![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Thursday, October 8, 1998 Published at 17:40 GMT 18:40 UK UK More coal, more global warming ![]() A lifeline for the coal industry or a death sentence for the environment? The government's decision to throw a lifeline to the coal industry will be welcomed by many in the remaining mining communities. But some experts believe it is sending a dangerous signal - that protecting the environment is not really important.
However, a greater use of coal could stop that trend, environmentalists believe. Under the terms of the agreement reached at the meeting of governments in the Japanese city of Kyoto last year, the world is committed to cutting its emissions of all greenhouse gases to five per cent below their 1990 levels, and to reaching this target some time between 2008 and 2012. UK's ambitious targets The countries of the European Union are responsible for achieving eight per cent of this target, with the UK share of the EU cuts more ambitious still - a commitment to achieve a reduction amounting to 12% of the savings the entire EU has to make. On top of that the government has promised to cut our emissions of CO2, the gas given off by burning fossil fuels, by 20% before the 2010.
Friends of the Earth has mixed feelings about the government's announcement. A spokeswoman said the group supported a moratorium on the building of new large gas-fired power plants, in order to protect the diversity of fuel supplies and prevent the country becoming too dependent on any one source. And she said allowing coal a bigger role would give more scope for CO2 cuts in the next century. She said that, according to FoE's own modelling work, there was a place for coal in the UK's energy policy. But she said the coal that was used should come from deep pits, not from opencast sites or as imports from abroad.
Andrew Warren, the director of the Association for the Conservation of Energy, said the government was sending the wrong signal with its announcement. Mr Warren said: "What it is saying is, 'we are not bothered about sending the wrong signal when it comes to getting rid of dirty fuels. We are a government to whom the environment is less important than realpolitik'. And yet it says that the environment runs through all its decision-making." |
UK Contents
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||