Representation by Jane Annabel Eades
- Date submitted
- 5 August 2022
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Dear Team, This email registers my objection to Drax’s application to add carbon capture technology to two of its wood-burning units. Along with millions of others, scientists and the general public, I submit that the proposal is not a sustainable development as defined in the National Planning Policy Framework [Redacted]. Above all it is incompatible with protecting our Earth and improving people's health and the recovery of biodiversity. Nor will it increase productivity - the planning document from Drax is clear that carbon capture stands to reduce net efficiency of biomass boilers to just 28.49% - because 28% of the energy generated by each unit would then be used to capture and compress CO2. The real figure could potentially rise above that. And by decreasing electricity generation, demand for fossil gas will rise in other power stations. This is contrary to the Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy’s [Redacted] commitment to reduce energy from fossil fuels. There are also grave concerns about the potential harm to human health from the amine chemicals which 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 [Redacted] . Yorkshire and Humberside already have high levels of air pollution [Redacted], and there is a lack of research into the impacts of these chemicals on public health. Additionally, Drax’s Ecology Report [Redacted] for the project states that this development will 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 dishonestly classes energy from burning trees as ‘low-carbon’, arguing that it helps ‘tackle climate change’, when we know that it does not, and have petitioned several times to support forest conservation and transparency in renewable energy projects. Customers were persuaded to switch energy companies by the weasel word 'renewable'. I strongly disagree, as do hundreds of scientists [Redacted] and environmental NGOs around the world [Redacted] who highlight that burning wood is as bad for the climate as fossil fuels. Drax’s claims that BECCS can achieve “negative emissions” are based on the false assumption that logging, transporting and burning trees in power stations can be “carbon neutral.” [Redacted] For the sake of all our survival on a warming planet I urge you to take note of these concerns and refuse permission for Drax’s BECCS application. Yours sincerely,