Sustainable power station in the UK destroying ancient forests for fuel

Oct 9, 2022 10:07 AM

Bobby360

Views

103398

Likes

1333

Dislikes

27

Only using wood pellets from sustainable sources? More lies

By black out its only come out when the damage is done. When it's pointless to complain. When ethics Lose.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Drax..them.. sklounsk.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

As it turns out capitalism is bad for the planet

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

[glares in Canadian]

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

This doesn't surprise me. Live near Drax - they have huge structures that honest to God, look like Trade Federation starships. Totally evil.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No surprise; #canpoli addicted to industrial clear cutting

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Toris need to go

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Sawed that coming.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

You should be ashamed of yourself @OP, posting coal and paper industry propaganda. I assume you work for BP? ?

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

It's really another company behind this, they also make Soylent Green products.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This is Canada say your sorry and the liberals don’t care

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

So they're burning wood. What else should they burn instead ? Electricity is not energy. It is only a way to move energy.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Wood pellets as fuel is meant to be a way to dispose of waste from other industries. Just burning wood is not how it should be working.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

You can get wood from places that aren't 1000 year old growth forests.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Motherfucker @OP, post the fuckin' link.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

If NO old growth was ever cut again, we would still have 98% (some say >99%) left to cut. There is no reason to cut another single old

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

growth tree in BC. It is almost ALL gone, and the biodiversity of old growth is much greater than even second growth. In terms of plants we

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

are talking about the extinction of several species by the continued cutting - many in just the last 10 years. Sad.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

This sounds like reactionary bs. I read both the cbc article and the BBC. Both imply falsehoods and imgur runs with it. Nobody takes an ol

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

d growth tree and grinds it up if it can be used for lumber. That's like using a 100$bill for it's paper value.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Secondly, our forests are our main source of revenue and pay for our Healthcare... but by all means let's stop exporting and we can all liv

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

e in grass huts till we die at childbirth. Nobody is saying burning wood is good for the environment but when the option to burn the clean

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

est fuel is taken off the table because it's "evil" "unsustainable" etc. What are you left with? Britain and Europe need ng

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Hey Britain, fuck you. Love Canada.

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

So fucking sorry, this is pure bullshit. Fuck corporations for doing this. Love the Brits. Ps, I'm sure you appreciate that we didn't know >

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Our taxes paid for this despite how this article is worded.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Corporations gonna corporate. Regulate your forestry industry better.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just to confirm we are noteven aware of this.... a media black out on these horrors.

3 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 12

media black out where? It's an article from the BBC

3 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 0

"If I haven't seen it, it's clearly a conspiracy to keep me from seeing it"

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Before people pile on I do want to say the original commenter already clarified 1/2

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

"By black out it only came out when the damage was done. When it's pointless to complain. When ethics Lose." 2/2

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

English taking advantage of their old colonies ... say it isn't so! (Over the top sarcasm)

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 9

Well, it's happening in *British* Columbia, so maybe they were just confused.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The global rich keeping themselves rich, more like.

3 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 2

The article says UK. Try reading more

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Where are they getting the trees from?

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Is this step one in the Moonraker Project?

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Wouldn't a Canadian agency have to give him a permit to cut down a forrest. Blame them.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

They gave a response here; https://www.drax.com/press_release/drax-response-to-bbc-panorama-programme-on-canadian-forestry/

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Their response don't mean shit unless there's an audit with a traceable paper trail to verify the source and destinations of the material.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Agreed, I simply found & supplied their response, as you say, how it plays out, will show us how truthful they are.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Drax be like

3 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

Must be standing still...I cannot see any pixels

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 4

But,But it is sustainable. It will only take 200 years for the trees to grow back!…../s

3 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 5

This is dumb, most trees are harvested before 100. And are burning in ever increasingly larger forest fires

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

If they use only wood scraps from fast growing farmed trees then yes it is sustainable.

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Which they do! Well, and some diseased wood. This is coal and paper industry propaganda and so many people are falling for it ?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And it's not just growing more trees, the delicate ecosystem is destroyed forever.

3 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 4

Not true of vast majority of logging in bc. Not even close

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Drax IS sustainable, but it's totally dependent on it not being operated by thundercunts

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

A power company named like a bond villian, behaving exactly as you'd expect from such a a person.

3 years ago | Likes 94 Dislikes 4

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drax,_North_Yorkshire (it's also a surname)

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Yes, that was quite common to use Profession, City, Geographic Area, or Parent's Name as Forerunner to surname in the past.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Drax is the name of the village where the power station is....

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Cdn govt allowing this shit…like WTF.

3 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 2

Exporting natural resources is literally what every country does??

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The Canadian government only speaks one language not 2 like you've been told $$$$$$$$

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Oil sand mines, first nation opressions, seal hunting:clubbing, neoliberalism, etc., shit's nasty even in Canada.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Follow the money. My faith in humanity dies a little more each day.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Well, it's a provincial jurisdiction, so (having read the article), British Columbia should be cracking down on it.

