Greenpeace and over 100 other environmentalist groups including Friends of the Earth International claim that plans to bury industrial greenhouse gases will create "false hope," and is not the solution to tackling world climate change.
Governments want to use new technology to capture heat-trapping carbon dioxide from exhausts of factories and power plants, and entrap them in porous rocks. WWF also support the technology as a means of preventing further climate change.
However, Greenpeace International released a report criticising the technology entitled "False Hope." Emily Rochon, climate and energy campaigner at Greenpeace International and author of the report says: "Carbon Capture and storage is a scam." She added that the entire capture process is simply a way of allowing environmentally damaging coal power plants to continue running.
Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth International and 112 other green groups are all pushing for governments to invest in solar, wind and other renewable energies rather than technology that prolongs the burning of fossil fuels in factories and power plants.
A statement closely linked to the report claims that the technology risks "locking the world into an energy future that fails to save the environment."
There is division between the green groups about the significance of the new technology. Some groups accept it as a means of reducing carbon emissions and averting increasingly powerful storms, droughts, heatwaves, disrupted monsoon rains and worldwide ocean level rises.
Stephen Singer, head of WWF's European Climate and Energy Programme in Brussels, says: "carbon capture and storage is not an ideal solution, but it buys us time." He believes it is "part of the solution - an emergency exit."
In addition, the UN Climate Panel back carbon capture and storage as a main way of slowing climate change by the end of the century - it will contribute a larger share of greenhouse gas cuts than energy efficiency, a transition to renewable energies, or an increased international dependence on nuclear power.
Singer uses China's capital as an example of the benefits of applying the technology, stating that Beijing's vast amount of coal power plants could use carbon capture and storage, as China would be very reluctant to shut them down.
Greenpeace International says that the technology is not yet fully developed and would take at least another 20 years to be deployed on a large enough scale. It is also a dangerous investment that would not be economically feasible.
Lars Haltbrekken, head of Friends of the Earth Norway says: "We believe that CCS will be an important tool to reduce emissions from existing coal and gas-fired power plants," however he does not support the continuing building of such plants.
Related posts
Posted under Articles, Environmental News
This post was written by Ben Willis on June 2, 2008