Acorn Project carbon capture funding to be announced in spending review
In the House of Commons on Tuesday, ministers were asked a number of times about funding for the project.Energy Minister Sarah Jones told MPs they didn't have long to wait to see what the spending review had to say about the project.She said: "We have always been clear that we support the Acorn Project" adding "we know what an important proposal it is."The decision is a matter for a spending review but we are very close to having those decisions".
'Vital' for climate targets
In March, business leaders including oil tycoon Sir Ian Wood and organisations such as the Scottish Chambers of Commerce signed a letter urging the chancellor to back the project.The letter argued that the project had faced two decades of setbacks, and that it is needed to help Scottish industry decarbonise.The project missed out on support in 2021, when funding instead went to two areas in the north of England, and Acorn was placed on a reserve list for future backing.The UK government said Acorn had already received more than £40m for its development.If it is given the go-ahead, waste CO2 will be piped from central Scotland to St Fergus using redundant pipelines which previously carried natural gas south.Experts say the technology is vital for Scotland to meet its climate targets.Sites which are signed up include the refineries at Mossmoran and Grangemouth as well as a new power station at Peterhead.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
PETER VAN ONSELEN: UN climate boss makes LUDICROUS claim about daily habit Aussies will be forced to give up because of warming - turning off the very people he needs to win over
When Simon Stiell, the UN's top climate official, warns Australians that unless we lift our game on emissions, fruit and veggies will become 'a once-a-year treat', you know he's jumped the shark. That kind of rhetoric may stir applause from activists who are already won over to the climate cause, but it risks turning off the very people who weigh up what practical action should look like. You don't have to be a climate change denier to fall into that category. Climate change is real, most people accept that. The science is sound, people know that too. The dangers posed by a warming planet are therefore not to be underestimated. But packaging the argument in short term apocalyptic headlines doesn't strengthen the cause, it weakens it. It sounds like activism, not expert analysis, and that distinction matters. When the debate becomes saturated with worst case scenarios and doom-laden predictions, most people dismiss those who deliver inflated rhetoric as lacking credibility. Stiell might believe he's spurring governments into action, but for mainstream voters, the ones who decide elections, this sort of messaging can feel more like an old fashioned guilt trip. It becomes counterproductive to the cause. Australia is preparing to update its 2035 emissions reduction target right when the Labor government has ambitions to co-host a global climate summit. And the UN's climate tsar seems to think fresh alarmism will spur Labor into more action. But that will not be the case if his sensationalising makes the government look like its plans are rooted in activism. Younger voters tend to be more inclined to listen to the alarmism, but the electorate is broader than one generation still finding their feet in life. The case for serious emissions reduction is strong, but it must be made with rigour. Suggesting fresh produce will become a luxury good - or that living standards are set to collapse without dramatic policy shifts in Australia - makes for a good headline but is poor public engagement. It risks framing climate policy as a punitive exercise rather than an economic and technological opportunity. It also ignores the reality that Australia is a very small emitter on the global stage even if our per capita emissions are too high. What we do, or don't do, matters little if the likes of China and India don't do much more than they currently are. There are plenty of nations in greater need of lectures than we are. Australians aren't oblivious to climate risks, but they are wary of poor policies, broken promises and emissions targets that are often costly and don't get met anyway. Voters want action that's credible, not utopian and dreamy. They also want costed plans, not alarmist lectures, especially in the context of rising energy prices and concerns about reliability. The Coalition is already highlighting the economic burden of the government's major emissions reduction policy - known as the safeguard mechanism - and other net zero policies. The public will want proper answers to a problem - not simplistic fear mongering. The credibility of climate action depends on public trust. That means being transparent about costs and benefits, about timelines, trade-offs and targets. It means avoiding exaggerated claims that can't be sustained if the short-term doesn't mirror the long-term projection. Just because opponents of climate action use fear and verbosity is no reason for advocates who claim to be on the side of science to dash their credibility by returning fire. If the government wants to be taken seriously at home and abroad, it should focus less on emotionally charged appeals and more on policy design that builds confidence. There's merit in the idea of setting ambitious targets with built-in flexibility, allowing for adjustments as new technology develops and economic conditions change. That's the kind of thinking that builds consensus and keeps momentum going. Those urging rapid decarbonisation, net zero within a decade, or 65 per cent emissions cuts by 2035 need to ground their calls in practical pathways. Without them, they risk pushing the conversation to the fringes. There's nothing wrong with urgency, but it should be channelled into persuading the undecided rather than trying to pressure them. If Stiell wants Australia to lead, avoid the junk threats. After all, science is already on his side.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Donald Trump flags huge tariff hike that will impact Australia
Australian exporters may be hit with tariffs of up to 20 per cent at the US border, after President Donald Trump flagged a hike in the baseline impost. On Monday, the US President suggested countries that do not negotiate separate trade deals would soon be hit with a new minimum tariff up to twice as high. 'We are going to be setting a tariff, for essentially the rest of the world, and that's what they're going to pay if you want to do business in the United States,' he told reports at a press conference at his luxury golf resort in Turnberry, Scotland. Asked what the new rate would be, he answered: 'I would say it'll be somewhere in the 15 to 20 per cent range.' 'Probably one of those two numbers'. Trump floated broad-sweeping tariffs as a key election promise last year which, he claimed, would encourage more manufacturing firms to set up shop in the US. Australia is among the roughly 200 countries expected to be hit with the new baseline tariff despite its bilateral free-trade agreement with the US. Shadow Finance Minister James Paterson said the update shed new light on the need for the Australian Prime Minister to meet with Trump. 'I think there is enough evidence now in the public realm that we do have a problem in the bilateral relationship between Australia and the United States,' he told Sky News. 'It's more than 260 days since the president was elected, Anthony Albanese has still not sat down and met with him.' Mr Albanese sought to discuss the tariffs with Trump during their attendance at the G7 summit in Canada last month before the US President cut his trip short. Mr Peterson added it remained 'unclear' whether Ambassador to the US Kevin Rudd had yet to meet with the White House administration since Trump was sworn in in January. 'I suspect we would know about it if he had, I suspect it would be all over social media if he had, so I think it's a reasonable inference now that there has been no meetings.' For its part, the Albanese government has restated its opposition to the tariffs but has downplayed what it says about the two country's relationships. 'We are a country that relies on trade, we are a country with a very high proportion of jobs that rely on trade,' Assistant Treasurer Dan Mulino told Sky News. 'That remains the position of this government. So, we would rather a situation in which the world doesn't go down the path of imposing tariffs. 'But what I can say is that Australia remains in a situation where we've got as good a deal as anybody, and we continue to engage with the US Government intensely on these matters.' A spokesperson for Trade Minister Don Farrell said Australia would continue to engage 'at all levels' to advocate for the removal of the tariffs. 'Our position is unchanged – any tariffs on Australian goods are unjustified and an act of economic self-harm,' they said. It comes only days after Australia lifted its ban on importing US beef - eliminating a key reason cited by the Trump administration for its tariff on Aussie goods. Mr Albanese insisted the move was the outcome of a review that had been underway for years, but Trump's officials have celebrated it as a win for the president.
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Chris Mason: Trump's Scotland visit gives Starmer invaluable access
Two times around, the US president and the prime minister went, looking down on Donald Trump's new golf course north of they came into land, days of diplomacy garnished with Street are reconciled to the Trumpian ways of doing international doing a few airborne laps of the president's new Scottish golf course are par for the course on board the presidential helicopter and en route to a private dinner with him, so be notionally "private" trip for Trump has been actually very course it has: it is how the president president's private interests are talked up in public office, even down to the quality of the plywood at Trump's Turnberry golf course in Ayrshire, where he was before he flew on to Aberdeenshire. And all this on his first trip to the UK since his re-election, but just weeks before he makes an unprecedented second state visit here in talks at Turnberry began with the spectacle of the president gushing about the prime minister's wife, Victoria, as she stood alongside him, the entire conversation almost drowned out by a nearby leaders then spent more than half an hour talking one on one, before a classic of the Trumpian genre – a rolling, free-wheeling question-and-answer session with reporters, lasting more than an topic list: turbines, Germany, free speech, Scottish independence, China, the King, interest rates, pharmaceuticals. Among other Sir Keir Starmer, both on and off camera, this all amounts to invaluable face time with Trump, even sharing a lift on Air Force One, burnishing a relationship as solid as it is jeopardy for him is clear too though: riding shotgun with a free-wheeling president at ease shooting the breeze with reporters seemingly Keir interjected with care, to defend the mayor of London, heavily criticised by the president, to explain his immigration policy and his outlook on earlier rolling encounter with reporters took No 10 by surprise: the prime minister's wife, standing next to the president, perfecting her poker face as the questions – and answers – flowed and flowed. As ever, the key question is what can this relationship deliver for the UK?Downing Street regard the access moments like this offer as are pleased that the president's language on Gaza amounts to what they see as a toughening of his outlook and what they hope might be an alignment with the discussions the UK, France and Germany have been having in recent Tuesday, the cabinet will gather at 14:00 for a rare summer meeting, some ministers attending in person in Downing Street, others joining focus will be on Gaza – and the latest move from many to see if, collectively, the beginnings of a solution can be found to the horrific pictures we're currently seeing from the Middle East.
