In a masterclass of political timing, the government waited until the first day back from parliamentary recess to rubber-stamp one of Britain’s most controversial energy decisions.   

On Monday, a sparsely-attended Delegated Legislation Committee voted 11-4 to extend subsidies for large-scale biomass power generation until 2031—a move that will see billions more in public money flow to Drax, the UK’s largest wood-burning power station.  

The scheduling wasn’t accidental. When governments bury contentious decisions in obscure committee meetings immediately after recess, it’s usually because they know the policy can’t survive proper scrutiny. And the Drax subsidies certainly can’t.  

What’s at stake?  

The Draft Contracts for Difference (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2025 enable the government to extend support for biomass generators when current schemes expire in 2027. While the regulations don’t name Drax specifically, the Yorkshire power station—whichburns millions of tonnes of imported wood pellets annually—is the clear beneficiary.  

Since 2012, Drax has received over £7 billion in public subsidies while producing roughly 3% of the UK’s total carbon emissions. The plant burns six times more trees than exists in the entire New Forest, shipping wood pellets across the Atlantic on diesel-powered freighters. Despite being classified as ‘renewable energy’, studies suggest biomass can produce higher emissions than coal when transport and processing are factored in.  

The new deal, running from 2027 to 2031, will cost consumers an estimated £2 billion. Energy Security Minister Michael Shanks argues this represents better value than previous arrangements, claiming the subsidies will be “halved” and the plant will operate “less than half as often”. However, the cost per megawatt-hour will actually increase from £138 to £160—more than double the cost of gas power.  

Who opposes it and why?  

Opposition to the legislation spans the political spectrum. Conservative Shadow Minister Nick Timothy called the extension “complete madness”, arguing that burning trees while claiming environmental benefits represents the worst excesses of net zero policy. Liberal Democrat Claire Young described biomass as “incredibly inefficient”, questioning why the government continues supporting a technology that multiple parliamentary committees have criticised.  

The concerns aren’t merely political. The Public Accounts Committee has criticised Ofgem (The Office of Gas and Electricity Markets) for allowing Drax to “mark its own homework” when claiming subsidies. The House of Lords Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee condemned 


2 / 3

the government for withholding key documents about the deal’s true costs and environmental impact.  

Most damaging of all, Drax was fined £25 million in 2023 for providing false data about its wood pellet sources. BBC Panorama investigationsrevealed the company had sourced wood from primary forests in British Columbia while publicly claiming to use only sustainable sources. A recent court case saw a whistleblower allege that Drax had “deliberately concealed” unsustainable sourcing practices.  

Where the scrutiny is missing  

The government’s rush to approve these regulations has bypassed normal oversight mechanisms. Ministers only sought advice from the Subsidy Advice Unit (SAU) last Friday—the finalworking day before Monday’s vote. The SAU’s consultation won’t conclude until July 10, meaning Parliament voted on extending subsidies without seeing the independent assessment of their value.  

Key documents remain hidden from public view. The 2022 KPMG audit of Drax’s accounts—which Prime Minister Keir Starmer promised to examine—hasn’t been released. Neither has the National Energy System Operator modeling that supposedly justifies the subsidy extension, nor the Ofgem audit findings.  

When security of supply becomes the excuse  

Shanks defended the subsidies as essential for energy security, arguing that without biomass, Britain could face supply shortages between 2027 and 2031. He claimed that building new gas plants in this timeframe would be too risky, making biomass the “lowest-cost option” for maintaining grid stability.  

Critics question this logic. If energy security is paramount, why has the government simultaneously ended new North Sea oil and gas licensing? And why not invest the £2 billion in genuine renewable energy storage or interconnectors that could provide long-term solutions?  

The government’s own Climate Change Committee has stated there is “no role for large-scale unabated biomass generation at high load-factors in the pathway beyond the expiry of existing contracts in 2027”. Yet, ministers are doing exactly what their advisers recommended against.  

The impact on students  

For young people already struggling with the cost-of-living crisis, these subsidies represent a double blow. Not only will they pay higher energy bills to fund Drax’s operations, but they’ll also inherit the environmental costs of a technology that undermines genuine climate action.  

While universities invest in solar panels and heat pumps, student energy bills subsidise a power station that burns forests. The £2 billion being handed to Drax dwarfs government spending on energy efficiency programs that could actually reduce student accommodation costs.  


3 / 3

The irony runs deeper. A generation facing climate anxiety and demanding urgent action on global warming is being forced to fund a power station that produces more carbon emissions than Britain’s last coal plant. It’s environmental policy written by accountants, not climate scientists.  

What next?  

Despite Monday’s vote, the controversy isn’t over. Multiple parliamentary committees continue investigating Drax’s practices and the government’s decision-making process. The Subsidy Advice Unit’s delayed report could still prove embarrassing when published in July.  

More fundamentally, the Drax deal represents everything wrong with Britain’s approach to energy policy: short-term thinking, regulatory capture, and a willingness to rebrand environmental destruction as climate action. For a generation that will live with the consequences of today’s energy choices, it’s a sobering reminder that not all “green” policies are created equal.  

In lighter news, Buzz—a 20-year-old tabby cat rescued from the Drax site earlier this year—has found a loving home in Lincolnshire after the RSPCA raised £500 for his veterinary care. Unlike the power station’s subsidies, this represents money well spent.