I regularly communicate with a group of engineering types who are all power generation minded and we regularly write about how misguided the green movement is regarding power generation to the grid or, if you like, grids around the world. I cannot speak for my engineering group, since I have no mandate to do so, but I do know we have a number of ideas in common, which I will set out.

This piece was prompted by an article in the UK publication, The Independent, titled ‘Britain goes coal free for two months – longest period since industrial revolution’. The article goes on to say that the new record may be due to the coronavirus crisis (well observed!) but does not mention that (as reported in The Telegraph): “Power demand across the UK fell close to its lowest level ever on Sunday”, owing to the nationwide lockdown.

The article goes on to say that Doug Parr, chief scientist at Greenpeace UK, told The Independent: “The rapid decline in such a polluting fuel is truly cause to celebrate. The UK rightly took the chance to be a world leader in phasing out coal.” The article also quotes Jess Ralston, analyst at the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit: “Yet another record-breaking coal-free run in Britain highlights the fact that the fuel is simply not needed in a modern energy system.” Green Party energy spokesperson Andrew Cooper is quoted as saying: “Getting rid of coal is certainly part of the solution to tackling climate change.” But then, fatally, Cooper drops the ball (if it had not been dropped already), since he states: “Finally, there is also a question around the wood pellets Drax power plant has been using as a replacement for coal. The power plant should provide robust proof that the millions of tons of wood pellets it uses are from sustainable sources.”

Let’s stop right there. Stop. Now on your computer type https://www.gridwatch.tempat.co.uk/. You will find yourself on the electricity generation dashboard for the UK. From this you will see that (at this time) the demand is 29 GW and that the generation supply, at this time of no-coal generation, is 35% wind, 14% nuclear, 16% gas turbine, 10% biomass and a whole lot of other small stuff. The ‘biomass’ is mostly power from the Drax power station, which uses seven-million tonnes of wood pellets sourced from commercial forests in the US each year. Now, just so you know, seven-million tonnes of wood is half the total round wood production of South Africa. Burnt into ash. Let’s read that again: “sourced from commercial forests in the US”. We take up the story, direct from the Drax website: “In the US, rail cars, each capable of carrying 120 t, transport the pellets 221 miles to Baton Rouge (for seven-million tonnes, that’s 58 000 rail cars).

“Drax uses a range of ships to carry the pellets on their 8 000-mile journey to the UK, each capable of hauling 20 000 t to 80 000 t (for seven-million tonnes at least 87 ships).

“Roughly, 14 trains arrive at the plant every day and collectively unload about 20 000 t of pellets every day.” The website notes: “The result is that, even with all supply chain emissions considered, the power generated has a carbon emissions profile that is more than 80% lower than coal.”

To summarise: Half the yearly South African production of roundwood travels 221 miles in 58 000 rail cars and then 8 000 miles in 87 large ships, and the diesel fuel consumed on the way has less emissions than if Drax used coal to generate power. Now, is that hard to believe or what? One thing for sure, Drax will continue burning biomass, since it receives a subsidy of £2-million a day to burn biomass. So, there you have it. As the opening lines of Bohemian Rhapsody have it: “Is this the real thing? Is this just fantasy? More next week.