Stop Drax's Carbon Capture Con

Stop Drax's Carbon Capture Con

If we want a liveable future, we have to stop the forest destruction and tree burning that is driving the climate crisis. But right now, the world’s biggest tree burner and the UK’s single largest CO2 emitter, Drax, is applying for planning permission to add unproven carbon capture infrastructure to two of its wood-burning units at Drax Power Station.

There is little evidence that Drax has the technical ability to successfully capture large amounts of CO2, suggesting that Drax wants to obtain this planning permission in order to attract new subsidies and investments to replace their current renewable subsidies of £2.68 million per day when they expire in 2027. Ember estimates that Drax’s BECCS application will cost £31.7 billion.

If the planning application is approved, Drax will continue burning trees from some of the world’s most biodiverse forests for decades to come, harming the climate and polluting communities in the process.

The project will have serious impacts on wildlife and communities near Drax with increased traffic, constant noise and the degradation and destruction of important habitats of rare and protected species. The chemicals (amines) Drax will use in BECCS can release by-products into the atmosphere such as nitrosamines and nitramines which are probable carcinogens which can cause cancer.

Drax claims they can become “carbon negative” by using CCS to absorb more emissions than it produces. However, this is based on the false assumption that burning wood is “carbon neutral”. In reality, it will take decades or longer for new trees to absorb the emissions produced by burning trees.

Drax’s planning application is reliant upon a pipeline to transport and store the carbon dioxide under the North Sea. This pipeline is not included in their current application, yet it depends upon it. The National Grid is expected to apply for planning consent for a huge new CO2 pipeline in the North Sea near Hull, which would be connected not just with Drax but with sites operated by some of the world’s biggest fossil fuel polluters, including Equinor, Ineos and Uniper.

We must urge the Planning Inspectors to say no to Drax’s carbon capture con.

If you agree that we should not allow Drax to harm wildlife and public health and risk preventing genuine climate action with the false solution of unproven BECCS technology, please help us to stop Drax’s proposed BECCS development by sending an objection to the Planning Inspectorate. The deadline for responses is 11.59pm on the 5th September 2022.

For more information about the environmental, biodiversity and health impacts of Drax’s BECCS plans, please see our briefing here.

How to object to Drax’s planning application for BECCS

You can object to Drax’s planning application by registering as an interested party on the Planning Inspectorate’s website here: https://national-infrastructure-consenting.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/register-have-your-say/EN010120

You will be asked for your name, address, phone number and email address and there is a text box where you can write your submission.

Below are some bullet points you might like to mention as well as a pre-drafted consultation response which you can copy and paste for your main submission. If possible, it is more effective if you are able to personalise your message.

You will not be obliged to take any more actions if you become an interested party.

If you have any problems submitting your objections or any questions, please email us at stopburningtreescoalition@gmail.com

Objections

Whilst the Planning Inspector is bound by UK law on biomass, which classifies biomass and renewable and therefore exempt from climate-based objections, we believe that it is still worthwhile objecting on climate grounds due to the devastating climate impacts of burning wood for energy. Last year, over 500 scientists wrote to President Biden and other world leaders, urging them to end subsidies for biomass burning because of the harm to the climate. There are also strong arguments as to why the application can and should be rejected that fit within the grounds of the Planning Inspectorate.

Climate  

  • Burning wood in power stations is adding increasingly large amounts of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. It takes 44-104 years for replanted to trees to absorb the carbon emitted by burning them, this is time we do not have if we are to avoid the worst impacts of the climate crisis

  • Logging and burning forests for energy reduces the capacity of forests to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, making it more difficult to keep global temperature rises below 1.5C: adding carbon capture does not solve this problem

  • BECCS has not been demonstrated at scale; Drax itself admitted last year that their BECCS assumptions are not based on trials and there are no examples of large-scale carbon capture for burning wood

  • The Planning System should ‘help increase the use and supply of renewable and low carbon energy and heat’: Under current policy energy projects need to increase energy generation in classified ‘low carbon’ sectors: Drax’s BECCS application does the opposite - by reducing energy generation and making it less efficient there’s a high chance that it will cause more fossil gas to be burned

    • We understand that the Planning Inspectorate cannot go against government policy but scientists around the world are challenging the idea of biomass burning as renewable and arguing for its reclassification


Ecological / biodiversity

  • Drax's Ecology Report shows that habitats will be disturbed or destroyed, including Designated sites of international, national and county importance

  • The ecological surveys have found protected and notable species near the site which will be impacted by the development, including water voles, otters, bats, Great Crested Newts & bird species on the amber and red lists of conservation concern.

