The use of biomass for carbon removal is an understandably fraught topic.
Today Frontier published a set of high-level sustainable biomass sourcing principles that will help us navigate the complicated landscape of biomass-based CDR projects: frontierclimate.com/assets/bioma...
If we are not careful, there is a real possibility to end up in a world where we replicate the mistakes of corn ethanol, driving indirect land use change and deforestation. There is a risk that projects could drive deforestation that ends up moving carbon from one stable store to another.
At the same time, there are real wastes and residues that should be used. While the sustainable biomass potential is probably only in the range of a few GtCO2/yr (vs the irrational exuberance for BECCS in some IAMs), that can get us a long way toward meeting the CDR needed in our net-zero goals.
The sustainable biomass sourcing principles are:
1) Endorse biomass for carbon removal where there is no other, stronger near-term use case from a climate, ecosystem, or human impact perspective.
2) Avoid substituting above ground durable carbon stocks for geologic storage.
3) Ensure that sourcing biomass from a managed system does not reduce the stock of carbon in that system over time.
4) Utilize existing waste and residues over purpose grown biomass.
5) Use feedstocks with sustainable sourcing certification from highly regulated jurisdictions while avoiding sourcing from primary forests or supporting forest conversion.
6) Undertake a comprehensive accounting of project lifecycle emissions (including indirect effects).
100%. Any time you incentivize people to go into the woods with chainsaws you're risking some really bad stuff. The whole European biomass energy industry is basically a mutant version of that.
TBH I'd greatly prefer these principles to be EPA or USFS rules or something similar
