Report questions sustainability of UK biomass

In its report on government support for biomass, PAC questions the strength of certification schemes intended to prove that biomass used in Britain is sustainably sourced.

Some £22bn of government support has been provided to businesses and households using biomass for fuel since 2022, including £6.5bn for Drax.

Biomass is seen as a low-carbon alternative to fossil fuels, provided it’s sustainably sourced, and when used in combination with carbon capture and storage technology (BECCS) is seen as essential to achieving net zero. However, questions and concerns have been raised around biomass causing significant environmental harm and whether it can be considered a low-carbon fuel.

According to the PAC’s report, the government has relied on an untested approach to make sure biomass generators are meeting sustainability criteria in return for receiving financial support. Current arrangements rely on self-reporting and third-party schemes, and neither the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) or regulator Ofgem know whether this is effective in ensuring biomass’s sustainability.

The report recommends that, if BECCS is no longer considered viable, DESNZ should put in place vigorous contingency plans setting out how it will achieve the net carbon removals it requires and what the future of biomass will be.

The government has yet to settle on a target date for the UK’s first BECCS plant, which will not be achieved by the original target of 2030, and there are no BECCS projects in the first phase of the government’s carbon capture, usage and storage programme.

In 2023, the government committed to strengthening sustainability rules to specify that 100 per cent of woody biomass should be sustainable rather than the current 70 per cent, but DESNZ has not made clear how this will work in practice.

It did acknowledge to the PAC that an increase in resources to monitor compliance may be required, as indicated by Ofgem’s recent investigation into Drax. Public concerns were raised in relation to the findings of the KPMG review commissioned by Drax into its Canadian supply chain processes and reporting practices, and the PAC recommends Drax provide it with the full report for parliamentary scrutiny.

“Billions upon billions of government support has been provided to the biomass sector over the past two decades,” committee chair Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown said in a statement. “In light of the continuing concerns raised around biomass, gaining full confidence around the sector’s supply chains is work that must be carried out if government is to truly satisfy itself that biomass is not a white elephant. All are agreed that further monitoring of the sustainability of biomass will require government to devote more resources to the problem.”

Commenting, Matt Williams, Senior Advocate, NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council), said: “MPs are echoing what we’ve been warning for years: bioenergy - burning forests in power stations – provides very poor value for money. The companies get to judge themselves on whether they are ‘sustainable’, and carbon capture technology is an empty promise that may never materialise. The government must now reverse course on giving bioenergy companies billions more of the public’s money after 2027. Bioenergy can never be part of the net zero solution and it harms Ed Miliband’s credibility to keep claiming burning forests is good for the climate.”