bio-mass
<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font><div><div class="OQ_6vPwNhCeusNiEDcGp" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-family: DDG_ProximaNova, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_0, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_1, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_2, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_3, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_4, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_5, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_6, " proxima="Proxima" nova="Nova" helvetica="Helvetica" neue="Neue" segoe="Segoe" ui="UI" nimbus="Nimbus" sans="Sans" l="L" liberation="Liberation" open="Open" freesans="FreeSans" arial="Arial" sans-serif="sans-serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline" display="display" flex="flex" flex-grow="flex-grow" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color"><div class="mwuQiMOjmFJ5vmN6Vcqw B433VpEfaxl6n8VNRUDy NvMwcsUp56q4W2Z_b8E7 hAeZQDlu0XXeGwL7U722 SgSTKoqQXa0tEszD2zWF LQVY1Jpkk8nyJ6HBWKAk" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-url-main); vertical-align: baseline; display: inline-block; max-width: 100%; overflow: hidden; text-decoration: inherit; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap; letter-spacing: var(--letter-spacing-result-url-main);"><a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/sami-yassa/chatham-house-study-debunks-biomass-carbon-neutrality" rel="noopener" target="self" data-testid="result-extras-url-link" class="Rn_JXVtoPVAFyGkcaXyK" data-handled-by-react="true" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="Wo6ZAEmESLNUuWBkbMxx" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">https://www.nrdc.org</span><span class="oaxCunrdbQs3WQDCq3Ls" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"> › experts › sami-yassa › chatham-house-study-debunks-biomass-carbon-neutrality</span></font></a></div></div><div class="ikg2IXiCD14iVX7AdZo1" style="margin-top: calc(var(--px-in-rem)2.1024); margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: calc(var(--px-in-rem)4.09696); margin-left: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-family: DDG_ProximaNova, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_0, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_1, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_2, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_3, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_4, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_5, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_6, " proxima="Proxima" nova="Nova" helvetica="Helvetica" neue="Neue" segoe="Segoe" ui="UI" nimbus="Nimbus" sans="Sans" l="L" liberation="Liberation" open="Open" freesans="FreeSans" arial="Arial" sans-serif="sans-serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color"><h2 class="LnpumSThxEWMIsDdAT17 BrPN5UiFwJN5HlfRhga9 CXMyPcQ6nDv47DKFeywM" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: normal; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-title-main); vertical-align: baseline; letter-spacing: var(--letter-spacing-result-title-main); position: relative;"><a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/sami-yassa/chatham-house-study-debunks-biomass-carbon-neutrality" rel="noopener" target="self" class="eVNpHGjtxRBq_gLOfGDr LQNqh2U1kzYxREs65IJu" data-testid="result-title-a" data-handled-by-react="true" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; display: block;"><span class="EKtkFWMYpwzMKOYr0GYm LQVY1Jpkk8nyJ6HBWKAk" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: top; display: inline-block; max-width: 100%; overflow: hidden; text-decoration: inherit; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Chatham House Study Debunks Biomass Carbon Neutrality</font></span></a></h2></div><div class="E2eLOJr8HctVnDOTM8fs" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-family: DDG_ProximaNova, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_0, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_1, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_2, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_3, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_4, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_5, DDG_ProximaNova_UI_6, " proxima="Proxima" nova="Nova" helvetica="Helvetica" neue="Neue" segoe="Segoe" ui="UI" nimbus="Nimbus" sans="Sans" l="L" liberation="Liberation" open="Open" freesans="FreeSans" arial="Arial" sans-serif="sans-serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color"><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The <span style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: 600; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">Chatham</span> <span style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: 600; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">House</span> report is the capstone to a growing body of peer-reviewed scientific analyses—including the UK government's own modeling —that show forest <span style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: 600; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">biomass</span> is not carbon neutral. It...</font></span></div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></span></div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Chatham House Study Debunks Biomass Carbon Neutrality</font></div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">February 23, 2017 Sami Yassa </div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">Today, a pre-eminent think tank in the United Kingdom, Chatham House, issued a seminal report challenging a fundamental assumption underlying European renewable energy policy: that burning forest biomass to produce electricity is “carbon neutral.” The report Woody Biomass for Power and Heat: Impacts on the Global Climate, finds that many forms of forest-derived biopower are likely increasing carbon pollution rather than reducing emissions, and calls for restrictions on existing government incentives for the biomass industry in the EU. </div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">The context for this analysis is a cross-Atlantic dirty energy boom, fueled by misplaced subsidies intended to promote clean energy. Currently energy companies are cutting US forests and producing wood pellets to export to EU markets, claiming that biomass fuel is clean and renewable. These exports are driven by generous EU renewable energy subsidies that erroneously reward all forest biomass as “carbon-neutral”—equivalent to non-polluting sources like solar and wind energy. In other words, when counting carbon pollution at a biomass power plant, EU regulators treat the discharge from the smokestack as zero carbon, even though biomass combustion releases carbon emissions at levels comparable to fossil fuels. </div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">The Chatham House report is the capstone to a growing body of peer-reviewed scientific analyses—including the UK government’s own modeling—that show forest biomass is not carbon neutral. It underscores that in many cases forest biomass produces more emissions than fossil fuels, and these emissions persist in the atmosphere for decades.