But Teesside is also one of the UK’s main “low carbon industrial centres”. Mass marine die-offs have therefore become part of the UK’s green transition to net-zero emissions.
Seid and Humber
Nearly half of the UK’s industrial cluster emissions come from the Humber and Teesside, with the Humber being the second most carbon-intensive region in Europe.
Inducted in 2021, together with the other six domainsas recipient Substantial government funding and support Become a low-carbon industrial zone.Teesside aims to be the world’s first Center for Zero Carbon Industry by 2040.
Teesside as a project is linked to the Zero Carbon Humber including Drax Power Station, British Steel, the SSE operated Keadby Power Station, a number of chemical and manufacturing projects and hydrogen production including the notorious Italian Petroleum Statoilhydrogen plant. speed,’green jet fuel The factory at Stallingborough is also a collaborative project.
The entire project will be supported by infrastructure developed through the Northern Endurance Partnership (NEP), which brings together fossil fuel companies BP, Equinor, Shell, ENI and Total, of which BP is the lead operator.
Teesside is a dubious “zero-carbon” industrial cluster, built in a free port where regulations including tax, labor and environmental laws barely apply, propped up by government money and support, and largely profited by fossil fuel companies.
Green Cleaning for Hydrogen and Net Zero
As a project, Teesside is pinning its net zero target on two things: carbon capture and storage and green hydrogen.
carbon capture and storage (CCS) has harsh criticism as a Misunderstanding. Not only does it not work at scale, but most existing projects leak or store far less than they claim.
Nevertheless, it still attracts millions in government funding. Teesside’s Net Zero plan plans to capture up to 10 million tonnes of CO2 emissions per year, a significant proportion of emissions associated with the region and equivalent to the annual energy use of up to 3 million UK households emissions.
Given how poorly CCS “works”, it’s safe to assume that far fewer are actually captured and safely stored.
However, it is in this infrastructure that the fossil fuel majors backing the project are investing heavily, aiming to extend the life of their own offshore oil and gas projects by offsetting their emissions and then using CO2 to boost oil and gas production ( By injecting carbon dioxide into operating wells), the depleted oil and gas wells will eventually be used as carbon storage sites. They will continue to profit from climate change for decades to come.
Production
The second element is hydrogen, with Teesside aiming to become a significant hydrogen hub for the UK, with a transport network, two ‘blue’ hydrogen projects from BP and Kellas, and a green hydrogen project run by Protium.
Despite a global boom in funding for hydrogen, both the UK and the EU have come under intense fire corporate lobbying exist Support hydrogen production and substantial government financial support for hydrogen development.
Britain put on hold £240m for hydrogen-related developmentalthough EU has poured 5.4 billion euros into a hydrogen energy project alone.
However, while many agree that hydrogen will play a limited but important role in the future, its green claims have been as heavily criticized as claims that it will play a huge role in the future.
Most hydrogen is currently produced through the use of fossil fuels – in 2021 nearly 47% of global hydrogen production will come from natural gas, 27% from coal and 22% from oil. This hydrogen is called “blue hydrogen” and relies on CCS to achieve carbon neutrality. It is not.
lobbyist
blue hydrogen is actually likely More carbon pollution than burning natural gas, making it a form of greenwashing for fossil fuel companies. By 2021, only 4% of hydrogen will be produced using electricity and less than 1% using renewable energy. This means that less than 1% of hydrogen is truly “green”.
Most hydrogen not only produces carbon emissions but is also expensive to produce, fossil fuel companies require Billions in taxpayer dollars to produce fuel for decades to come.
beyond this, Technical Difficulties and Infrastructure Issues means even if The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee concluded that: “The large-scale use of hydrogen for home heating or passenger car fuel is unlikely to be practically and economically feasible in the short and medium term”.
Indeed, this would make Home heating is more, not cheaper. The situation is much the same for shipping and most road transport. While it has a limited role in some industrial processes, it is the wrong solution, promoted by corporate and fossil fuel lobbyists and backed by billions of dollars in government.
toxic net zero
Teesside is a tragic example of how revived neoliberalism can combine with the wrong climate solutions to create an environmental disaster.Turning Incorporate net zero into business plans A lot of money and huge profits may be made through government funding and support, but it won’t solve climate change.
As more land breaks ground around Teesside and other proposed industrial net-zero clusters, we can expect the toxic legacy of industrialism buried in the soil and lodged in rivers and sea beds to be released into surrounding areas.
Construction and manufacturing processes will generate more waste, including carbon emissions. This includes possible spills from CCS sites and blue hydrogen production.
All in all, the tragic mass ocean death at Yorkshire’s cost is only part of the environmental cost that needs to be paid as part of the UK’s push for so-called net-zero emissions. The aim is to change as little as possible the drivers of UK industry so that it is business as usual.
the author
Dr Nicholas Beuret is a Lecturer in Management and Ecological Sustainability at the University of Essex.His research has been published in including Opposite, Science and Culture and south atlantic quarterly. He can be found on Twitter @_nic_beuret_.
