries for electricity generation there. The capacity to generate electricity from coal in the Netherlands will more than double if the four new coal-fi red power plants currently being planned in the Netherlands go forward as envisioned. Much of that coal comes from countries like Colombia, Russia, and South Africa, where sub-standard social and environmental conditions often prevail. A lack of transparency about the origin of coal used in the Netherlands has allowed the electricity companies responsible for importing irresponsibly mined coal to avoid public and political pressure for improving conditions in their supply chain. Increasing transparency in the coal supply chain is an important fi rst step toward improving the sub-standard conditions at coal mines around the world. This report details the functioning of the coal supply chain and provides a thorough overview of all publicly available information on the origin of coal used in Dutch power plants. The report identifi es critical gaps in public knowledge resulting from the lack of transparency provided by electricity companies operating in the Netherlands and analyses whether the degree of transparency provided by electricity companies is in line with international standards. The Black Box Obscurity and Transparency in the Dutch Coal Supply Chain SOMO Amsterdam, January 2012 (Updated March 2013) SOMO is an independent, non-profit research organisation.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Results
    Preliminary Results 12 Months Ended 31 December 2014 24 February 2015 Group Structure Biomass Generation Retail Self-supply Markets and Trading Fuel Drax Group plc 2 Agenda Business Review Dorothy Thompson Chief Executive 2014 Financial Review Tony Quinlan Finance Director Biomass Update Dorothy Thompson Drax Group plc 3 2014 Overview Dorothy Thompson – Chief Executive Drax Power EBITDA Good operations Significant regulatory headwinds £229m Major deterioration in commodity markets Underlying Earnings Per Share Haven Power Strong sales growth 23.7p Drax Biomass Total Dividends Commercial operations commence shortly 11.9p/share (£48m) Drax Group plc 4 Safety and Sustainability Safety Safety Performance 0.6 Maintaining good safety performance 2014 Global Coal Power Plant First Quartile TRIR – Solomons LLC 0.5 • > 65% increase in hours worked since 2012 0.4 Sustainability 0.3 All Drax biomass procured against robust 0.2 industry leading sustainability policy 0.1 • Fully compliant in 2014 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 • Delivering > 80% carbon lifecycle savings vs. coal Group TRIR Group LTIR • Thorough PWC independent audit process TRIR = total recordable injury rate, LTIR = lost time injury rate DECC working towards October 2015 mandatory standards Sustainable Biomass Partnership GHG(1) Life Cycle Emissions vs. Fossil Fuels • Industry sustainability standard to be launched Drax GHG Target March 2015 Biomass Gas(3) Coal(4) 2015-2020(2) in 2014 34g 79g 193g 280g CO2/MJ CO2/MJ CO2/MJ CO2/MJ (1) GHG = Green House Gas (2) DECC proposed target (includes
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 Corporate Responsibility Report
    2010 Corporate responsibility report Introduction and approach Contents 2 Chief Executive’s introduction 11 Governance 3 Approach and governance Centrica Executive Committee An Integrated business and CR strategy Corporate Responsibility Committee 4 Our CR strategy Performance 2010 Energy for a low carbon world 12 Looking ahead 8 Risk management 13 Assurance and reporting 9 Materiality 14 Scope of report 10 Stakeholder engagement Key stakeholder groups Prioritising stakeholders 2010 Corporate responsibility report: Introduction and approach 1 Chief Executive’s introduction In last year’s corporate responsibility (CR) report I discussed the changing shape of our business and how we responded by developing a new CR strategy. In 2010 we have focused on implementing that strategy and pursuing opportunities that lead the drive to a low carbon world. I am delighted to present our 2010 CR Report, which sets out our progress during the year and addresses some of the challenges that we face. Our new CR strategy has given us a better framework for our through energy efficiency and behaviour change, and on activities, with an emphasis on identifying ways in which providing additional support to our most vulnerable customers. Centrica can reduce carbon emissions. This is a role we are uniquely placed to fulfil through our customer relationships, the What is apparent is that we cannot achieve our low carbon skills of our service engineers and our expertise in sourcing goals in isolation. In September 2010, I set out what I believe energy and generating power. There are significant new market is needed from the industry, government and consumers to opportunities in helping to deliver a low carbon society; building achieve a low carbon economy.
    [Show full text]