UK could be at forefront of green Industrial Revolution with carbon cluster plans – and here’s why
If you crack open a bottle of something – be it wine, water or soft drinks – over the festive season, there’s a good chance the glass came from the Encirc factory in Cheshire.
Here, on the banks of the River Mersey, you will find one of the world’s largest glass factories. They take sand from Norfolk, soda ash created from the salt sitting beneath the Cheshire countryside and a lot of recycled glass and throw it into two of the biggest glass furnaces in the world.
There, in the furnace, at temperatures of around 1,600 degrees centigrade, the sand melts and becomes a liquid river of molten glass. It is a chemical reaction humans learnt thousands of years ago, but here at Encirc it’s carried out on a gargantuan scale.
This factory alone produces two billion bottles and containers a year, a number which is hard to process, until you note that it includes around 40% of all the wine bottles consumed in the UK.
That includes a significant proportion of all the New World wines we consume here, by the way. Mostly, the wine from Australia, California and Chile arrives not pre-bottled, but in large bags inside shipping containers, which are then emptied into metal vats at Encirc, from where they are pumped into bottles made here in the UK.
It’s an extraordinary site – a place which says a lot both about our appetite for liquids (both alcoholic and not) and our ability to turn raw materials into sophisticated products.
The struggle to get to net zero
But turning sand into glass is an enormously energy intensive process. Some of the heat in the furnace can be created by electric elements which heat the bottom of this enormous oven. But glassmakers like Encirc say it’s impossible to do what they do – making glass on a vast scale – without blasting that furnace with a very hot flame.
At the moment that flame is produced using methane – natural gas – with the upshot that this glassmaking facility produces rather a lot of carbon dioxide. And even if you could find a way of running their furnace without a naked flame it would still be producing a sizeable amount of CO2, since some of it derives from the chemical reaction as sand turns into glass.
In short, this glass factory is a pretty good illustration of how tricky it is to get to net zero. Much of the energy use in this country can be shifted from fossil fuels to green electricity – whether that’s vehicles or home heating. Sometimes the cost will be high; sometimes in the long run, going green will be cheaper than the status quo.
But for a handful of important industries it’s far, far harder. Glassmaking is one of those industries. You can run small furnaces on electric power but not the big ones you need to feed a massive glass container factory like this one.
Read more from Sky News:
The key economic graphs that define 2023
Big differences in house prices changes across the UK
All of which is why they are seeking another alternative. The most obvious route to allow this plant to decarbonise is to replace those methane flames with hydrogen ones, and then to collect all the CO2 coming out of the chimney and sequester it below the ground.
And, as it happens, the technology is pretty much there. We know how to make hydrogen both from natural gas and from electricity (the former still involves some carbon emissions; the latter is extremely expensive, so these options are not without their issues). We know how to capture carbon dioxide.
But there’s a couple of problems which have always deterred businesses like this from taking the leap. The first is that it hasn’t made any economic sense. Capturing carbon is expensive, so why do it when it’s cheaper to pay for carbon credits and carry on burning gas?
Location, location, location
The second is that the infrastructure isn’t yet there. Right now if you collected carbon dioxide from your chimney, there’s nowhere to put it. Someone needs to lay the pipes out to the depleted gas reservoirs under the sea where we might be able to store it. That’s also expensive.
All of which brings us to one of the least discussed, but arguably most important topics in the green energy transition: clusters. In short, if businesses like this glassmaker are going to green it is far more likely to happen if they can do so alongside other heavy industry players.
Look at the geography of the UK’s industries and the idea makes quite a lot of sense. Many of the country’s biggest polluters happen to be clustered relatively near each other on the coast. Alongside Encirc you’ll find one of the country’s biggest oil refineries, as well as the Inovyn (part of Ineos) chemicals plant, not to mention a major gas power station and, some miles further away in North Wales, a cement manufacturer.
All of these businesses have big energy demands. They would all benefit either from carbon capture or hydrogen. Squint a little bit into the future and you can envisage a world where they share pipes both taking the carbon away and delivering the hydrogen.
How to make it happen?
But how to create these clusters? How to finance them? How to coordinate the businesses that all want to make profits while fulfilling their commitments to reduce or eliminate their carbon emissions?
It’s a question no one has yet been able satisfactorily to answer, but whoever does will have that most precious of things: a blueprint about how to decarbonise the trickiest bit of the world’s carbon budget.
