• About
    • Which Energy Mix is this?
  • Climate News Network Archive
  • Contact
The climate news that makes a difference.
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
  FEATURED
SPECIAL REPORT: ‘Defuse the Climate Time Bomb’ with Net-Zero by 2040, Guterres Urges G20 March 20, 2023
Devastating Impacts, Affordable Climate Solutions Drive IPCC’s Urgent Call for Action March 20, 2023
Window for 1.5°C ‘Rapidly Closing’, IPCC Warns March 20, 2023
Swift Action, Inclusive Resilience Vital in Face of Overlapping Climate Hazards March 20, 2023
Shift from Fossils to Renewables is Quickest, Cheapest Path to Cut Emissions, IPCC Report Shows March 20, 2023
Next
Prev

Bioenergy Faces Scrutiny Over Coal Plant Conversions, Forest Loss

January 5, 2020
Reading time: 4 minutes

Bava Alcide57/Wikimedia Commons

Bava Alcide57/Wikimedia Commons

1
SHARES
 

Bioenergy entered 2020 facing renewed scrutiny over its potential to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, with scientists in Europe and the United States warning that coal-to-biomass power plant conversions could actually fuel the climate crisis.

The Guardian describes experts as “horrified at large-scale forest removal to meet wood pellet demand,” citing campaigners’ conclusion that shifting Europe’s coal plants to wood “could accelerate rather than combat the climate crisis and lay waste to woodland equal to half the size of Germany’s Black Forest a year”.

  • Concise headlines. Original content. Timely news and views from a select group of opinion leaders. Special extras.
  • Everything you need, nothing you don’t.
  • The Weekender: The climate news you need.
Subscribe

Those numbers prompted Prof. Michael Norton, a director at the European Academies Science Advisory Council, to call large-scale forest removal for bioenergy production “horrifying from a climate perspective”, given the urgent need to stop deforestation.

In the U.S., meanwhile, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) climate and clean energy specialist Sasha Stashwick argues that “per unit of energy, biomass power plants emit more carbon dioxide from their smokestacks than coal plants. And cutting down older trees and replacing them with saplings reduces the amount of carbon stored in that forest, even under a best-case scenario in which harvested trees are immediately replanted.” [Disclosure: The Energy Mix Publisher Mitchell Beer has worked as a consultant to NRDC.]

That means a decades-long delay for any net climate benefits, even when the biomass energy comes from forestry residues, Stashwick adds, and “we don’t have decades to wait”.

The Guardian cites the Brussels- and UK-based climate think tank Sandbag, which looked into the “staggering” amount of tree cutting that could be triggered by heavily-subsidized wood pellet programs. The research “found that Europe’s planned biomass conversion projects would require 36 million tonnes of wood pellets every year, equal to the entire current global wood pellet production,” writes reporter Jillian Ambrose. “This would require forests covering 2,700 square kilometres to be cut down annually.”

And since the majority of the pellets would be shipped from the U.S. and Canada, “there’s a huge added environmental cost in transporting the wood from the other side of the Atlantic,” said report author Charles Moore.

The 67 megatonnes of emissions produced by planned biomass conversions in Finland, Germany, and The Netherlands would not likely be reabsorbed by new trees within the time frame of the Paris Agreement—and after all that, the power plants would supply less than 2% of Europe’s electricity demand, the same capacity that solar and wind are adding every year.

The Guardian connects the story to the massive Drax power plant in North Yorkshire, UK, where management claims a coal-to-biomass conversion backed rather tenuously by carbon capture and storage will make it the world’s first “carbon-negative” company within 10 years. “Drax only uses sustainable biomass sourced from managed forests that are replanted and stay as forests, absorbing carbon as the trees grow,” a company spokesperson told The Guardian. “Drax will not use biomass that drives harvesting decisions which would adversely affect the long-term potential of forests to store carbon,” and a new sustainability policy and independent advisory board “will ensure our biomass sourcing meets the highest standards using the latest science and best practice.”

