Residents of a small Mississippi community have initiated legal action against Drax Biomass after the company obtained a permit allowing its wood-pellet facility to function as a “major source” of hazardous air pollution. This move reverses an earlier denial and intensifies accusations that the facility endangers public health in Gloster, Mississippi.
Background
Prior Denial and Community Concerns
The Drax subsidiary had earlier been denied permission to increase emissions in Gloster—a town of about 900 people—after locals sounded the alarm about serious health impacts from the existing operations.
Permit Granted Despite Objections
In April, Drax’s plans were turned down. But in a dramatic turnaround, on Wednesday the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) permit board approved the permit for Drax’s Amite County wood pellet plant.
The Plant and Its Role
The facility in Gloster processes timber sourced from southern U.S. states into wood pellets, which are then burned as biomass fuel at Drax’s large power station in Selby, North Yorkshire, England.
A think tank, Ember, estimates Drax will collect over £10 billion in UK renewable energy subsidies between 2012 and 2027 for its biomass operations. Critics—including environmentalists and climate scientists—argue that the wood used may not be sustainably sourced.
Past Violations and Fines
Drax has previously been penalized for misreporting biomass sourcing data, leading to a £25 million fine by UK energy regulators. The firm is also under investigation by the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), and lawmakers in the UK are scrutinizing the multi-billion subsidy regime supporting Drax in North Yorkshire.
In Mississippi, the plant’s history includes:
- A $250,000 fine last year for exceeding permitted pollutant levels by over 50%
- A $2.5 million penalty in 2020 for underestimating volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions over several years
The New Lawsuit: Allegations and Impacts
The new lawsuit contends that the Amite County facility—directly adjacent to the community—has unlawfully subjected residents to excessive chemical exposures. These pollutants reportedly coat homes and increase risks of cancer, respiratory diseases, and other serious illnesses.
“This case is about holding a multibillion-dollar foreign corporation accountable for poisoning a small Mississippi community,” said Letitia Johnson, attorney at Singleton Schreiber, which filed the suit.
Gloster is predominantly Black and low-income, and residents have reported dizziness, headaches, and general malaise since the facility began operating roughly a decade ago. Any further emissions increases may exacerbate respiratory, cardiovascular, and other health issues.
Observers have argued that the UK’s renewable subsidies to Drax amount to environmental racism—funding pollution in a vulnerable U.S. community while reaping climate-friendly credits overseas.
One resident, Jimmy Brown, who lives within a mile of the plant, described conditions to conservation outlet Mongabay:
“You got dust falling all night… constant noise… odor… truck traffic all day… It’s nonstop.”
Controversial Approval & Local Reaction
The permit decision flew in the face of the plant’s past violations.
Despite that, following the permit approval, a Drax spokesperson stated they were “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 corporate statement, Drax Biomass said it was aware of the lawsuit. While it would not comment on ongoing legal proceedings, it pledged to “strive to be a good neighbour in our communities and to support their wellbeing and prosperity.”
Simultaneously, 85 advocacy organizations wrote to Mississippi’s governor, Tate Reeves, and the MDEQ board expressing deep alarm over Drax’s impact on Gloster residents. They urged decisive action “to ensure [residents] 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… Those who can afford to leave are doing so, while those who remain are left to suffer worsening health.”
