In the heart of Europe, a silent battle is raging between the continent’s ambitious renewable energy goals and its ancient forests. A recent study published in ‘Global Change Biology Bioenergy’ sheds light on a contentious issue: the European Union’s forest biomass policy, which is inadvertently undermining its own climate mitigation efforts. The research, led by Mary S. Booth of the Partnership for Policy Integrity in Pelham, Massachusetts, reveals a stark reality: the EU’s push for biomass energy is weakening its forest carbon sink, with some member states losing their net forest sink entirely.
The EU’s Renewable Energy Directive has been a driving force behind the surge in biomass use, with wood burning for heat and electricity constituting the largest source of renewable energy in the EU. However, the policy’s sustainability criteria, which consider forest biomass to have zero carbon emissions, are at odds with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) guidelines. This discrepancy has led to a situation where increased biomass use is shrinking the forest carbon sink, even when sustainability criteria are met.
“The EU’s biomass policy is a classic example of a well-intentioned policy gone awry,” Booth explains. “By treating forest biomass as a carbon-neutral energy source, the EU is inadvertently incentivizing the burning of wood, which releases carbon stored in forests and weakens the continent’s ability to absorb CO2 from the atmosphere.”
The commercial implications for the energy sector are significant. The EU’s renewable energy incentives have led to an 1100% increase in biomass use for electricity generation since 1990. However, residential heating, which is ungoverned by any criteria, still represents the largest use of wood for energy in the EU. This has created a lucrative market for biomass, with billions of euros in subsidies driving the industry. But as the study highlights, this market is built on shaky environmental ground.
The future of the EU’s biomass policy is uncertain, but the study’s findings suggest that a rethink is necessary. “We need to reduce pressure on forests by disqualifying forest biomass from counting toward renewable energy targets,” Booth argues. “We should also reduce subsidies for wood-burning and adopt forest management policies that prioritize carbon sequestration and biodiversity.”
The study’s findings could shape future developments in the field by prompting a reassessment of biomass as a renewable energy source. If the EU and other governments heed the call to realign their biomass policies with international emissions reporting, it could lead to a significant shift in the energy sector. This could involve a reduction in biomass harvesting and a reallocation of subsidies to other renewable energy sources like solar, wind, and geothermal.
For the energy sector, this could mean a shift away from biomass and towards other renewable energy sources. It could also mean a greater focus on carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies, which could help mitigate the carbon emissions from biomass burning. However, as the study notes, the EU’s reliance on bioenergy with CCS (BECCS) to meet climate targets is misguided, as it does not remove net CO2 from the atmosphere.
The study’s findings are a wake-up call for the EU and other governments promoting biomass as a renewable energy source. As Booth puts it, “It’s time to face the facts: burning forest biomass is not a carbon-neutral solution. It’s time to rethink our approach to biomass and prioritize the health of our forests and our climate.” The research published in ‘GCB Bioenergy’ (Global Change Biology Bioenergy) is a significant step towards this rethinking, and its implications for the energy sector are profound.