But NRDC’s Stashwick calls greenwashing in response, citing the sourcing practices of Drax parent company Enviva, the world’s biggest wood pellet manufacturer. “Significant and troubling evidence shows that mature hardwood forests in the U.S. Southeast are logged to supply Enviva,” she writes. “These investigations, supported by NRDC and conducted by our coalition partners and other local groups, also spotlight the vast quantities of the most carbon-intensive types of biomass, including whole trees, entering the industry’s supply chain. These unsustainable sourcing practices not only liquidate carbon stocks, but damage biodiversity in a region where the Atlantic coastal plain is designated as a global biodiversity hotspot.”

On top of that, she continues, “a 2017 analysis of the U.K. power sector found that by 2025, Drax’s existing biomass plants will be more expensive to operate than building completely new solar and wind capacity, even when fully accounting for the costs of integrating solar and wind into the grid.” A separate study of biomass plants in Virginia revealed similar poor economics.

Alex Mason, senior policy officer, climate and energy with WWF’s EU office, responded that burning forests is “literally the opposite of what we should be doing” in response to the climate emergency.

“As 800 scientists pointed out last year, converting coal plants to biomass will increase emissions for decades, if not centuries,” he told The Guardian. “This new report is yet more evidence that the EU must use the new EU Green Deal to fix EU bioenergy rules before this ticking time bomb of a policy does any more damage.”



in Biodiversity & Habitat, Bioenergy, Carbon Levels & Measurement, Clean Electricity Grid, Climate Denial & Greenwashing, Coal, Ending Emissions, Energy Subsidies, Forests & Deforestation, Solar, UK & Europe, United States, Wind

The latest climate news and analysis, direct to your inbox

Subscribe

Related Posts

EUMETSAT/wikimedia commons
Severe Storms & Flooding

Cyclone Freddy Leaves Over 500 Dead on Africa’s Southeast Coast

March 23, 2023
14
Kern River Valley Fire Info/Facebook
International Agencies & Studies

SPECIAL REPORT: ‘Defuse the Climate Time Bomb’ with Net-Zero by 2040, Guterres Urges G20

March 20, 2023
267
IFRC Intl. Federation:Twitter
International Agencies & Studies

Devastating Impacts, Affordable Climate Solutions Drive IPCC’s Urgent Call for Action

March 21, 2023
813

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Trending Stories

U.S. Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement/flickr

Willow Oil Project in Alaska Faces Legal Challenges, Economic Doubts

March 19, 2023
547
IFRC Intl. Federation:Twitter

Devastating Impacts, Affordable Climate Solutions Drive IPCC’s Urgent Call for Action

March 21, 2023
813
Secretariat of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine/Wikimedia Commons

IPCC Report Charts a Course for Ottawa’s ‘Clean Technology’ Budget

March 21, 2023
155
Kern River Valley Fire Info/Facebook

SPECIAL REPORT: ‘Defuse the Climate Time Bomb’ with Net-Zero by 2040, Guterres Urges G20

March 20, 2023
267
NTSB

Ohio Train Derailment, Toxic Chemical Spill Renews Fears Over Canada-U.S. Rail Safety

March 8, 2023
1.5k
EcoFlight

Historic Deal Reopens B.C. Indigenous Territory to Fracking, Promises Land Restoration

March 19, 2023
457

Recent Posts

EUMETSAT/wikimedia commons

Cyclone Freddy Leaves Over 500 Dead on Africa’s Southeast Coast

March 23, 2023
14
U.S. National Park Service/rawpixel

Window for 1.5°C ‘Rapidly Closing’, IPCC Warns

March 20, 2023
77
FMSC/Flickr

Swift Action, Inclusive Resilience Vital in Face of Overlapping Climate Hazards

March 20, 2023
70
Kenuoene/pixabay

Shift from Fossils to Renewables is Quickest, Cheapest Path to Cut Emissions, IPCC Report Shows

March 20, 2023
218
Kiara Worth, UNClimateChange/flickr

Gap Between IPCC’s Science, National Actions Sets Challenge for COP 28

March 21, 2023
75
Photo by IISD/ENB

IPCC Sees Deeper Risk in Overshooting 1.5°C Warming Threshold

March 20, 2023
48
Next Post
Max Goessler/Pixabay

Review of Colossal Fossils’ Climate Promises Separates Spin from Substance

The Energy Mix - The climate news you need

Copyright 2023 © Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy and Copyright
  • Cookie Policy

Proudly partnering with…

scf_withtagline
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities

Copyright 2022 © Smarter Shift Inc. and Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}