And guess what: it so happens the UK is further ahead of most other countries around the world in planning its blueprint for clusters. It now has detailed plans for how to fund, construct and run a series of major clusters: one around the Encirc factory (the Net Zero North West Cluster Plan), another in the Tees Valley (Tees Valley Net Zero), as well as plans for Scotland, for the Humber, for the Black Country and South Wales.
An area where the UK is genuinely leading
Thanks in part to government funding, which began in 2019, Britain’s clusters expertise is admired far and wide. While the US is widely seen as having taken the lead on industrial decarbonisation, thanks to its enormous Inflation Reduction Act set of subsidies, Americans – and many from Europe – have been regularly visiting the UK to understand how to do clusters.
There are many areas where UK politicians claim (without much basis) to be world leaders, but here is an area where it does actually have a world-beating proficiency. However, the government funding for clusters is coming to an end in March, and those working here are nervous that this could be another area where the country squanders an early lead and soon becomes a laggard.
While the cluster in Cheshire looks likely to become a physical reality, with companies soon laying the pipes that will connect plans to hydrogen and carbon dioxide pipes, those in the Black Country and elsewhere are much less advanced.
It’s something to ponder as you have a drink over the festive season. It’s tempting to assume that Britain no longer makes much of anything any more. However, visit plants like the Encirc one, and you realise that that is very far off the mark.
And there’s a prospect that this country, which brought the world the Industrial Revolution, could be at the forefront of managing the green Industrial Revolution. In a few years’ time that glass could be truly low carbon – maybe in due course it could be zero carbon. But it will take a lot more work – especially on clusters – to make it a reality.
The UK will buy up to 7,000 long-range missiles, rockets and drones and build at least six weapons factories in a £1.5bn push to rearm at a time of growing threats.
The plan, announced by the government over the weekend, will form part of Sir Keir Starmer’s long-awaited Strategic Defence Review, which will be published on Monday.
However, it lacks key details, including when the first arms plant will be built, when the first missile will be made, or even what kind of missiles, drones and rockets will be purchased.
The government is yet to appoint a new senior leader to take on the job of “national armaments director”, who will oversee the whole effort.
Andy Start, the incumbent head of Defence Equipment and Support – the branch of defence charged with buying kit – is still doing the beefed-up role of national armaments director as a sluggish process to recruit someone externally rumbles on.
Sir Keir Starmer and Volodymyr Zelenskyy at a presentation of Ukrainian military drones. Pic: Reuters
Revealing some of its content ahead of time, the Ministry of Defence said the defence review will recommend an “always on” production capacity for munitions, drawing on lessons learned from Ukraine, which has demonstrated the vital importance of large production lines.
It will also call for an increase in stockpiles of munitions – something that is vitally needed for the army, Royal Navy and Royal Air Force to be able to keep fighting beyond a few days.
Sky News will launch a new podcast series on 10 June based around a wargame that simulates an attack by Russia against the UK to test Britain’s defences
“The hard-fought lessons from [Vladimir] Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine show a military is only as strong as the industry that stands behind them,” John Healey, the defence secretary, said in a statement released on Saturday night.
“We are strengthening the UK’s industrial base to better deter our adversaries and make the UK secure at home and strong abroad.”
Army Commandos load a 105mm Howitzer in Norway. Pic: Ministry of Defence/PA
The UK used to have a far more resilient defence industry during the Cold War, with the capacity to manufacture missiles and other weapons and ammunition at speed and at scale.
However, much of that depth, which costs money to sustain, was lost following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, when successive governments switched funding priorities away from defence and into areas such as health, welfare and economic growth.
Even after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and a huge increase in demand from Kyiv for munitions from its allies, production lines at UK factories were slow to expand.
A reaper drone in the Middle East. Pic: Ministry of Defence
Sky News visited a plant run by the defence company Thales in Belfast last year that makes N-LAW anti-tank missiles used in Ukraine. Its staff at the time only worked weekday shifts between 7am and 4pm.
Under this new initiative, the government said the UK will build at least six new “munitions and energetics” factories.
Energetic materials include explosives, propellants and pyrotechnics, which are required in the manufacturing of weapons.
There were no details, however, on whether these will be national factories or built in partnership with defence companies, or a timeline for this to happen.
There was also no information on where they would be located or what kind of weapons they would make.
