It's mostly good stuff and I'm really pleased to see climate activists get around to focussing on coal rather than oil, and getting closer to the supply side than the demand side.
I find it interesting that such a radical organisation as Climate Camp is able to accept so readily some highly suspect Government figures suggesting there won't be an energy gap. So they really believe we'll be getting 40%, some 160TWh per year from renewables by 2020, 11 and a bit years from now? So they really believe we'll still be generating over a third of our electricity from gas in 2020? I'd say not a chance.7. Without these power stations there will be an energy gap.
The old ones are the best ones. Problem: a load of companies want to make big bucks but can only achieve it by doing the rest of us over. Answer: come up with something scary so people are distracted and don’t notice what you're up to. O’oo the energy gap. A frightener isn’t it. It’s meant to be what happens if we don’t build new coal and nuclear power stations to replace the ones that are being decommissioned. We run out of energy, the Christmas lights go out , rubbish blows in the streets and we’re all transported back into the 70s and forced to listen to crackly Val Doonican records on pedal powered stereos.
But the energy gap is a nonsense.
Check out the Government's own projections:
• The amount electricity generating capacity reduction by 2027 from closing old coal and nuclear power stations: 35%
• The amount of energy Gordon Brown has said we will generate from renewable sources by 2020: 40%
On these figures there is no energy gap. In fact we're up five percent seven years early. There are other gaps. A commitment cap, a vision gap, a take the bull by the horns and do something useful for a change gap. But no energy gap.
Climate Change thinkers must get to grips with the energy security side of this issue. Such blinkered, single issue thinking is not likely to deliver the best outcome.
EDIT: To generate 160TWh in a year is equivalent to an average rate of generation of 18.3GW. If this is to come from renewables with an average 30% load factor 61GW of name plate capacity would be needed. This is around six times the current nuclear fleet capacity and would cost close to £100bn at today's prices.