There's something deeply ironic (and more than a little broken) about Drax pushing into CCS. The biomass mentioned in the article, that they burn in huge quantity travels a fair way to be burnt in the UK's largest emitter. Drax <i>currently,</i> with two of the six 660MW turbines still reserved for coal, burns more wood pellets in a year - 13m tonnes in 2016, when only 3 turbines were biomass - than the UK produces wood. Though they now want to convert the last two to gas, not biomass.<p>So where does this "renewable" source of biomess (sic) come from? Why two thirds of it comes from Enviva, who clearcut mature US wetland natural forests - not from managed forestry.<p>Drax's renewable claims are 99% empty greenwashing, and they remain part of the climate problem. Drax the Destroyer would be very fitting as their logo.<p><a href="https://theecologist.org/2017/apr/10/no-drax-theres-nothing-sustainable-about-big-biomass" rel="nofollow">https://theecologist.org/2017/apr/10/no-drax-theres-nothing-...</a>