Private emails reveal Drax executives privately questioned sustainability claims as energy company faces probe over alleged wood sourcing from old-growth forests.
Senior executives at Britain's largest power plant, Drax, expressed private doubts about the company's sustainability claims to ministers and civil servants, contradicting public denials of allegations that it was burning wood from "old-growth" forests in Canada. This revelation comes amid a growing row over Drax's biomass sourcing, which has seen the company face repeated scepticism over its business model.
The energy giant, which received £7 billion in subsidies on condition that biomass pellets are sourced from sustainable forests, is now facing an employment tribunal after one of its former top lobbyists, Rowaa Ahmar, took the company to court. Ahmar claimed she was sacked after warning ministers and government officials about Drax's alleged misrepresentation of its sustainability claims.
Court documents submitted to several news organizations reveal that Drax executives were aware of concerns over the company's ability to prove the origin of all its wood pellets. Former chief commercial officer Paul Sheffield stated he had been aware of these concerns, which were later raised with the executive committee.
Drax has denied the findings in a BBC documentary, which accused the energy company of burning 250-year-old trees from some of Canada's oldest forests via one of its pellet production sites. The company responded by claiming that 80% of the material used to make its biomass pellets was sawmill residue - "sawdust, wood chips and bark left over when timber is processed" - with the rest being waste material.
A review of Drax's data, commissioned by the company after the documentary, found an absence of adequate data governance and controls in place when it came to profiling the sources of wood used from Canada. The energy giant has agreed to pay £25m in compensation for a breach.
The UK's energy regulator Ofgem concluded that it did not find any evidence that Drax had been issued with subsidies incorrectly or that its biomass did not meet the government's sustainability threshold, but admitted there was an absence of adequate data governance and controls.
Senior executives at Britain's largest power plant, Drax, expressed private doubts about the company's sustainability claims to ministers and civil servants, contradicting public denials of allegations that it was burning wood from "old-growth" forests in Canada. This revelation comes amid a growing row over Drax's biomass sourcing, which has seen the company face repeated scepticism over its business model.
The energy giant, which received £7 billion in subsidies on condition that biomass pellets are sourced from sustainable forests, is now facing an employment tribunal after one of its former top lobbyists, Rowaa Ahmar, took the company to court. Ahmar claimed she was sacked after warning ministers and government officials about Drax's alleged misrepresentation of its sustainability claims.
Court documents submitted to several news organizations reveal that Drax executives were aware of concerns over the company's ability to prove the origin of all its wood pellets. Former chief commercial officer Paul Sheffield stated he had been aware of these concerns, which were later raised with the executive committee.
Drax has denied the findings in a BBC documentary, which accused the energy company of burning 250-year-old trees from some of Canada's oldest forests via one of its pellet production sites. The company responded by claiming that 80% of the material used to make its biomass pellets was sawmill residue - "sawdust, wood chips and bark left over when timber is processed" - with the rest being waste material.
A review of Drax's data, commissioned by the company after the documentary, found an absence of adequate data governance and controls in place when it came to profiling the sources of wood used from Canada. The energy giant has agreed to pay £25m in compensation for a breach.
The UK's energy regulator Ofgem concluded that it did not find any evidence that Drax had been issued with subsidies incorrectly or that its biomass did not meet the government's sustainability threshold, but admitted there was an absence of adequate data governance and controls.
... like they're trying to tell us one thing in public and another in private? It's crazy how senior execs knew all along that their wood sourcing claims were suspect but just went ahead with it anyway. And what's with the whole £7 billion subsidy thing? That's a ton of money, and now we find out most of it was spent on questionable practices 
.
This is a huge deal for me. I mean, think about it - one of the biggest energy companies in the UK is basically lying to the public and the government about its sustainability claims. And what's even crazier is that they've been getting billions of pounds in subsidies because of it 
. I'm not surprised, though - this kind of thing has been going on for years with big corporations. It's all about profit over people and the environment.
. But what really gets me is that Drax executives were secretly questioning their own sustainability claims behind closed doors 
. That's just mind-boggling. What does it say about our system if the people in charge are already doubting their own statements?
. We need transparency, we need answers, and we need change 
.
this is all so wrong... i mean drax can't just claim to be sustainable and then secretly burn wood from old-growth forests 
it's just not right. i feel bad for the environment and the people who are affected by their actions. they need to take responsibility for what they've done 
and start making things right. 25m in compensation is a good start, but i think that's just the tip of the iceberg 
what if rowaa ahmar wasn't sacked for speaking out? would we be in this mess right now? 
I mean I knew they were being super scrutinized over their biomass sourcing, but this is just crazy! it's like they're putting profits over the planet 
. I don't think it's cool that they were aware of these concerns and still went ahead with it...like what was going through their minds?! 
. on a more positive note, the fact that rowaa ahmar spoke out about this is super brave 
. And now they're paying £25m in compensation for not having proper data governance? That's wild 
. I mean, if you can't even prove where your wood comes from, how can we trust you? It's like, basic transparency, guys 
.
the worst part is that the gov actually gave them £7 billion in subsidies with no strings attached 
what's wrong with these ppl? 
.
. And don't even get me started on Ofgem's review - "no evidence of wrongdoing" huh? That sounds about as convincing as a politician's promise 
.
I mean, think about it, we're talking about trees that are hundreds of years old here, like 250-year-old trees being chopped down for energy production. That's just crazy to me. Drax executives were aware of the issues, but they still went ahead with their sustainability claims. It's not just about the environment, it's also about trust and accountability. How can we expect any company to be transparent when its top executives are questioning those same claims behind closed doors? The fact that there was no adequate data governance in place is just a huge red flag... this needs to change ASAP 
. I mean, the whole thing reeks of greenwashing, if you ask me 
. And now they're paying £25m in compensation – well, at least that's a small consolation 
.
. But until then, I'll just be over here being super skeptical of all things Drax 
... like, have you ever seen a more picturesque place? The water is literally turquoise and crystal clear! And I'm not even kidding when I say that I found this insane little cave hidden behind a waterfall, it was like something out of a movie 
. gotta say tho,Rowaa Ahmar sounds like a real hero for speaking up