Drax Re-power

The views expressed in this page do not represent those of the Planning Inspectorate. This page consists of content submitted to the Planning Inspectorate by the public and other interested parties, giving their views of this proposal.

Drax Re-power

Received 30 July 2018
From Faith Kenrick


Dear Sir / Madam,

I place my objection to the Drax Repower proposal; replacing the final two coal-burning units at Drax with huge ones to burn natural gas. I make this objection since I believe the proposal is not a sustainable development as defined in the National Planning Policy Framework, due to being incompatible with a transition to a low-carbon future.

In reference to the recent decision by the prior Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government to reject planning permission for an open-cast coal mine at Druridge Bay in Northumberland in March this year; The inappropriateness of the proposed coal mine to UK climate goals was given as one of the grounds of the decision by the Secretary of State: “The negative impact on greenhouse gases and climate change receives very considerable adverse weight in the planning balance.” [Redaction]

Reasons why the proposal doesn't relate to a transition to a low carbon economy and thus not a sustainable development:

Drax is already the U.K.’s single largest emitter of carbon dioxide, conceding in its Preliminary Environmental Information Report that the burning of fossil (natural) gas at the power station will: “represent a significant net increase in greenhouse gas emissions and have therefore negative climate impacts.”

So to actually meet the Paris Climate Agreement of 2015 to keep global temperature increases to 1.5 degrees, it is vital for the UK to phase out our fossil fuel emissions, not increase them. According to a recent Oil Change International report: “the coal, oil, and fossil gas in the world’s currently producing and under-construction projects, if fully extracted and burned, would take the world far beyond safe climate limits. Opening new fossil gas fields is inconsistent with the Paris climate goals.” [Redaction]
Permitting power stations such as Drax to burn large quantities of natural (fossil fuel) gas will push us beyond the 1.5 degree limit and stops the UK from meeting its international commitments to tackle climate change.

+ Drax proposes to build what would be by far the largest gas-burning power capacity ever built in the UK. It comes at a time when the UK’s North Sea gas production is in long-term decline and Norwegian gas production (the main source of gas imports) is predicted to peak around 2022. This means that increased reliance on gas would require either increased Russian imports (an unlikely option for geopolitical reasons), or, more likely, reliance on unconventional gas, especially hydraulic fracturing (fracking) and horizontal drilling. There are already 3 active shale gas sites in the UK and a Freedom of Information request to The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) revealed the government expects there to be approximately 17 sites by 2020 and around 30 to 35 sites by 2022[Redaction]

+ Unconventional gas production is associated with significant leakage of methane – far more so than conventional gas production [Redaction]. Research published in the journal, Environmental Science and Technology suggests that a gas plant can become a bigger source of greenhouse gas emissions than a coal one if just 3% of the gas leaks into the atmosphere. [Redaction] Leakage of methane in the production of gas for Drax would therefore significantly increase carbon emissions over and above the smokestack emissions of burning the gas.

+ The smokestack CO2 emissions from new gas units will exceed the longer-term average CO2 emissions per unit of electricity (which have been dropping rapidly due to greater wind and solar power use) and thus contribute to higher long-term UK CO2 emissions.

+ Drax’s Repower plan to burn large quantities of gas will hamper rather than help the U.K.’s transition to low carbon energy. Drax argues that gas can be a useful ‘transition fuel’ between coal and renewable energy as the UK government phases out the burning of ‘unabated coal’ by 2025. The alternative to Drax’s Repower proposal will be the closure of the two coal power units, resulting in genuine and significant carbon reductions. Replacing coal with another fossil fuel does not activate our commitment to decarbonise, particularly since Drax has said that repurposing two coal units to burn gas will “extend their operation into the 2030s.” As the ecosystem scientist, Professor Robert W Howarth, from Cornell University, states: “the only path forward is to reduce the use of all fossil fuels as quickly as possible. There is no bridge fuel, and switching from coal to shale gas is accelerating rather than slowing global warming.” [Redaction]

I believe that, rather than being forced to pay for an unnecessary gas development which is bad for the climate, we through Drax and other agencies should instead invest in genuinely renewable wind, wave and solar energy which can help us to meet our climate targets.

I urge you to take note of these concerns and refuse permission for Drax to start burning gas.

Yours sincerely,