BAKU, Azerbaijan – Parties to negotiations risk further entrenching big biomass as a highly-polluting energy source worldwide if the carbon market mechanism in Article 6 of the Paris Agreement is operationalized, climate experts warned at a press conference at COP29 today.
A new global threat map from the Biomass Action Network released this week shows that the woody biomass industry is expected to triple its supply by 2030 – especially if carbon markets are operationalized at COP29.
If it goes forward, this massive biomass expansion will have wide-ranging, disastrous impacts on both the climate and communities. These impacts include forest degradation around the world and the destruction of primary and old growth forests in North America, Asia, and Europe; environmental racism and adverse health effects on people living close to pellet plants in the southeast United States; and land grabs of Indigenous territories in the Global South.
The Biomass Action Network threat map adds to the growing body of evidence proving that burning woody biomass at utility scale – often in the form of wood pellets or chips – is not sustainable and will further exacerbate the climate crisis. Burning biomass for energy generates significant pollution at the smokestack, and a major expansion would derail global commitments to a 1.5 degree pathway. And proposals to offset biomass emissions with carbon capture technology as BECCS (Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage) are unproven, expensive and unlikely to scale effectively.
Additionally, in many countries the industry is accessing public subsidies meant for renewable energy. Because of this, there’s a significant risk that by subsidizing biomass, critical investments will be diverted away from cleaner and cheaper energy solutions like wind and solar power.
“The evidence is clear: unless we act now to reverse the massive expansion of big biomass in Canada, and around the world, we risk locking ourselves into another carbon-emitting fuel that brings forest destruction and human rights abuses with it,” said Tegan Hansen, Senior Forest Campaigner at Stand.Earth. “We know that real energy solutions that center people and nature are readily available. Our planet simply cannot afford dangerous distractions like big biomass – we can’t burn our way to a climate-safe future.”
“The focus on unproven negative emissions at COP negotiations is extremely concerning and overlooks the wider environmental damage to forests across the world from logging trees to be burnt in biomass plants. Scaling up this model risks destroying swathes of precious natural habitat and releasing carbon that should be locked away for decades or even centuries in forests,” said Ruairi Brogan, Senior Policy Officer at RSPB. “ In the U.K., this is an expensive distraction from the fact the country is not even on track to reduce emissions in line with its own targets. Rushing into untested high-tech solutions like BECCS poses a serious threat to climate and nature.”
“NRDC’s recent study in the United Kingdom demonstrates that bioenergy with carbon capture and storage will not be carbon negative, cannot offset the carbon emissions of other sectors, and will not help the U.K. achieve net zero. Instead, our results show that BECCS using forest biomass would actually slow the U.K.’s progress to net zero,” said Amanda Maxwell, Global Managing Director at NRDC. “When proper carbon accounting is employed, the cumulative emissions from BECCS alone could surpass the U.K.’s total emissions from all other sources by the late 2040s. The best thing for the climate and for biodiversity is to leave forests standing and biomass energy – even with BECCs – does the opposite.”
With only a few days of negotiations remaining, Parties at COP29 must pause operationalizing Article 6 until a serious risk assessment of the land use, biodiversity, and human rights impacts of removals can be conducted. They must also focus on ending nature-harming subsidies.
More information:
- Currently 55% of all renewable energy worldwide is bioenergy, and burning woody biomass for centralized energy generation is the predominant form of bioenergy.
- Both biomass energy and BECCS are being actively promoted as potential recipients of carbon market funding via Article 6 despite the emissive impacts of biomass burning and the failure of CCS projects to date.
- Biomass energy generates significant carbon pollution. Because wood is less efficient than coal, it emits as much or more CO2 per unit of electricity. Research validating this finding has been carried out by the Joint Research Council to the EU and the Partnership for Policy Integrity.
###
Media contacts:
Liz McDowell, Senior Campaigns Director, Stand.earth – liz@stand.earth
Kathryn Semogas, Communications Specialist, Stand.earth – kathryn.semogas@stand.earth
Peg Putt, Coordinator of EPN’s Biomass Action Network – peg.putt@gmail.com
