Residents of a small Mississippi town are suing Drax Biomass after the company won a permit to become a “major source” of hazardous air pollution at a local wood pellet production plant.
The subsidiary of the FTSE 250 energy company was previously denied permission to increase emissions in the 900-person town of Gloster, Mississippi, after local residents warned that they had already suffered serious adverse health consequences because of the operation.
But in a reversal of the April decision, the Mississippi department of environmental quality (MDEQ) permit board on Wednesday granted Drax’s Amite county wood pellet production facility a permit.
The plant in Gloster converts trees sourced from southern US states into wooden pellets, which are burned as biomass fuel in Drax’s huge power station in Selby, North Yorkshire, England.
Drax is expected to receive more than £10bn in UK renewable energy subsidies between 2012 and 2027 for its biomass generation, according to the thinktank Ember, despite criticism from green groups and climate scientists which claim that the wood it uses to manufacture biomass pellets is not sustainably sourced.
The company was found to have supplied inaccurate data relating to its sourcing of biomass, leading to a £25m ($33m) fine which was paid to the UK energy regulator. The company is currently being investigated by the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and lawmakers in the UK have been reviewing the billions in renewables subsidies the North Yorkshire plant receives.
The new lawsuit against Drax alleges that the Amite county facility – which shares a fence line with the larger community – has unlawfully exposed locals to excessive levels of chemicals and pollutants. It says those in turn have coated people’s homes and put them at greater risk of diseases such as cancer and respiratory illness.
“This case is about holding a multibillion-dollar foreign corporation accountable for poisoning a small Mississippi community,” said Letitia Johnson, an attorney at Singleton Schreiber, which filed the lawsuit.
Residents of Gloster’s predominantly Black, low-income town have reported feeling dizzy, getting headaches and otherwise feeling unwell since the facility opened a decade ago, and they have expressed concern that any plans for increased emissions could worsen respiratory illnesses, heart disease and other health issues linked to the pollutants.
The UK government has previously been accused of funding “environmental racism” through the subsidies to Drax.
“You got dust falling all night,” said Jimmy Brown, who lives less than a mile from the plant, the conservation outlet Mongabay reported. “You got constant noise from the plant. You got odor. You got truck traffic [carrying tons of trees and chipped wood] all day, every day. That’s what a lot of people don’t understand. It’s nonstop.”
The approval came despite the site’s previous standards violations, which resulted in a $250,000 fine last year for releasing over 50% more harmful pollutants than allowed and a $2.5m penalty in 2020 for underestimating volatile organic compound outputs over several years.
After the permit decision this week in Mississippi, a Drax spokesperson said the company was “pleased that the [permit board] has listened to the clear recommendations of its own technical staff, and the voices of Gloster community leaders, local businesses and a large number of our neighbors in Gloster”.
In a statement, Drax Biomass said it was aware of the lawsuit and while it could not comment on ongoing legal matters it would “strive to be a good neighbour in our communities and to support their wellbeing and prosperity”.
In a recent letter to Mississippi’s governor, Tate Reeves, and the MDEQ permit board, 85 advocacy organizations expressed concern at the effect Drax’s manufacturing has had on Gloster’s residents and urged steps “to ensure they can breathe clean, safe air”.
“From young children with asthma who are unable to play outside, to elderly residents reliant on costly breathing treatments, it is clear that Gloster is a community in crisis,” the organizations wrote.
“Those who can afford to leave are doing so,” they added, “while those who remain are left to suffer worsening health.”