Local

Just transition/jobs

  • Drax's claim that it’s BECCS plants will create 10,000 jobs has been widely reported, but the reality is very different.
  • According to Drax’s own ‘Needs and Benefits Statement’ at the peak of the construction phase (expected to be 2027) the BECCS plants could support 4,940 direct jobs (ie manufacture and installation), 2,120 indirect jobs (ie in the supply chain and services), and 3,240 induced jobs (ie resulting from spending by these workers in the local economy).
  • However, in most of the construction phase the numbers of jobs are significantly lower, and in the operation and maintenance phase (2029 to 2050) the figures are 375 direct, 960 indirect and 1,800 induced jobs.
  • That is, the number of jobs rapidly drops from around 10,000 to around 3,000 creating a jobs ‘time bomb’ for the area. Instead, workers need secure employment in sectors that genuinely help cut emissions.

Government strategy

  • The High Court has ruled that the government's current Net Zero Strategy, of which BECCS makes up a large part, is unlawful - planning permission should not be given to Drax for something which may turn out to be unlawful

  • The Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) BECCS consultation is ongoing - this clearly should inform planning decisions about BECCS which is not possible at this current point in time

  • Although Planning Inspectors cannot challenge government policies, BEIS is currently drafting a new biomass policy which is due to be published later this year. The Government's classification of wood burning as 'renewable' and 'low carbon' energy may be subject to change given that increasing numbers of scientists are challenging the designation of biomass burning as 'carbon neutral.’


Technical/Health

  • Capturing and compressing CO2 takes a lot of energy - 28% of all the energy produced by each unit, according to Drax but possibly even more - so there’s a high risk of the resultant shortfall in electricity production being met from increased fossil gas being burned elsewhere, leading to yet more CO2 emissions

  • It will also risk human health as Drax plans to use chemicals called amines to separate or ‘scrub’ the CO2 from the other flue gases. These chemicals release by-products, including nitrosamines and nitramines, which are probable carcinogens that can cause cancer.

Draft Objection

Dear Sir / Madam,

I wish to object to Drax’s application to add carbon capture technology to two of its wood-burning units.

I am objecting because I believe the proposal is not a sustainable development as defined in the National Planning Policy Framework (https://tinyurl.com/ypsn6txx), since it is not compatible with increasing productivity, supporting communities’ health, protecting our natural environment or improving biodiversity.

According to Drax’s planning document, carbon capture will reduce the net efficiency of the biomass boilers to just 28.49% as 28% of the energy generated by each unit will be needed to capture and compress CO2. By decreasing electricity generation, it is highly likely that this will cause more fossil gas to be burned in other power stations. This is contrary to the Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy’s (https://tinyurl.com/bdhxup86) commitment to reduce energy from fossil fuels.

I am also very concerned about the potential harm to human health from the amine chemicals Drax is planning to use to separate the CO2 from the other flue gases. These amines can form other compounds when they are emitted, including nitrosamines and nitramines which are possible carcinogens (https://tinyurl.com/mryacer9).

Drax’s Ecology Report (https://tinyurl.com/yvwn8nn2) for the project states that this development could lead to the degradation and destruction of a number of internationally, nationally and locally important habitats where ecological surveys found rare and protected species, including orchids, water voles, otters, Great Crested Newts and many species of birds.

The government classes energy from burning trees as ‘low-carbon’ and argues that it can help ‘tackle climate change’. I strongly disagree with this, as do hundreds of scientists (https://tinyurl.com/yckwdf3t) and environmental NGOs around the world.

Research has demonstrated that burning trees for fuel emits more carbon than coal per unit of energy generated (https://tinyurl.com/46689j7y) and takes 44-104 years (https://tinyurl.com/46689j7y) to reabsorb this carbon. This is time we do not have. Drax’s claims that BECCS can achieve “negative emissions” are based on the false assumption (https://tinyurl.com/ywm887w4) that logging, transporting and burning trees in power stations can be “carbon neutral.”

In the ‘Needs and Benefits Statement’ (https://tinyurl.com/2p995kd3) Drax states that at the peak of the construction phase its BECCS plants could support a total of 4,940 direct jobs (i.e. manufacture and installation), 2,120 indirect jobs (i.e. in the supply chain), and 3,240 induced jobs. However, in most of the construction phase the numbers of jobs are significantly lower, and in the subsequent operation and maintenance phase (2029 to 2050) the figures are 375 direct, 960 indirect and 1,800 induced jobs. The number of jobs rapidly drops from around 10,000 to around 3,000 – a potential unemployment ‘time bomb’ for the area.

I urge you to take note of these concerns and refuse permission for Drax’s BECCS application.

Yours sincerely,