A biologist by training, I now spend most of my time working in areas to do with publishing – writing, translating, proofreading, editing, etc. My focus when writing is on environmental and peace issues, although I also write on many other subjects connected with Iceland. I have published papers in peer-reviewed journals and have improved the English of both academic theses and papers for publication.
Here are some websites I write for/have written for: In-Depth News/International Press Syndicate, Al Jazeera, Inter Press Service and ENDS Europe. The list of articles I’ve written for IPS can be seen here, the list for Al Jazeera here and those for IDN/International Press Syndicate here. I have also written for BBC Future and Energy Monitor. I am currently writing extensively on environmental policy issues from Iceland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway for ENDS Europe.
I have lived in the UK, Australia and Iceland and am fluent in Icelandic.
Lowana Veal 
Comments on: "About" (8)
heard pccbakki declared force majeure on si shipments
That wouldn’t surprise me at all!
Read your article for the BBC Future about CSS and was shocked how inaccurate one of your key findings was. You stated “Many carbon capture and storage plants are now in operation, either for harnessing CO2 from power plants or from other industrial facilities. However, most of these are small-scale or still under construction. Only two large-scale plants are currently in operation, Petra Nova Carbon Capture in the US and Boundary Dam CCS in Canada.”
However, if you follow the links you gave you will see that there are 14 major CSS projects already in operation in North America and many of those have been in successful operation for years! How does one get an article published on the BBC with such terribly inaccurate reporting? You might want to think about trying to correct such an amateurish error.
Respectfully,
Bruce, I noticed that from the link. I checked with the press officers of the Global CCS Institute and it was they who told me that, in regard to power generation. Maybe it depends on the definition of large-scale. But the link gives readers more detailed information.
Hello,
I understand your explanation. However, as the journalist with complete command and control of your reporting it is absolutely incumbent on you to do the research and present a factual account. This part of the article is simply not accurate and that you suggest that “the link gives readers on more detailed information” makes it seem like you are absolving yourself of finding and reporting accurate data. Also, the fact that you took the editors’ word at face value and simply stopped your research without further validation is not good journalism.
Also, please don’t try to write this “discrepancy” off as a matter of definition. It only took me three minutes to parse the Global CSS Institute data to find the fourteen “large-scale” projects (their definition, not mine). I was also able to corroborate this info at a couple of other public sources in less than 15 minutes.
I am sorry, but your “facts” are simply wrong and the article in BBC Future needs to be corrected immediately as it is likely that the BBCs readers will be mis-informed about this very interesting (and likely) critical technology moving forward. Please step up and do the right thing.
Respectfully,
Dear Klint. You were shocked Lowana reported only 2 major CCS projects, but I was shocked the extremely high cost of CCS was not reported. It is an unproven technology whose pomised benefits are in the never-never.
Respectfully
First, the information I got was terribly confusing as there seemed to be loads of plants listed (not just 14). Also, when asking to get two different sentences changed, the editor said she’d do it but didn’t. And thirdly, re inaccurate reporting – unfortunately, it happens all the time. Even if I read over something I’ve written (or, as happened last week, something about me) and point out changes that need to be made, they often end up altered but wrong. And reports of actions/events I’ve been involved in invariably end up inaccurate.
I sent the Global CCS Institute press people a link to the article this morning and they sent me an email saying: “This is not correct or rather it’s partially correct. There are only two large-scale Power Plants with CCS in operation, otherwise there are a total 21 large-scale CCS facilities in operation globally (2 of which are in power), with the remainder 19 being in industrial applications. A dozen or so (power plants with CCS) are at various stages of development around the world. Otherwise there are 38 facilities in total (both power and industrial) in development.”
I forwarded the email onto my editor who said she’d update the piece but doesn’t seem to done so yet.
So I’m trying.