King Charles visits HMS Prince of Wales. Pic: PO Phot Rory Arnold/Ministry of Defence/PA
In addition, it was announced that the UK will buy “up to 7,000 UK-built long-range weapons for the UK Armed Forces”, though again without specifying what.
It is understood these weapons will include a mix of missiles, rockets and drones.
Sources within the defence industry criticised the lack of detail, which is so often the case with announcements by the Ministry of Defence.
The sources said small and medium-sized companies in particular are struggling to survive as they await clarity from the Ministry of Defence over a range of different contracts.
One source described a sense of “paralysis”.
The prime minister launched the defence review last July, almost a year ago. But there had been a sense of drift within the Ministry of Defence beforehand, in the run-up to last year’s general election.
The source said: “While the government’s intentions are laudable, the lack of detail in this announcement is indicative of how we treat defence in this country.
“Headline figures, unmatched by clear intent and delivery timelines which ultimately leave industry no closer to knowing what, or when, the MOD want their bombs and bullets.
“After nearly 18 months of decision and spending paralysis, what we need now is a clear demand signal from the Ministry of Defence that allows industry to start scaling production, not grand gestures with nothing to back it up.”
As well as rearming the nation, the government said the £1.5bn investment in new factories and weapons would create around 1,800 jobs across the UK.
A leading British palliative care consultant has described the assisted dying bill as “not fit for purpose” and is urging MPs to stop the bill from progressing any further.
Rejecting assurances from supporters of assisted dying who claim the proposed British version would be based on the scheme used in the American state of Oregon – widely regarded as the model with the most safeguards – Dr Amy Proffitt said “it’s far from a safe system”.
“The majority, 80% of the people that have assisted death have government insurance with Medicaid or Medicare suggesting that the vulnerable in society are not worth it,” she said.
“Put that into our NHS and what does it say about us as a society… those with disability, those with learning disabilities, those with social deprivation?”
Oregon’s assisted dying method is ‘far from a safe system,’ Dr Amy Proffitt said
Dr Proffitt added: “I think it’s deeply dangerous for the bill that has been proposed and it needs to be scrapped and we go back and look again.”
She and other leading palliative care doctors have expressed concern about the erosion of end of life care if the bill passes. It is a fear expressed by Britain’s hospice sector.
Read more:
Why is assisted dying so controversial – and where is it already legal?
Dr Ted Gruber, a retired Oregon doctor who has assisted numerous assisted deaths, says those fears have not been realised and the state’s hospice sector has strengthened since the introduction of assisted dying in Oregon in 1994.
He says he has never had any doubts about his role as a physician who assists a patient’s death.
“I’ve never been conflicted,” he explains. “I’ve attended a number of them.
“Each of the ones I’ve attended has been almost sacred if you will, it’s hard to explain but with the family there, the family dog in the bed, with the music playing that they want.
“Everyone’s sad, everyone’s crying, it’s not a joyful moment but in a way it’s kind of a sacred moment.”
Dr Ted Gruber told Sky News ‘I’ve never been conflicted’ about assisted dying
Oregon’s assisted dying laws have not seen the same number of changes to widen the cohort groups who would qualify for an assisted death in the way, for example, Canada has.
So it has managed to steer clear of the “slippery slope” criticism levelled at other programmes.
Dr Gruber also said the assisted death scheme in Oregon had enhanced the patient-physician relationship.
“The role of the doctor who is attending the dying patient is one of listening and paying attention to what the needs of the dying patient are and it’s eroded when the patient can’t trust the doctor,” he said.
“When I’ve seen a patient who has tried to talk to a doctor about aid in dying and they’re like ‘oh, I won’t do that, I’m opposed to it’… well that doesn’t enhance a doctor-patient relationship, it will be enhanced when a doctor says let’s talk about why you want to ask that.”
Read more from Sky News:
Assisted dying law ‘unworkable, unaffordable and naive’
MPs criticise Esther Rantzen’s assisted dying intervention
Oregon’s assisted death model is the closest to what is being proposed in the UK.
Both require it to apply only to adults who are terminally ill, mentally competent, and have six months to live or less, and to take the drugs themselves.
But while Oregon cases are reviewed by two doctors, in the UK they would be reviewed by a panel including a psychiatrist, a social worker and a legal professional.
In Oregon, the drugs are posted to the individual for them to take when ready, whereas in the UK, a healthcare professional would bring them on the day of the planned death.