</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">The report provides exhaustive research and deliberate reasoning to debunk the industry-promoted myths underlying the EU’s misplaced carbon-neutrality assumptions. Here are a few of their top-line conclusions and recommendations:</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">Biomass Plants Pollute at the Smokestack at Levels Comparable to Fossil Fuels.</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">Since wood has a lower energy content compared with fossil fuels while also having a higher moisture content, its combustion for energy usually emits more carbon per unit of energy produced than fossil fuels. The Chatham House study, citing numbers from the IPCC confirms this fact:</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">...in most circumstances, comparing technologies of similar ages, the use of woody biomass for energy will release higher levels of emissions than coal and considerably higher levels than gas. </div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">Burning Biomass Produces a “Carbon Debt” Which is Not Automatically Offset by Forest Regrowth.</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">The report goes on to underscore a fundamental flaw underlying the arguments of biomass proponents: namely, since forests can regenerate over time and sequester carbon in the process, this regrowth balances or offsets the stack emissions produced by burning wood for energy. The report rejects this overly simplistic error and instead stresses that biomass burning creates a “carbon debt”—excess carbon in the atmosphere—and that the intensity and duration of this debt depends on the type of forest biomass burned (for example, whole trees versus logging residues versus mill waste). In sum it confirms the findings of many prior scientific inquiries that not all biomass is created equal, and burning whole trees in particular is always detrimental to climate.</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">The harvesting of whole trees for energy will in almost all circumstances increase net carbon emissions very substantially compared to using fossil fuels. This is because of the loss of future carbon sequestration from the growing trees—particularly from mature trees in old-growth forests, whose rate of carbon absorption can be very high—and of the loss of soil carbon consequent upon the disturbance.</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">The use of sawmill residues for energy has lower impacts because it involves no additional harvesting; it is waste from other operations of the wood industry. The impact will be most positive for the climate if they are burnt on-site for energy without any associated transport or processing emissions.</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">While wood pellet manufacturers in the US southeast claim that most of their wood pellets are produced with residues, the report shows that about three quarters of the pellets from the southern US came from whole trees and residues accounted for only a quarter.</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">Time Scale Matters.</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">These two examples from the study show that when biomass is burned it releases carbon emissions immediately and this carbon debt lasts anywhere from a few years to many decades (often called the “payback period”)—depending upon the type of feedstock used. But carbon emissions from burning forest biomass will have real consequences for climate in the near term—and not just some distant future 100 years from now. These near-term “tipping points” include melting glaciers, sea level rise, disruptions to agricultural systems, and effects on human health. So only those feedstocks that reduce emissions in the short term will provide climate benefits. The Chatham House study confirms this finding:</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">Some have argued that the length of the carbon payback period does not matter as long as all emissions are eventually absorbed. This ignores the potential impact in the short term on climate tipping points (a concept for which there is some evidence) and on the world’s ability to meet the target set in the 2015 Paris Agreement to limit temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, which requires greenhouse gas emissions to peak in the near term. This suggests that only biomass energy with the shortest carbon payback periods should be eligible for financial and regulatory support.</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">“Sustainable Forestry” Does Not Mean Carbon Neutrality</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">Many biomass proponents like to argue that biomass fuel sourced from a region where the net forest growth is positive, or where sustainable forestry is practiced—is carbon neutral. Such logic is nonsense. Rates of forest growth simply cannot detect, quantify, or reflect the carbon emissions from an individual biomass-burning facility, and it does not establish a proper baseline for accounting or a cause-and-effect between the power plant and the region’s forests. The Chatham House study flatly debunks this industry myth:</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">It is often argued that biomass emissions should be considered to be zero at the point of combustion because carbon has been absorbed during the growth of the trees, either because the timber is harvested from a sustainably managed forest, or because forest area as a whole is increasing (at least in Europe and North America).</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">These arguments are not credible. They ignore what happens to the wood after it is harvested (emissions will be different if the wood is burnt or made into products) and the carbon sequestration forgone from harvesting the trees that if left unharvested would have continued to grow and absorb carbon. The evidence suggests that this is true even for mature trees, which absorb carbon at a faster rate than young trees.</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">Among the report’s many recommendations, three stand out as rejecting the fundamental carbon neutrality assumption underlying the EU’s Renewable Energy Directive and restricting financial support only to biomass feedstocks that actually reduce carbon emissions in the short term—mill residues and post-consumer waste.</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">• It is not valid to claim that because trees absorb carbon as they grow, the emissions from burning them can be ignored.</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">• The provision of financial or regulatory support to biomass energy on the grounds of its contribution to mitigating climate change should be limited only to those feedstocks that reduce carbon emissions over the short term.</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">• In practice, this means that support should be restricted to sawmill residues, together with post-consumer waste. Burning slower-decaying forest residues or whole trees means that carbon emissions stay higher for decades than if fossil fuels had been used.</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">
</div><div class="OgdwYG6KE2qthn9XQWFC" style="font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: var(--line-height-result-snippet-main); vertical-align: baseline;">Burning forest biomass is not a climate solution. It often worsens climate change by emitting more carbon than burning coal. These findings have now been corroborated by an established UK institution with a history of independent and rigorous research. It should serve as a wake-up call to policymakers in both the UK and EU that their renewables incentives and subsidies aimed at reducing carbon emissions from power plants are—in the case of forest biomass power—likely having the opposite effect and making our climate problems worse.</div></span></div></div></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=
</font><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><a href="https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/baseload/a-burning-question-are-europes-biomass-imports-sustainable/">https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/baseload/a-burning-question-are-europes-biomass-imports-sustainable/</a></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">2013</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><p class="contentIntro" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="dateline grey" style="box-sizing: border-box;">LONDON —</span> Europe’s debate over the sustainability of its imported biomass feedstock is heating up.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">While analysts expect biomass to meet roughly half of Europe’s 20 percent-by-2020 renewable energy target, and biomass pellets imported from the southeastern U.S. and British Columbia, Canada are seen as crucial to meeting these targets, there is much debate over how sustainable these imports really are.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This debate has now gone global, with both exporters and importers attempting to influence a European <a href="https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/content/rew/en/articles/2013/08/draft-european-biomass-policy-repeats-biofuel-policy-mistakes-green-groups-say.html" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-feathr-click-track="true" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">policy in the works</a>. In <a href="http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/imported/eu-biomass-threatens-forests-in-southern-us/78113.aspx" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-feathr-click-track="true" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">an article in European Voice</a>, Danna Smith of U.S. NGO the <a href="http://www.dogwoodalliance.org/" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-feathr-click-track="true" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">Dogwood Alliance</a> said Europe shouldn’t view North America’s sustainability issues as less important than those of other bioenergy feedstock-producing regions such as Indonesia and Brazil. Smith called for strong forest sustainability criteria to be applied to the southern U.S., Europe’s leading source of biomass pellets, where “there are virtually no laws regulating industrial forestry on private lands which make up 90 percent of the forests in the region.” Due to this lack of a legal framework, claims are growing that exports to Europe could increase carbon emissions from North American forests and threaten the region’s long-term forest sustainability.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A number of studies have measured the carbon implications of energy production from forest biomass, with some concluding that carbon emissions from wood-based bioenergy can be worse than burning coal while others said energy from woody biomass can offer significant carbon mitigation benefits. A new report from trade group Aebiom’s <a href="http://www.aebiom.org/blog/category/policy/bridging-with-biomass-campaign/" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-feathr-click-track="true" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">Bridging with Biomass coalition</a> (BwB) attempts to counter the negative claims with data on how biomass pellets are produced.</font></p><div class="td-a-rec td-a-rec-id-content_inline tdi_92 td_block_template_3" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-align: center; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div id="div-gpt-ad-8675309-Native-1" data-google-query-id="COaJgarasPoCFUyiAAAditoLUQ" style="box-sizing: border-box; max-width: 784px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">it concluded that net forest growth in the southeastern U.S. exceeds net removals by 35 percent, and found “strong forestry research, education, and outreach programmes throughout the region coupled with a long history of investment and commitment to forest retention and management on the part of forest landowners.”</font></div></div><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Previous studies’ conclusions “are very heavily dependent upon underlying assumptions” which “are sometimes unrealistic” and often fail to reflect current biomass production and conversion practices, the report said.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For example, BwB found that studies indicating long carbon debt repayment times tended to assume that forests are managed and harvested purely for bioenergy, are slow-growing, were previous unmanaged, had high original carbon stocks and would maintain these stocks over time. Actual wood pellet production, BwB said, comes largely from residues and low-value products of existing forestry activities in forests being managed for other purposes (such as timber and pulpwood).</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“When realistic assumptions are applied, production of energy from woody biomass results in carbon payback times and sequestration [losses] that are very small compared to the substantial carbon savings achieved over time,” BwB said.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In addition, BwB found that a number of studies assumed that, without being managed for bioenergy production, forests will continue to grow naturally. “This is not realistic when evaluating biomass from existing production forests which have been managed for timber and pulp for years,” BwB said. It would be more appropriate to “recognise the need of forest owners (especially private owners) to continue to receive economic benefit from the forest,” it said.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A scenario in which a 30-year rotation forest in the southeastern U.S. was harvested entirely for bioenergy would result in a carbon payback time of 22 years, the report found – but, BwB said, only if the alternative model was based on a “no harvest” scenario. “This scenario is unrealistic since management of forests strictly for bioenergy is not expected to play a role in actual pellet production for the foreseeable future,” it said.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The report found that bioenergy gleaned from existing sustainably managed forests maintains or even increases forest carbon stocks over time, while also avoiding emissions from burning fossil fuel. BwB’s modeling showed an initial small emissions increase due to a decline in the amount of carbon stored in forest litter, but large emissions savings over time. In the southeastern U.S., the report said, the time to carbon parity is just three years when forest residues are used for bioenergy.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In a statement, environmental group <a href="http://www.birdlife.org/regional/europe/index.html" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-feathr-click-track="true" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">Birdlife Europe</a> and the <a href="http://www.eeb.org/" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-feathr-click-track="true" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">European Environmental Bureau</a> (EEB) said the report “fails to bridge the gap between industry arguments and reality.” The groups cited <a href="http://www.dogwoodalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Whole-Tree-Wood-Pellet-Production-Report.pdf%20" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-feathr-click-track="true" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">a 2012 study</a> by the Dogwood Alliance, which said: “There are significant issues related to forest sustainability in this region of the world, where logging is largely unregulated, including the loss of biodiversity and the degradation of water resources and carbon sinks from indiscriminate clearcutting and the widespread conversion of natural forests to plantations.”</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The study also claims whole trees are being used in the U.S. to produce wood pellets for export to Europe. It cites <a href="http://www.rwe.com/web/cms/en/522380/rwe-innogy/technologies/biomass/procurement-international/waycross-georgia/" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-feathr-click-track="true" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">RWE Innogy’s plant</a> in Waycross, Georgia, which exports 750,000 tonnes of pellets per year to Europe, as a major offender, quoting a company statement saying “The use of trees as an energy crop fosters the planting of additional forests.” </font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">RWE says its wood comes from sustainably managed forests and meets criteria set out by the <a href="http://www.sfiprogram.org/" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-feathr-click-track="true" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">Sustainable Forestry Initiative</a>, an independent body which certifies biomass sourcing across the U.S. and Canada. “The SFI programme’s unique fibre sourcing requirements promote responsible forest management on all suppliers’ lands. SFI chain-of-custody (COC) certification tracks the percentage of fibre from certified forests, certified sourcing and post-consumer recycled content,” the group’s website says.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Birdlife and the EEB echoed Smith in noting that, in the U.S., sustainability criteria equivalent to Europe’s are not currently enforced. (There is much less debate over the sustainability of pellets imported from Canada, where forests are largely government-owned.)</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">At present, draft European biomass sustainability criteria are rather vague, saying only that “It is in the interest of the EU to encourage the development of voluntary national or international schemes” that set sustainability standards. However, the proposal’s specification that “woody raw material should come only from forests that are harvested in a sustainable manner, in accordance with the principles of sustainable forest management developed under international processes such as <a href="http://www.foresteurope.org/" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-feathr-click-track="true" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">Forest Europe</a> and implemented through national regulations” may prove problematic for international markets.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It’s clear that Europe needs more biomass than it can produce, and wants what it imports to be sustainable. But until the policy implications of dependence on a large global market and the science behind the “for” and “against” claims are equally clear, the debate will continue to burn.</font></p></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">https://www.wired<b>prnews.c</b>om/how-europes-biomass-appetite-is-harming-the-us-south-energy-news/</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">aljeera</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>How Europe’s biomass appetite is harming the US south | Energy News</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">NewsReport NewsReport Send an email May 3, 2022 </font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Garysburg, United States – Silverleen Alston recalls when nothing but brooding groves of sweetgums, oaks and cypress trees surrounded her family home in the small town of Garysburg, in North Carolina’s Northampton County.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But those trees are long gone, replaced by rows of fast-growing pines that help feed the hulking wood from standing less than a half-mile (800 meters) from her back yard.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">At the plant, owned by Maryland-based Enviva, trees are dried and pressed into small, uniform pellets. The facility is one of four companies running in the state, and it is part of a booming industry in the southeastern country, where a dozen companies churn out more than 10 million tons of wood pellets a year.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Much of this output is exported to Europe and burned for energy that counts towards green goals.