In February, the UK Government announced it was likely going to continue subsidising tree-burning giant Drax until 2031. Alongside, it promised an independent review of greenhouse gas removal (GGR) technologies, including BECCS (bioenergy with carbon capture and storage). The goal, they claimed, was to ensure better decision-making than in the past and to evaluate “strong and credible low carbon alternatives.”

Today, they’ve revealed the details of that review—and, in the least shocking development ever, the independence claim is already looking thin.

The review will be chaired by Alan Whitehead, former Labour MP and long-time advocate for biomass and BECCS. This is the same Alan Whitehead who, at a Drax-sponsored event in 2021, declared that Labour “completely backs biomass,” appearing entirely untroubled by the fact that Drax emits more carbon pollution per megawatt-hour now than when it burned coal, as well as eyewitness evidence showing that Drax is logging carbon-rich bottomland forests of the US Southeast to make wood pellets. BBC’s Panorama expose of Drax hadn’t yet come out in 2021, but there was already plenty of evidence in 2021 that Drax was logging primary forests in Canada.

More recently, here’s Alan Whitehead hosting the UK’s Renewable Energy Association in 2024 – with Drax’s materials featured.

Based on his past stance, and a cosy relationship with Drax (not just anyone gets invited to represent Drax in a public forum), Alan Whitehead is not an unbiased arbiter brought in to weigh the science. This is a long-standing Drax enthusiast now overseeing a review of a technology that Drax claims it wants to deliver, and that will yield still more billions for the Government’s favorite fatted calf. This is looking like another “performance” of oversight by the Government, like so many other consultations, special committees, etc, that somehow never quite get around to acknowledging that the UK’s treatment of biomass as having “zero” emissions lacks any trace of scientific credibility.

It’s good that the UK government has committed to examine BECCS, but it needs to be done right. It needs to be based in real science – and acknowledge, for starters, that as the IPCC will tell you, as well as anyone with common sense, burning trees and storing the carbon belowground will not “remove” CO₂ from the atmosphere.

Meanwhile, the government continues to pour billions into subsidies for Drax, while waving away long-standing concerns from scientists, NGOs, and communities impacted by the biomass industry.

You can read the GGR review’s terms of reference here. Critically,  it plans to investigate issues like “barriers to deployment at scale” but shows no intent to question whether BECCS can even deliver negative emissions. The effectiveness of BECCS is taken as given.  The review’s “approach and process” is as follows: “The Chair will consider a range of evidence including, but not limited to, document analysis and interviews with relevant individuals. In conducting the review, the Chair is expected to consult widely with a diverse range of stakeholders.”

Just him? Just the Chair? The person who’s been representing Drax?

Looks like another Government-Drax stitch-up!