skip to main navigation
 

Dr. Morris: Biomass energy is “positively carbon-neutral”

Dr. Greg Morris of the Green Power Institute and Future Resources Associates outlines why biomass energy is carbon-neutral and won’t cause deforestation in an editorial in the San Francisco Chronicle. He states:

Failing to consider forest residue as a renewable, clean-energy source would virtually kill a potentially valuable tool for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It would also ignore overwhelming scientific evidence that shows biomass energy can return significant carbon-sequestration benefits.

Claims that biomass energy is anything but carbon-neutral ignore the fact that not all carbon is created equal, at least in terms of the global carbon cycle. When fossil fuels are burned to produce energy, there is a net increase in carbon released to the atmosphere, because it takes carbon that was stored safely underground and adds it to the atmosphere. That kind of carbon is called fossil carbon.

Biomass energy, however, deals with biogenic carbon – carbon that is already part of the atmospheric system. There’s no carbon added because the carbon in question is already part of the global-carbon cycle. It’s like the difference between good cholesterol and bad cholesterol. You want to increase your good cholesterol and lower your bad. Biogenic carbon is OK, but you want to lower the amount of fossil carbon being released into the air.

Tags:

Leave a Reply

LATEST NEWS

  • Comments on an USDA Forest Service report: Private Forests, Public Benefits. More

  • Senators Lincoln and Chambliss introduced legislation to affirm that if pesticides are applied according to EPA guidelines no additional permit is needed. More

  • NAFO submits comments to EPA underscoring the traditional use of biomass for energy. More

See All

LEGISLATIVE ACTION CENTER

Take action to conserve private forests.

More

FORESTRY JOURNAL

  • A video presentation exploring how using North American wood products helps mitigate climate change. More

  • Rep. Emerson makes the case that the EPA's action to over-regulate biomass energy will cost jobs and stifle a domestic, renewable, and sustainable energy supply. More

  • Over 100 members of Congress tell EPA Administrator Jackson that the proposed Boiler MACT rule will cost thousands of jobs and not impact human health or the environment. More

See All
 
back on top