PAUL HOMEWOOD
h/t Philip Bratby
The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has just released a devastating indictment of UK Government policies regarding the burning of wooden pellets at Drax and other biomass plants.
Here is their Press Release:
Is biomass sustainably sourced? Risk that sector is marking its own homework, PAC warns
There is a risk that biomass generators are marking their own homework on sustainability. In its report on Government support for biomass, the Public Accounts Committee raises concerns that the certification schemes intended to prove that biomass used in the UK is sustainably sourced may not be strong enough.
Some £22bn of government support has been provided to businesses and households using biomass for fuel since 2022, including £6.5bn for biggest single recipient Drax. Biomass is seen by government as a low-carbon alternative to fossil fuels provided it’s sustainably sourced, and when used in combination with carbon capture and storage technology (BECCS*) is seen as essential to the achievement of net zero for the UK. However, questions and concerns have been raised around biomass causing significant environmental harm and whether it can genuinely be considered a low-carbon fuel.
The PAC’s report finds that government has for too long relied on an untested approach to make sure biomass generators are meeting sustainability criteria in return for receiving financial support. Current arrangements rely heavily on self-reporting and third-party schemes, and neither the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) or regulator Ofgem know whether this is effective in ensuring biomass’ sustainability.
The report recommends that, if BECCS is no longer considered to be viable, DESNZ should put in place robust contingency plans setting out how it will achieve the net carbon removals it requires and what the future of biomass will be. BECCS deployment has been repeatedly delayed, despite remaining a key part of decarbonisation plans. Government has yet to settle on a target date for the UK’s first BECCS plant, which will not be achieved by the original target of 2030, and there are no BECCS projects in the first phase of the government’s carbon capture, usage and storage programme.
Government committed in 2023 to strengthening sustainability rules to specify that 100% of woody biomass should be sustainable rather than the current 70% – but DESNZ has not made clear how this will work in practice. It did acknowledge to the PAC that an increase in resources to monitor compliance may be required, as indicated by Ofgem’s recent investigation into Drax. Significant public concerns were raised in relation to the findings of the KPMG review commissioned by Drax into its Canadian supply chain processes and reporting practices, and the PAC recommends Drax provide it the full report for Parliamentary scrutiny.
Heads of terms for a new support package were announced for Drax in February 2025. The report identifies risks that the provisional new deal may not provide good value for money. Under the deal, Drax will only be supported to operate less than half the time it currently is, saving each household an estimated c.£6/yr. DESNZ expects the agreement to reduce the amount of subsidy that Drax receives each year by £170 million compared to the alternative of procuring gas and includes a claw-back provision for profits over a certain level. The new agreement also insists on all Drax’s biomass coming from 100% sustainable sources. Under the provisional new deal – which lacks any element of competition – Drax will receive a higher unit price than other renewable generators. The report calls for DESNZ to consider how it can update the agreement to prompt Drax to begin transitioning to BECCS.
Chair comment
Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP, Chair of the Committee, said:
“Billions upon billions of government support has been provided to the biomass sector over the past two decades. Rather than taking it on faith that the woody biomass burnt for energy is a sustainably sourced low-carbon alternative fuel, it is long past time a true assay was made of what taxpayers are getting for their money. Our report also raises further questions around what role will be played by BECCS, long-viewed as crucial for net zero but with no movement visible on the horizon to start to build it into the UK’s infrastructure.
“In light of the continuing concerns raised around biomass highlighted by our written evidence, gaining full confidence around the sector’s supply chains is work that must be carried out if government is to truly satisfy itself that biomass is not a white elephant. All are agreed that further monitoring of the sustainability of biomass will require government to devote more resources to the problem. This was demonstrated by Ofgem’s recent own investigation into Drax. We hope that Drax will agree with the need for Parliamentary scrutiny of the findings of the review into its supply chain and reporting practices, and to supply this review to our Committee.
“Under current carbon accounting rules, CO2 emissions are accounted for in the current country of origin, not in the country that actually burns the biomass. This is an approach this Committee were extremely critical of in our report on carbon capture, usage and storage, and many members of the public will find this inexplicable.”
Their full report is here.
Dominic Lawson covers the story in the Sunday Times here.
He concludes:
Actually, Drax has Miliband over a barrel: because of the government’s hubristic plans to make the electricity grid fossil-fuel-free by 2030, the system on which our existence depends will be far more exposed to intermittent energy (depending on whether the sun is shining and the wind is blowing). And since nuclear has been scandalously neglected by successive governments, Drax will become ever more crucial in avoiding catastrophic grid failure and keeping the lights on in our homes, hospitals and businesses.
So the great subsidised tree-burning boondoggle will continue. It makes a mockery of that phrase in King Charles’s message: “well managed”. There are other terms for it, few of them printable.
The scandal continues to grow. Now inhabitants of Gloster, Mississippi are complaining that Drax’s wood pellet plant there is damaging their health. The Mail report:
Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has been accused by US activists of being complicit in the pollution of a town in Mississippi by handing billions in taxpayer cash to a UK power firm that they claim is harming the health of residents.
Drax Group operates a power plant in Selby, North Yorkshire, that generates electricity by burning wood pellets. Many of these are sourced from forests in the US and shipped to the UK.
Activists from Gloster in Mississippi, where Drax runs a wood pellet factory, say pollution from its plant has caused health issues for people nearby, including heart disease, cancer and respiratory problems.
Campaigner Katherine Egland said: ‘Poor, mostly communities of colour – as the descendants of slaves – in the south-eastern US, are being subjected to toxic levels of emissions in the Drax manufacturing of wood pellets.’
The whole biomass business has been a giant green scam since the start.
Burning trees in plants like Drax emits carbon dioxide instantaneously into the atmosphere, and in much greater amounts than burning coal would. Even if those trees were replaced, and there is no evidence that they are, it would take decades to recapture that CO2. Surely we are supposed to be cutting emissions now, not in a hundred years time?
And, of course, felling vast areas of natural forest is hugely damaging from an environmental point of view.
Neither is Drax’s argument that they only use offcuts and diseased trees, which has anyway been thoroughly debunked. But even using this wood means it is not available for pulp or sawdust, meaning more trees need to be cut down.
The only reason biomass has been and awarded obscene subsidies is that it ticks the Net Zero box, according to EU rules which say you can ignore its emissions.
And we are now so desperate for reliable, dispatchable power that Ed Miliband will continue to turn a blind eye to the environmental devastation wrought and the very real carbon dioxide emissions resulting from Drax’s operations.
SOURCE: Not a Lot of People Know That
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply