The global Biomass scam.

Biomass is held up by governments around the world as a net-zero carbon alternative to fossil fuels. Just like most aspects of climate change mitigation though, the reality is far more complicated than that. Some studies have suggested it may actually be doing far more harm than good. So what's going on?

Help support this channels independence at

Or with a donation via Paypal by clicking here

Download the Just Have a Think App from the AppStore or Google Play

Interested in mastering and remembering the concepts that I present in my videos?

Check out the FREE DiveDeeper mini-courses offered by the Center for Behavior and Climate. These mini-courses teach the main concepts in select JHAT videos and go beyond to help you learn additional scientific or conservation concepts. The courses are great for teachers to use or for individual learning.

Check out other YouTube Climate Communicators

zentouro:
Climate Adam:
Kurtis Baute:
Levi Hildebrand:
Simon Clark:
Sarah Karver:
ClimateTown:
Jack Harries:
Beckisphere:
Our Changing Climate :

Research Links

South Korea

SFOC report

Conservation North

Dogwood Alliance

Carbon stored in forests

Partnership for Policy Integrity

[raimondse]

I do enjoy how the calm man describes ways we are fucked.

[Greguk]

I have to admit I was naive in believing the biomass propaganda as being carbon-neutral. Thank you for this very interesting and enlightening presentation.

[polishguy]

"Just have a think" and "Just have another think"? At this rate I'll have to think all the time!

[markmushypeas]

Madness. One step forward, two steps back

[Dinahmite]

Live in BC and am appalled and angry seeing our forests cut down for biofuel sent to other countries. Watching the old growth forests decimated is distressing

[toyotaprius]

If anyone has heard about Northern Ireland's biomass "renewable heat incentive" scheme, you'd know how ridiculous management can be.

[lindsayforbes]

I've been telling people not to use pellets for years but you put it so much better.
Copied to my MP. Sheffield, in the fallout from Drax

[DrJaxonsElixirOfLife]

I'll be sharing this video with a lot of people. Yet another thing I've been banging on about for years...

[shaigluskin]

I'm going to write my elected representatives about this. I'm shocked, though I shouldn't be. Thanks for the reporting.

[georgestergios]

I’ve been telling my friends about this Drax scandal for years. Thanks for confirming it. If it had continued on coal the CO2 per kw would have been less!

[TazPessle]

Me watching JHAT: Feels greatful for the information but also rolls eyes at how stupid we are at a specie.

[largato]

Here in Brazil biomass is usually referred to as biogas energy burners from the poultry and swine industry, and the sugarcane bagasse resulting from the ethanol plants. Since these industries here usually just burn these byproduct dejects into the atmosphere or throw into the water streams, the few who harvest it for biomass are usually applauded.

[alderom]

The proper title for this video is: "Devious carbon accounting fuelling burning of forests"

[qkmccm]

First, I love your videos; they are well researched and clearly explained for most audiences. I do think in this case, there have been a few too many generalizations. I have been involved in studies related to biomass combustion for thermal energy, and have learned about many of the issues you have raised in this video. What is not fully covered are the mitigations that some regions have implemented to minimize or eliminate the issues. In my region, we have regulations and enforcement for forestry management, something that is, for the most part, taboo in the US. That's not to say it's perfect; there are always those who put profit first and take the risk of not getting caught, but on average, our forestation exceeds our deforestation.

Rules to consider for biomass:
1. Source biomass must be from new growth, managed forests or cycled crops (i.e. for each plant removed, one or more equivalent plants are planted to create a cycle).
2. Biomass must be locally sourced (e.g. < 200 km transport distance).
3. Ensure a hierarchy of biomass usage based on maximizing sequestration period (e.g. construction lumber - furniture - pulp & paper - agricultural charcoal - combustion).

Even with these rules, there is still the issue of the carbon debt (initial carbon released at the beginning of the cycle). There are a couple solutions for this; specific forestation or carbon capture. Planning for advanced forestation prior to the beginning of combustion can offset the balance of carbon emitted. Large amounts of land that have a low sequestration factor are necessary, and the new growth must be given ample time to reach a level of development to ensure adequate CO2 absorption (> 5 years).

Carbon capture can be used to make the process carbon negative (carbon sink) if done correctly. The end use of the CO2 is important in this process. If it goes to something like the bottling industry or greenhouses, most of the CO2 is released back to the atmosphere almost immediately. Long-term storage in the ground, or infused in concrete are examples of effective sequestration. I'm still on the fence, based on principle, whether I support the oil industry using the CO2 to help extract oil, but it is another long-term storage option.

With all this said, the first solution in our 30-year plan is to use hydroelectricity, preferably run-of-river, to supply our production equipment. Combining run-of-river, reservoir (dams), solar, and wind, the operating emissions are about 2g/kWh compared to about 180g/kWh for natural gas, and lifecycle emissions are about 22g/kWh (lifecycle emissions for NG are not easily determined). (note, the numbers are extracted from my aging memory so forgive me if they are wrong and feel free to reply with corrections)

[PeacefulWarriorAmanda]

Once again, another great video! I'm going to try to comment on every video even if I have nothing really to say just to increase the comment numbers 'cause this is a great channel. Thanks!

[roydesignedthat]

Yes! I don't know why there is not more of an uproar over this! Thanks for speaking up! BestRoy

[macalister]

Here in my city they burn the garbage and now we have air quality alerts every day, what a grand idea it is

[Venzina]

While I whole heartily agree that cutting down living trees and burning it for fuel is not carbon neutral, I do think that there is a place for certain biomass energy technologies. Specifically I am talking about biochar optimized pyrolysis. This converts up to 50% of the carbon stored in biomass into a recalcitrant (a.k.a. doesn't breakdown and release over time) form of carbon. If this were used to convert forestry waste (read this as forest fire fuel reduction), agricultural waste, woody construction debris, etc. into biochar you can sequester carbon for hundreds or thousands of years, while harvesting energy and heat from the process that can displace fossil fuels. That said you have to be extremely careful to make sure that the process you use is optimized for biochar production (carbonization/torrefaction), and not energy (such as gassification technology), otherwise you basically are just burning it, which does no one any good. I would love to see you do a video on biochar, not only looking at its carbon sequestration potential but also the soil amendment properties it has. Cheers!

[rits]

Greetings from an American in the Philippines. My idea about biomass use a useless waste product, rice husk that the rice mill is happy to give us, use it as flooring in our Piggery. Every few weeks change it out, compost it and use to improve what little good soil is here to grow fruit trees and vegetables. Win win all around and with the rice husk down in the pig pens, people are amazed; no bad odor at all.

[davidrowewtl]

YouTube suggested i should watch this. Clever thing.
Good tube.