Representation by Tessa Prudence Jones
- Date submitted
- 22 August 2022
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I am writing to object to the application by Drax to add carbon capture technology to two of its wood-burning units. My reasons for objection are as follows: I do not consider that the proposed development is a sustainable development as defined in the National Planning Policy Framework [Redacted]. The proposal does not comply with protecting our natural environment, improving biodiversity, increasing productivity nor supporting the health of communities. The planning document provided by Drax claims that the net efficiency of the biomass boilers will be reduced, due to carbon capture, to 28.49%. This is because 28% of the energy generated by each unit will be needed to capture and compress CO2. However, the actual figure could be higher. It is probable that by decreasing electricity generation, more fossil gas will be burned in other power stations. This runs counter to the commitment to reduce energy from fossil fuels enshrined in the Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy [Redacted] . In addition, I am very concerned that Drax is proposing to use amine chemicals which are potentially harmful to human health, in order to separate CO2 from other flue gases. Such amines, when emitted, can form other compounds such as nitrosamines and nitramines which may be carcinogenic [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. I am concerned that the project Ecology Report [Redacted] finds that the proposal would result in the degradation and destruction of internationally, nationally and locally important habitats, and that ecological surveys found rare and protected species, including otters, water voles, Great Crested Newts, many bird species, and orchids. I am deeply concerned that the government classifies energy from burning trees as ‘low-carbon’ and argues that it can help ‘tackle climate change’. I strongly disagree with this, and note that globally hundreds of scientists [Redacted] and environmental NGOs [Redacted] emphasise that burning wood is as bad for the climate as fossil fuels and that 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]. I very much hope that you will refuse permission for Drax’s BECCS application. Yours sincerely,