Indira Mann (Letters, 7 November) expresses unqualified support for the concept of carbon capture and storage (CCS) and sings its praises. However, the letter content fails to present reality.
Any fossil-fuelled generator with CCS has its output reduced by 25 to 30 per cent, requiring more generators to produce the same electricity output, thereby negating any significant and meaningful emissions advantage.
Norway is specifically mentioned in the letter but, within the past month or so, Norway has abandoned its Mongstad carbon capture plan due to mounting and unacceptable costs. Additionally, the Global CCS Institute recently published a report saying that investment in CCS is “on the decline” with projects either being cancelled or put on hold – basically, private institutions are not investing in CCS.
The overall assessment of CCS would appear to be that it is far too expensive to be commercially viable. This may not be what the Scottish Carbon & Storage research organisation wants to hear, but it is reality.
(Dr) GM Lindsay