Biomass Generation 2025-02-10

Biomass from Canada is neither clean nor cheap. Drax's role should be limited, but not with subsidies that are higher than before (£160 per MWh). Gas power plants would offer a cheaper and cleaner alternative without the need for unsustainable biomass practices.

Inquires about the sustainability criteria for Drax’s wood imports, seeking clarity on whether wood from primary forests is unsustainable and will be banned. Asks if the Government has confirmed receipt of a KPMG report regarding subsidies. Questions the cost implications of BECCS technology and requests analysis of alternatives to this technology.

Defends the Government's deal with Drax as a significant improvement over previous deals, highlighting lower subsidies, sustainability improvements, profit clawback mechanisms, and better energy security.

Compliments the Minister on his analysis of energy policies and asks if the cuts in subsidies and reliance on Drax will contribute to reducing bills and enhancing clean power plans.

Critiques the Government's decision to extend biomass burning, questioning its sustainability and carbon emissions. Questions NESO's advice on Drax’s necessity and calls for transparency regarding KPMG reports.

Minister emphasises the importance of the agreement with Drax, highlighting that it costs £170 million less than building new gas-fired power stations. The deal ensures dispatchable power when needed and halves subsidies to bill payers.

Conservative MP criticises the agreement, stating it is a half-baked solution that relies on importing pellets from Canada with high carbon costs. He questions the sustainability of the deal.

Minister addresses concerns about Drax's sustainability and compliance with new 100% criteria. Highlights the role of an independent adviser to ensure full compliance and audit trail for sustainable wood burning. Also mentions plans for long-term clean power mix.

Labour MP raises concerns about the impact of Drax's operations on North American forests, questioning whether the company can be trusted to meet sustainability requirements. Asks for details on audit trail and powers of independent adviser.

Conservative MP requests that the full analysis comparing support for Drax with alternatives be published, emphasising transparency in decision-making.

Labour MP welcomes the Government's actions against Drax, cutting subsidies and setting a clear exit strategy. Questions the role of Ofgem in ensuring proper reporting on sustainability issues.

Scottish National Party MP criticises biomass burning as a temporary solution that allows for high CO2 emissions, urging significant direct investment in long-term energy storage such as pumped hydro and green hydrogen production.

Labour MP welcomes the drastic reduction in subsidy and increased sustainability criteria. Questions why previous Government failed to achieve a similar deal with Drax.

Conservative MP highlights the economic impact of the deal on his constituency, urging for consideration of local supply chain jobs as long-term solutions are developed.

The Minister is commended for ending a deal that led to higher bills, excess profits and poor sustainability standards. The opposition criticises the hypocrisy of Conservatives who oppose Drax after supporting it previously.

Defends the government's decision to end subsidies to Drax, stating they inherited an energy system without long-term planning and that Drax did not have a deal good for climate, security or citizens. The new management wants to move past coal-fired power generation.

Critiques the net zero policy, stating it is staggering and counterproductive as Drax is now transporting wood from 3,000 miles away instead of using locally sourced coal. The Reform party opposes the current subsidy system.

Thanks the Minister for imposing strict new sustainability rules on Drax, which will mean no payment for unsustainably sourced biomass. Questions the role of an independent adviser to monitor compliance.

Welcomes the emphasis on energy security and asks about the timetable for small modular nuclear reactors, preferably those built by Rolls-Royce.

Welcomes news of a windfall tax on Drax, which was welcomed across his constituency. Asks if this will be the end of grotesque profits for Drax at the expense of taxpayers.

Critiques Drax as a clean energy scam that has received £6 billion in subsidies since 2012. Questions if clawback applies to past profits or only future ones.

Welcomes the revision of Drax’s role, reducing biomass and ensuring it displaces gas rather than excess wind and solar. Asks for exploration into hydrogen as a dispatchable power source.

Questions whether credible low-carbon alternatives to burning biomass should include energy from waste plants or if these should be subject to a moratorium on construction like in Scotland and Wales.

Critiques the last Government's deal with Drax as shocking value for taxpayers and bad news for the environment. Asks for assurances that this new approach will be better for bill payers, workers, and the green transition.

Warns against cheerleading renewable energy as Drax’s subsidies have led to high consumer costs (£1 billion a year), chopping down habitats 3,000 miles away, and increased CO2 production.

Defends the decision to give Drax a subsidy, arguing it is important for energy security and delivers value for money. He outlines plans for cheaper bills and industrial jobs in the future.

Commends the statement for capping Drax’s output, introducing a windfall tax, halving subsidies paid by constituents, and improving sustainability. He supports it as a pragmatic solution to a disastrous inheritance.

Welcomes the move to slash Drax's subsidy and enforce 100% sustainability targets on its supply chains, urging the Minister to call it a windfall tax openly.