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

I'm a member of the ruling party in BC (just a ground-level member, I get one vote in local general meetings and nominations) 1/

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's a "big-tent" party of Trade-Unionists, generally progressive, and a tiny minority of Democratic Socialists (like me). 2/

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Our current leader (and premier) is on his way out. I hope he does the door hit his ass on the way out. 3/

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

He never met an industrial lobbyist he disagrees with. Environmental plans seem to be about justifying not changing the status quo 4/

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

that hefty 200k fine will hurt their 2b profit so badly

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

1/2 I worked for a canadian woord manufacturers. Those pellets are made primarily with sawdust. with the decline of paper product -

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 2

2/2 many sawmills have big surplus of it, for some it go into woodproduct landfill. maybe the article is missing some context...

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

- keep in mind that wood IS a renewable resource, as long as the timber harvest rate is sustainable. this is not a simple issue

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 2

And the Canadian government let them?

3 years ago | Likes 68 Dislikes 1

I think as long as a tree is planted for every tree taken down for the industries its fine(its a baw here if im not mistaken)

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 4

Companies are cutting down old growths... you know... massive trees that we'll never see again in our lifetime.

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Our government only cares about the environment up until they can earn a dollar by selling a piece of our country to anyone that will buy.

3 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

English-speaking countries not sucking the dick of corporations who destroy the environment challenge: Impossible

3 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

Considering we have forests that are 20x the size of the UK itself, im not sure what primary means in this context. We have lots of wood.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Canada is not a good example of environmental stewardship. We only recycle a tenth of our plastic waste, produce most waste per capita /

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

globally - which we dump on poor countries, continue push disruptive oil pipeline construction, and done nothing to cutback on emissions.

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

This is literally BC'S main export....?????

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

You mean the natives. I'm honestly surprised nothing has happened to em yet.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Provincial jurisdiction, not federal - British Columbia's government should be cracking down on this, though. I was surprised it wasn't ON.

3 years ago | Likes 48 Dislikes 1

Exporting timber, lumber and the like is LITERALLY WHAT WE DO

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I was surprised this wasnt QC too

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

BC is a resource colony operated on behalf of multinational corps.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

It definitely feels like it sometimes. Nestle getting our water for pennies on the dollar then selling it back to us comes to mind.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

“the province's longtime chief forester, Diane Nicholls, was hired by Drax as a vice-president.” https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6606921

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

That tracks. The "resources industry" has a very incestuous relationship with regulators/authorities. Most industries do, I suppose.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I'm an NDP guy but the NDP BC gov needs a fucking slap for the amount they're pro-logging.

3 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 1

Vote Green

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Waiting to see who wins BC NDP party leadership. If Eby wins, fuck yeah. If he loses and Appandurai wins, I'll vote NDP, I think

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

At a federal level the NDP sounds great. At a local to provincial level they're the biggest shitheads.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Better than the BC Liberals.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'll take them over the conservatives any fuckin' day of any fuckin' week, and so should Alberta.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Well no shit, but that's a real low bar we're setting here.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Afuckingmen

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

BC NDP is currently running scared at what they're calling a "coup" attempt by a candidate vying for the party leader job. Cowards.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

The whole point of wood pellets was finding a use for the sawdust created by wood manufacturers. Idiotic to cut trees to make wood pellets.

3 years ago | Likes 344 Dislikes 2

They're not. This is a lie

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

They don't. The take offcuts, sawdust, diseased wood etc that the lumber industry doesn't want. This is coal and paper industry praganda.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Especially old growth forests. All that heartwood being chucked in the incinerator...

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

They're definitely not

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

This is up there with turning wild catch into feed pellets for farmed fish. Dumb.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Finding a use for waste is step 1 of creating a new industry that causes waste. Like jeans insulation.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Power company owners are pieces of shit and why we can't trust them with anything, esp nuclear. Nationalize it all.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

I wish that helped. Swedish government owns Sveaskog which owns 3.1 mega hectar forrest, which is 14% of all swedish forrest.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

They cut primary forrests. They have no regard for natural values. They ignore alarms from real scientists.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

They bring in lots of money directly to the tax coffers, so the politicians see no reason to stop them. They are evil.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Presumably they have to then ship the timber across the ocean to transport it to the power station in the UK. More dumbassery.

3 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 1

Ah, I was wondering how this insanity came to happen. Lawmakers did a crappy job - unforeseen consequences ensued.

3 years ago | Likes 59 Dislikes 3

I doubt it was unforseen. Uk politics is notoriously corrupt and profit motivated.