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>In 2009, the European Union committed to obtaining 20 percent of its energy needs from renewable sources by 2020 – and burning wood for fuel was considered a zero-emissions renewable source.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Aerial view of Enviva Biomass facility in Northampton County [Courtesy of Dogwood Alliance]</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The idea was that since forests can be replanted, the carbon dioxide released during logging, shipping and burning can be reabsorbed by the new trees as they grow.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Encouraged by government subsidies, energy providers in countries like the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Belgium built new infrastructure or retrofitted their coal-fired plants to burn wood pellets.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">Today, biomass energy provides nearly 60 percent of the EU’s renewable power generation capacity, a share projected to grow further as the bloc aims for ambitious clean energy targets.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>But while politicians on both sides have heaped praise on biomass companies for creating much-needed rural jobs and boosting local logging and trucking businesses, residents like Alston argue that their growing presence has only made life worse</b>.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Residents protesting against Enviva in Northampton County [Courtesy of Dogwood Alliance]</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The 63-year-old said there was an unpleasant odor in the air and the trucks going up and down the highway made constant noise. The buzz of sawmills and other machinery is incessant, even at night.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“I can’t remember the last time I slept for more than three hours in a row,” said Alston.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For lifelong resident Belinda Joyner, the main concern is pollution.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“We used to have cookouts in the back yard every weekend and kids could play on the lawn,” said the 69-year-old. “We can’t do that any more because of the stuff that’s coming out from the plant. It’s not safe. ”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Turning tree trunks into wood pellets releases thousands of tons of fine particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and other noxious chemical compounds linked with a range of illnesses, from respiratory and heart disease to cancer.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Rita Frost, campaigns director for the forest-protection advocacy nonprofit Dogwood Alliance, said these pollutants put a further burden on the health of people already experiencing negative impacts from living next to significant pollution sources.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">According to a 2018 study, all pellet mills in North Carolina are located in predominantly minority, low-income communities already burdened by toxic industries. Across the region, these facilities are 50 percent more likely to be located in low-wealth communities of color.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Northampton County, which is 57 percent Black and one of the poorest counties in the state, already had three plants emitting large amounts of air pollutants before Enviva opened its factory in 2013. Three more such facilities can be found within 3.2km (two miles) of the southern border of the county.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A 2018 health assessment by the county health department found that more than 60 percent of the population in Northampton County suffer from high blood pressure, nearly 11 percent of residents had heart disease, and more than one in 10 adults in the county had asthma.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Alston lives these statistics. One of her sisters sleeps on a ventilator, and her aunt suffers from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. She, her mother, and another sister all suffer from respiratory issues, which she said became worse after Enviva’s arrival.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In an emailed statement to Al Jazeera, Enviva said the company’s plants are in compliance with air quality regulations and even exceed regulation standards in controlling air pollution.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Yet a 2018 report by the Environmental Integrity Project found that more than half of the 21 pellet facilities operating in the region, including Enviva’s Northampton mill, “either failed to keep emissions below legal limits or failed to install required pollution controls”.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Turning tree trunks into wood pellets releases thousands of tons of fine particulates, gases, and noxious chemical compounds [File: Rick Wilking/Reuters]</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Biomass is contentious not just locally for the adverse impacts on those who live near wood pellet plants, but also globally for the unusual way its carbon emissions are tallied.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Under global accounting rules, emissions from burning wood are calculated where the trees are harvested, not where the material is burned.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">That means countries can avoid counting emissions from their wood-fired plants while reporting coal displaced as a greenhouse gas reduction.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Critics also point to evidence suggesting that timber trees are not as effective as native forests at storing carbon, and it can take many decades to fully grow and accumulate as much carbon as mature ones.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A Chatham House report argues wood pellets can be even dirtier than coal.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But even these findings have not stopped the industry from pursuing growth.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">At least eight new pellet mills have been proposed throughout the southeastern US. Companies are also looking to expand existing facilities – including the Northampton mill.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Joyner, who has been fighting against the expansion of the polluting industry in her community for decades, feels disrespected.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“It’s like they’ve decided we’re expendable because we’re black and poor and our lives are worth less than those of white folks,” she said. “We’re just tired of being dumped on for the sake of profit, that’s not fair.”</font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div></div></div>