You cannot argue with a sick mind - the Moloch inspired madness of Miliband - the UK’s “net zero” minister
Leaving aside business consumption of electricity, the UK’s 28.4 million households consume 2,700 kwh of electricity a year = 76.7 twh (terawatt hours, 1 million megawatt hours = 1 terawatt).
The Drax power station provides around 6% of that. Drax was converted to “green” energy - wood chips - from coal as the UK shut down all its coal mines.
From Brave AI:
“Drax Power Station has a total capacity of 2.6 GW for biomass and previously had a 1.29 GW capacity for coal that was retired in 2021. Currently, it provides about 6% of the United Kingdom's electricity supply.”
2.6 gigawatts, for 24 hours a day, 365 days a year = 22.8 twh,
Conversion factors here: https://www.convertunits.com/from/TWh/to/MWh
The UK switched to wood chips at Drax because they are classified as “renewables”. You can regrow, clear felled, forest.
Wood chips produce the same levels of CO2 emissions as the burning of coal,
Wood chips are transported across the Atlantic in diesel fuelled tankers, rather than taking the coal from mines within 50 miles of Drax.
From Brave AI:
“,,, Drax received significant subsidies for burning imported woody biomass, which is primarily sourced from wood pellets. The subsidies amounted to £869 million in 2024, indicating a substantial reliance on imported biomass.”
£869 million pf subsidies for the same pollution as coal.
The issue is debated here:
From Brave AI:
“In 2024, Britain imported a significant amount of electricity, with the total imports reaching 26.3 terawatt hours (TWh) from January to September alone, setting a new record for the UK. This figure includes 34.5 TWh of imports and only 8.2 TWh of exports. Overall, Britain imported 12.2 TWh in the second quarter of 2024, which was more than the country’s nuclear output (10.7 TWh) and close to total production from fossil fuels (13.6 TWh).”
36.5 TWh In one quarter imported - so much for energy security, Turn off more of that North Sea oil and gas, forget fracking and coal - and tilt at more windmills and soar panels.
Lots of confusing context, but the debate does not end there.
Consider this from Brave AI:
“Coal scrubbers, specifically flue gas desulfurization (FGD) systems, can remove over 95% of sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions from coal-fired power plants. Additionally, they can significantly reduce particulate matter (PM) emissions, including PM2.5, which are harmful to human health. For example, the installation of scrubbers at the Keystone facility in Pennsylvania reduced the number of associated deaths from over 600 per year to 80 per year after their installation between 2009 and 2010.
Scrubbers can also reduce mercury emissions when integrated with wet scrubbers and electrostatic precipitators (ESPs), potentially removing up to 70% of mercury from the flue gas.
However, mercury oxidation across catalytic reduction may increase HgCl2 in the flue gas from 75 to 95%, indicating that further research is needed to optimize their performance.
The effectiveness of scrubbers in reducing pollution is well-documented, and they are considered highly efficient air pollution control devices. They can achieve SO2 removal efficiencies of up to 98% according to EPA estimates.”
Not a 100% solution, but the question remains, Drax produces 6% of UK electricity needs, is heavily subsidized and its use of wood pellets produces the same amount of pollution as prior coal use.
How much has the UK taxpayer been cheated out of un subsidies for “net zero” policies over the last 20 years? 50 billion pounds - 100 billion - 500 billion - a trillion - two trillion pounds? Two trillion would equate to100 billion a year for 20 years.
How much of the prior coal pollution could have been and could be removed by “scrubbers” and would this completely negate the argument for the use of heavily subsidized wood pellets and reinstate coal use?
How much research would be necessary to make coal fired power stations viable? The US has far cleaner coal-fired power stations and China and India are no doubt actively pursuing such a strategy of cleaning up coal.
Why import expensive wood pellets, when domestic coal is available, cleaner and cheaper. Even imported coal would be cheaper!
Instead, mad Miliband wants to destroy millions of acres of prime countryside with wind farms and solar panels - as well as ignoring improvements in hydrocarbon (fossil fuel) technology.
No politician has ever devised a rational, workable and efficient energy policy, ever, and they all need to get out of the way of the free market.
Please take a subscription to gain access to the thousands of hours of research that go into producing these SubStack articles - or make a donation of $3 bucks or more for a ko-fi here:
Onwards!!!