3 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 5

consider California Prop 65 that basically defeated its own purpose by being badly worded

3 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

The devil is in the details.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

more properly a lack thereof

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I think it's worth mentioning that a very large portion of what's burnt as biomass is "waste" from the forestry industry, i.e logs unfit to

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Be used for lumber or firewood, and the brash. Brash recovery is becoming more common now although the profit margin for it is very fine so

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It's generally only done where haulage distances within the forest and to the power plant are short. This process obviously means that we

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Use "the whole tree" which certainly looks good as a headline. The downside of course is that in natural forest growth the deadwood is able

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

To decompose and create the unique soil structure that the woodland ecosystem depends on. By not leaving anything in the forest as waste, we

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Sustainable forestry is a thing, so the premise of using wood as a fuel isn't inherently bad.

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

No, they just obviously didn't use sustainable forests to do it

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Speaking as the director of a low-impact forestry company and part time arboricultural/silvicultural consultant. Yes you're mostly right.

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

(with caveats)

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The part that always gets to me is companies trying to go "green" by going paperless. Paper is often from renewable sources, power for

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Extra computes is not that green.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Exposed by BBC Panorama program. Burning coal would be better than this system of destroying trees

3 years ago | Likes 368 Dislikes 9

Fuckin' barbarians, I mean burning firewood on a massive scale, such short-sighted IDIOTS!

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The timing of this is suspicious. Right when the UK government is about to make a statement on biomass? Coal industry propaganda AGAIN.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The CBC started asking questions this morning. Glad they heard about it and got the word out

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Power companies don't give a shit and nobody in power will ever stand up to them

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Aaaand that's exactly what you're supposed to think. Timing of this is sus, and likely funded by the coal and paper industries. ?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

A quick look results in controversy that burning biomass (wood) pellets are potentially more harmful form of air pollution than coal. 1/2

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I think when they say "Green Energy" they are using the Wrong kind of "Green"; Energy from Living Plants, not Energy Safe for Plants. 2/2

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

This should be downvoted to hell. This is another standard coal industry argument. Y'all falling for this shit?! Imgur is dumb af.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

If anyone had actually watched the program, it was edited to fuck and super inaccurate! It's frustrating how gullible people are!

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It feels like Canada should be taking most of the blame here tho.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Certainly some, its all done under license. But does anybody check

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Absolutely. Trudeau crys for "green" carbon tax hikes but ignores this shit

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

As someone who lives where we need coal still!! Why are you using OUR trees to make your tea?

3 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 1

Because it makes the tea taste better with the destruction of your forests.

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

It's not supposed to be whole trees but scraps and compressed sawdust! This industry is one lie after another. Making millions from 0 Carbon

3 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 0

Do you have any idea how expensive whole trees are? Why on earth would they burn them?! It's a loss maker. This is coal propaganda.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

What next "Clean Coal"? From what I read "0 Carbon"/"Carbon Neutral" often means they pay off Carbon Footprint Tax/Campaigns.

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

And one thing that they do is plant trees! Usually on good farmland, so there could be a shortage of acres because this pays more

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

So, back to square one? Its the same issue with charging stations.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I mean... yes and no. Coal is adding more carbon that was otherwise sequestered in the ground. Trees pull carbon from the air.

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Trees take in CO2 and breath out O2 for us, though I believe the heavy work is done by algae in the oceans. Plus they help as windbreaks!

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Algae is way more efficient about it, for sure, but yeah, the idea is, the carbon cycle is what's in the air and what's growing.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Plants use carbon to grow, when consumed, the thing that consumed the plant puts the carbon back in the air.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

at every step, some of that carbon is removed from the cycle, but it's a very small amount. In the ocean, it's a MUCH greater amount -

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Like Vegans? So Vegans are killing the planet??

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

So in essence, burning them just burns carbon that was already in the system. Ideally we want to move AWAY from adding more carbon to that.

3 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

This only really applies if the trees are being replaced. Deforestation to burn wood for fuel releases more CO2 than burning coal

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

1: Your statement is false, unburned coal is by definition carbon that is OUT of the cycle...

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

2: Maybe you're not familiar with a little thing called Tree Farms. It's where the overwhelming majority of construction lumber comes from.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

(Also coal has a TON of other crap in it that you really don't want to breathe.)

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Modern coal fired power stations had started using filters for these, before we moved away from coal altogether.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

So they claim. And yet, airborne mercury, cadmium, etc, was still very much a problem.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Then you need to figure in the cost of cutting down and transporting trees. Maritime vessels use the filthiest fuels you can imagine

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Kinda sounds to me like the core issue is the transit, and transporting coal probably takes even MORE fuel.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Coal in bulk is normally transported by train . Cleaner than shipping. The program suggested that Drax is sitting on large coal deposits

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Unlike with coal which naturally floats to its destination and does not require transport or mining?

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Surface transport is always cleaner than shipping. Mostly by train after being mined

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Label this shit environmental terrorism and put the company in the fucking ground. Consequences now or more of this later.

3 years ago | Likes 110 Dislikes 2

Good luck with that. Corporations are above us don't you know.

3 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 1

Corporations are made of people. If enough people quit, protest, and likewise make it hell for them to operate, then the people win.

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

They'll just find more people to take their place, or issue an apology without doing anything about it.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0