Marcy Lehman’s father Ted was “her hero, the person I looked up to’. An Oregon doctor, he chose to have an assisted death at home in Portland surrounded by his family.
Marcy was there by his side. And it was for her, her mother and ultimately her father, the right decision.
“This was my hero, the person I looked up to, and now the roles were switched and I was taking care of him, and I had to be his hero,” Marcy said.
She explained that his stomach cancer “was starting to work up his system so he couldn’t eat.”
“My dad was a strong person and stronger even up until his death,” Marcy added.
‘He didn’t want someone to have to go to the bathroom with him,’ Marcy Lehman said
“He didn’t want someone to have to go to the bathroom with him to help with that or to feed him that wasn’t what he wanted – yeah, he was in pain, he could endure the pain, but it was really more the dignified way he wanted to leave this Earth.”
Ted’s family are grateful that they live in a state where assisted death is allowed. It’s a choice they would make again if they had to.
Now the UK must soon decide if that same choice is made available over here.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End Of Life) Bill was introduced to the House of Commons last October. Later next month, MPs will be asked to vote again in a ballot that will decide the fate of the proposed legislation.
As a ban on the sale of disposable vapes comes into force on Sunday, a doctor who set up the first-ever clinic to help children stop vaping has said she has seen patients so addicted they couldn’t sleep through the night without them.
Professor Rachel Isba established the clinic at Alder Hey Hospital in Liverpool in January and has now seen several patients as young as 11 years old who are nicotine dependent.
“Some of the young people vape before they get out of bed. They are sleeping with them under their pillow,” she told Sky News.
Professor Rachel Isba set up the first-ever stop vaping clinic for children
“I’m hearing stories of some children waking up at three o’clock in the morning, thinking they can’t sleep, thinking the vape will help them get back to sleep. Whereas, actually, that’s the complete opposite of how nicotine works.”
Ms Isba said most of her patients use disposable vapes, and while some young people may use the chance to give up, others will simply move to refillable devices after the ban.
“To me, vaping feels quite a lot like the beginning of smoking. I’m not surprised, but disappointed on behalf of the children that history has repeated itself.”
A government ban on single-use vapes comes into effect from Sunday, prohibiting the sale of disposable vaping products across the UK, both online and in-store, whether or not they contain nicotine.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) said usage among young vapers remained too high, and the ban would “put an end to their alarming rise in school playgrounds and the avalanche of rubbish flooding the nation’s streets”.
Pic: PA
Circular economy minister Mary Creagh said: “For too long, single-use vapes have blighted our streets as litter and hooked our children on nicotine. That ends today. The government calls time on these nasty devices.”
At nearby Shrewsbury House Youth Club in Everton, a group of 11 and 12-year-old girls said vape addiction is already rife among their friends.
Yasmin Dumbell said: “Every day we go out, and at least someone has a vape. I know people who started in year five. It’s constantly in their hand.”
Yasmin Dumbell says she knows students who started vaping in year five
Her friend Una Quayle said metal detectors were installed at her school to try to stop pupils bringing in vapes, and they are having special assemblies about the dangers of the devices.
But, she said, students “find ways to get around the scanners though – they hide them in their shorts and go to the bathroom and do it”.
Una Quayle says metal detectors installed at her school won’t stop students using vapes
The girls said the ban on disposables is unlikely to make a difference for their friends who are already addicted.
According to Una, they’ll “find a way to get nicotine into their system”.
As well as trying to address the rise in young people vaping, the government hopes banning single-use vapes will reduce some of the environmental impact the devices have.
Read more:
Disposable vape ban explained
Why vapes are environmentally bad
School support worker struck off over vapes boasts
Although all vapes can be recycled, only a tiny proportion are – with around eight million a week ending up in the bin or on the floor.
Pulled apart by hand
Even those that are recycled have to be pulled apart by hand, as there is currently no way to automate the process.
Scott Butler, executive director of Material Focus, a recycling non-profit group, said vapes were “some of the most environmentally wasteful, damaging, dangerous consumer products ever sold”.
His organisation worries that with new, legal models being designed to almost exactly mimic disposables in look and feel – and being sold for a similar price – people will just keep throwing them away.
He said the behaviour “is too ingrained. The general public have been told ‘vapes are disposable’. They’ve even been marketed this way. But they never were disposable”.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway