Hartlepool nuclear plant - completely out of action

Should you happen to find yourself debating with a passionate supporter of nuclear power about how to supply our country's future energy needs, the odds are that pretty early in the debate they'll play their trump card - namely that only nuclear can supply the 'base load' necessary to ensure that the lights stay on throughout the long, dark British winter. Hang the dangers of radioactivity, forget the ruinous expense, they'll say - we can't do without nuclear power.

Avedore CHP plant in Denmark

Remember how we said last month that industrial combined heat and power (CHP) plants could save us money, increase our energy security and help slow climate change?

Well, we've just heard that plans are afoot for just such a plant in Scotland. The Tullis Russell paper mill plans to reduce its annual carbon emissions by around 250,000 tonnes a year by switching to biomass CHP for its electricity and steam.

No one will be surprised that Greenpeace is against the construction of new nuclear power stations, but what some may find unusual is one of the solutions we are proposing to meet our energy needs and reduce our CO2 emissions - industrial CHP, or combined heat and power.

The ROCA 3 CHP plant in Rotterdam provides electricty and heat to 400,000 homes

Due to popular demand (well, demand anyway), The Weekly Geek now has its very own RSS feed.

Back in 1882, Thomas Edison built the United States' first electric power plant. Pearl Street Station, which supplied the good folks of Lower Manhattan with electricity for lighting and steam for manufacturing, was around 50 per cent efficient.

125 years on, the typical UK power plant is just 38 per cent efficient. But those modern power plants that have been built on the same principles as Edison's are reaching efficiency levels of up to 95 per cent.

So how did Edison do it? And where are we going so wrong?

In this week's slightly tardy Weekly Geek, we're looking at combined heat and power (CHP): the system Edison was using, and the heart of any truly clean and efficient decentralised energy system. (Those who read the first Weekly Geek on decentralised energy may notice a fair bit of crossover.)

I was sitting in my local last night with the Arsenal game on and looking around me at the rapt faces in the Hackney pub and I started to wonder what makes people so passionate about football yet so apathetic about politics and the future of our planet.

Read more »

John Sauven, our executive director,writing in The Guardian on why Gordon Brown's reluctance to embrace the economic and environmental potential of renewable energy technology is costing us time, money and could eventually cost us the climate.

At the centre of Britain's efforts to tackle climate change are targets for renewable energy, energy efficiency and ultra-efficient combined heat and power (CHP) plants.

Yet as warnings about the impact of global warming grow more severe, every single one of those targets is projected to be missed or has already been abandoned.

We recently launched a new film about the real solution to climate change (clue: it's not nuclear power - and the film explains exactly why not). The film's been sent to every MP in the country and is making its way around the interweb nicely. But we think its message - that the UK needs a new, and sane, energy system now - is crucial and we want to push it out further. So we've produced this new trailer.

There are plenty of ways you can help us get the word out: write to your MP asking them to watch the film; embed the film or the trailer on your website, blog or MySpace page; send it to a friend; Hugg it, Digg it or add it to your StumbleUpon favourites.

Climate change is happening. We know exactly what needs to be done to stop it. The technologies already exist. Let's do it.