– by Robert McClure, May 3, 2017, Undark
The idea that to generate electricity should be considered climate-friendly has been debated by scientists and politicians for years. Advocates, including many scientists, ask what could be more sustainable than burning trees? They drink in planet-warming gasses while growing, and give it back up when they are burned — a perfect closed loop with no net emissions. Critics, on the other hand — including other researchers — say the science is much more complicated than all that, and that when managed poorly, woody biomass power could be worse for the climate than coal.
– by Anna Simet, May 2, 2017, Biomass Magazine
Photo: Biomass Magazine
The $1 trillion Omnibus spending bill up for consideration by the House and Senate this week includes a policy rider that calls for federal recognition of forest bioenergy carbon neutrality.
The House Appropriations Committee released the fiscal year 2017 Omnibus Appropriations bill early Monday, 1,665-pages of legislation that will provide discretionary funding for the federal government for the current fiscal year.
To access this issue, please subscribe to quarterly issues of The Biomass Monitor.
Biomass Energy: Carbon Neutral or Not?
Study Assesses Economic Benefits of Biomass Energy on Rural Communities
OPINION: Middlebury College Declares Carbon Neutrality, Thanks to Biomass
OPINION: Middlebury Biomass Not Carbon Neutral
– by William Strauss, March 15, 2017, Biomass Magazine
The use of U.S.-produced wood pellet fuel blended with coal in large utility power stations could sustain coal mining jobs, create tens of thousands of new jobs in another sector that is experiencing significant job losses—the forest products sector—and stimulate billions of dollars of new investment in new U.S. manufacturing plants.
By supporting the blending of industrial wood pellet fuel with coal in pulverized coal (PC) power plants, policy will lock in the need for PC power plants, therefore guaranteeing significant demand for coal. This well-proven strategy, which is already in place in many other countries, can provide certainty for the need for U.S.-produced coal for decades, and certainty for U.S. coal mining jobs.
– by Liz Gyekye, March 13, 2017, Bioenergy Insight
Photo: Bioenergy Insight
More than 125 academics have joined the International Energy Agency Bioenergy Technology Collaboration Programme (IEA Bioenergy) slamming Chatham House’s recent report on bioenergy, calling it ‘misleading.
The group of academics from across the world and the IEA state that the report “does not present an objective overview of the current state of scientific understanding with respect to the climate effects of bioenergy”.
They are urging the Chatham House author to “reconsider flawed policy recommendations.”