BECCS is not an energy solution for the climate emergency
Why would you build six steam boilers side-by-side, to power a single 4,000-megawatt turbine? The UK Yorkshire Drax power station is a high-pollution, high-carbon emissions, bulk electric generation, the worst example of centralized design. The power station is in an urban area where residents breathe harmful emissions from a single smokestack.
The people who conceived this ultra-pollution site tried to fix it by replacing coal, creating a culture of mass deception. The latest specimens are the Arkansas BioEnergy “parasite” pellet mills. The first pellet mill is adjacent to the Leola West Fraser 40-acre sawmill. Russellville and Bearden are next.
Carbon-neutral is a burning issue
More than 300 million years ago, the Earth was covered with trees and plants, using photosynthesis to capture the sun’s energy and combine it with CO from the atmosphere. Dead trees and plants ended up in huge swamps that over millions of years formed the coal we used during the industrial revolution.
To meet the climate goals, the European Union (EU) decided that burning wood pellets is carbon neutral. All ecologists oppose the false idea that burning wood pellets is carbon neutral.
Using the above EU carbon accounting rule, the logical conclusions are that coal is an ancient “carbon-neutral” fuel, and burning coal is the “bio-energy” solution to the climate emergency. This is another way to prove the EU carbon accounting rule is flawed. Hence, burning wood pellets to run electric steam turbines is a source of carbon dioxide and PM-2.5 air pollution worse than burning coal.
Drax says BECCS is the best solution for the climate emergency. BECCS is their ambition, using BioEnergy (BE) and removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere (CCS) to store it permanently under the sea. After 10 years and billions of dollars in subsidies, they have nothing to show, absolutely nothing.
The burning lie
Truth be told, burning BE is a source of deforestation and PM-2.5 air pollution, increasing the morbidity and mortality of COVID-19. Burning coal creates lower carbon dioxide emissions than BE or fossil gas (methane). Ten years ago, Drax had an opportunity to stop burning coal and clear the field to start a new plant of solar panels and batteries. With a 3-ft. wide gap between the rows of panels, Drax could be growing vegetables with easy access to maintain the panels. What an innovation that would have been, the showcase site for COP26 and cost savings with zero emissions or pollution. Increasing demand for food and water will make selling kilowatt-hours a side operation.
Billions of dollars for pellet subsidies would have been saved, and Drax would have gained unique experience to transform other coal-fired power sites worldwide.
Environmental justice
Arkansas BioEnergy, represented by Stuart Spencer and his DEQ friends granting air pollution permits, have no concern for 30,000 likely deaths of those living in marginalized communities. In a world of truth and justice, an appeal before the Pulaski Circuit Court would be the next step.
If there is smoke …
Repetition makes facts seem true regardless of their nature. Will Gardiner, Drax’s CEO, and everyone connected to this dreadful corporation say BECCS is the energy solution for the climate emergency. BECCS is not real, it’s only an illusion.
The hard truth keeping Will Gardiner awake at night is how to keep shareholders from running when the truth comes out.
Big lies create the illusion of truth
Drax’s Chief Innovation Officer recently said, “We’re interested in potential opportunities for exporting BECCS overseas, where Drax could help other countries take positive action to address the climate crisis.” Helping coal-fired power plants is a noble idea, but BE is not an innovation, and CCS is just an ambition. What is Drax going to export, a sack of lies?
Last week, Drax tweeted, “We are pleased to announce our innovative new partnership with Bechtel to explore future options for BECCS globally.” Bechtel is the world’s largest engineering company, and they need to show concern for the climate. But burning wood is an ancient practice, and CCS is an illusion. What is the partnership going to sell?
Dr. Luis Contreras
Capturing carbon dioxide done by Nature, using photosynthesis, and storing carbon is of course needed
Man-made CCS is an idea that has not worked. Terra Nova was the latest and best attempt, but to make it “work” it used another gas power plant and the CO2 was piped to a fracking site to make more oil and gasoline, ending up as CO2 from a tailpipe.
===========================
Petra Nova suffered outages one out of every three days
After the high profile and expensive failure of Southern Company’s Kemper carbon capture project, advocates of coal carbon capture proposals have often pointed to NRG’s Petra Nova project as a success story. Power Magazine named Petra Nova “Power Plant of the Year” in 2017, and the Carbon Capture Coalition (formerly known as the National Enhanced Oil Recovery Initiative) said: “Petra Nova successfully entering formal operation in the U.S. marks a crucial further milestone in the ongoing commercialization of carbon capture technology in the power sector.” Department of Energy officials have also repeatedly touted the project, such as to “celebrate the third operating anniversary of Petra Nova” in January 2020.
But the technical report submitted to DOE reveals that the project suffered a variety of problems during the three-year “Demonstration and Monitoring” period of 2017 through 2019. A table in that report shows that the project experienced 367 days of outages over those three years, or one out of every three days. Problems with the carbon capture infrastructure and gas unit that powered it accounted for most of the outages.
The report submitted to DOE also shows that the Petra Nova project received Notices of Violations from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and from the Texas Railroad Commission, the latter concerning the carbon dioxide pipeline.
The report also shows that the Petra Nova carbon capture infrastructure and gas unit used 1.49 billion gallons of water over the three year period (not including water consumed by the coal unit). Studies show that operating carbon capture infrastructure significantly increases water consumption if used at coal plants.
https://www.energyandpolicy.org/petra-nova/
Drax is not done
If the new partnership with Bechtel does not work, they will go with Mitsubishi
The latest press release says:
Drax Group and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Engineering, Ltd., have agreed a long-term contract for Drax to use its carbon capture technology, the Advanced KM CDR process™️, in what would be the largest deployment of negative emissions in power generation anywhere in the world.
The contract, which combines UK innovation and world-leading Japanese technology, will see Drax license MHI’s unique carbon capture solvent, KS-21™️, to capture CO2 at its power station near Selby, North Yorkshire.
=====================
Is Drax saying BECCS does not work, but adding KM CDR and KS-21, all will be milk and honey?
Drax has no credibility, they have been getting subsidies to burn US forests (the BE part of the innovative strategy) but CCS is just a dream.
Some dreams come true – but dark nightmares keep Will Gardiner and Drax investors awake
Like Geo-Engineering, BECCS+ and other false climate solutions are deadly
https://www.drax.com/press_release/drax-and-mitsubishi-heavy-industries-sign-pioneering-deal-to-deliver-the-worlds-largest-carbon-capture-power-project/
The Bechtel media representative did not want to comment on the new partnership
He did not want to tell me what part of BECCS is Bechtel’s expertise
Clearly no one in the world would build another power plant like the Selby Drax station burning forests and billion dollar subsidies to sell dirty electricity.
https://www.drax.com/press_release/bechtel-and-drax-partner-to-explore-global-opportunities-for-new-build-beccs/