Biomass is a fuel that has been a key component of human evolution for millennia, and is considered by some parties to be ‘integral’ to a net zero future. It is a renewable fuel source. Biomass exists because plants were able to extract carbon from the atmosphere and fix it into their cells in the form of cellulose and lignin. However, it is shadowed by controversy. As demand for the biomass market grows, so do the worries voiced over subsidies and land management, amongst other issues of concern from highly vocal environmental and regulatory groups.

Bioenergy, produced by combustion biomass, is already a huge player in the global energy transition. It accounts for 55% of renewable energy worldwide and more than 6% of the global energy supply, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).

Power production and transport fuels are among the primary end markets, where bioenergy is not only key to meeting rising demand, but also to supporting a greener supply chain, such as for production of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF).

Overall, bioenergy’s contribution to final energy demand across all sectors is five times higher than wind and solar PV combined, according to the IEA.

But market growth, with ‘well-defined’ environmental rules and reporting, needs to accelerate. The 3% growth rate between 2010–2022 must nearly triple to 8% per year up to 2030 for bioenergy deployment to get on track with the IEA’s Net Zero Emissions (NZE) by 2050 Scenario.

Political support for biomass is strong in some quarters – but by no means universal. ‘Extraordinary’ is how Graham Stuart, the Minister of State for Energy Security and Net Zero in the UK’s previous Conservative government described the market’s future in the country’s eagerly anticipated Biomass Strategy last year. Nevertheless, the future is unclear under the current Labour government and Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero Ed Milliband.

The biomass sector employs 765,000 people worldwide, half of whom are in Europe, making it the world’s fifth largest employer in renewable energy, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA).

Clearly, biomass has significant potential. But no market is perfect and challenges must be addressed.

Fig 1: Biomass material can be processed in many ways  
Source: Bioenergy resources, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 

What’s bad about biomass?   
Subsidies are a major sore point amongst environmentalists. In the EU, biomass received the joint second-highest subsidy (with wind) at €15bn each amongst EU member states in 2022, (solar took the top spot with €25bn), according to the European Commission. In the UK, the National Audit Office (NAO) reported that £22bn of government subsidies have been provided to the biomass industry so far. As the largest biomass electricity generator by some distance, 36% of the Renewables Obligation funding (£14bn) went to Drax.

However, there are detractors. ‘A carbon accounting loophole created before the Kyoto Protocol in the 1990s has crept into energy policy over the years, enabling energy companies to say biomass is zero carbon because they don’t have to account for the emissions,’ explains Almuth Ernsting, Co-Founder of advocacy group Biofuelwatch. ‘Subsidies should not be spent on burning biomass wood whatsoever, and forest wood is the top priority.’

The IEA claims that burning biomass (wood) creates more CO₂ than burning fossil fuels. And four British power plants now burn the equivalent of 27 million trees in wood pellets every year, almost all of which are imported. Plus, environmental reporting doesn’t always take the fuel footprint of importing large quantities of wood that has travelled – by road and then shipped across the Atlantic from the US and Canada into the UK, or any destinations – into consideration. This all fans the momentum against subsidies.

Increased stringency worldwide is also needed for conversion of thermal power plants from coal to biomass. This is a route many governments and electricity suppliers are exploring, as fossil fuels and biomass can utilise similar infrastructure. This is especially attractive when the estimated global net present value of stranded assets in coal power generation up to 2050 could reach $2.3tn, according to a study led by researchers at the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change.

However, redirecting subsidies or ‘conversion money’ into scaling-up infrastructure for clean, non-emissive renewable energy options, such as wind and solar power generation, is a popular option amongst environmentalists. The IEA estimates that $4.5tn/y is needed by the early 2030s to accelerate deployment across all clean energy technologies and infrastructure – nearly triple the $1.tn invested in 2023.

‘It’s hard to see how large-scale biomass can exist without significant damage to the climate. The pieces don't fit.’ – Almuth Ernsting, Co-Founder of advocacy group Biofuelwatch

Others are also calling for greater accountability of sustainability regulations worldwide.

Among them is the UK’s NAO. ‘If biomass is going to play a key role in the transition to net zero, the [UK] government needs to be confident that the industry is meeting high sustainability standards. However, government has been unable to demonstrate its current assurances are adequate to provide confidence in this regard,’ said Gareth Davies, Head of the NAO. ‘Government must review the assurance arrangements for these schemes, including ensuring that it has provided adequate resources to give it assurance over the billions of pounds involved.’

Power of trees   
Worries over land use are also escalating. Deforestation, biodiversity damage and the establishment and opaque monitoring of forestry regulations are some of the main pressure points highlighted by environmentalists.

For example, 41 environmental organisations from the Western Balkans and across Europe called on KfW, a German state-owned development bank, in July to stop financing wood biomass energy in Serbia to avoid forest degradation risks.

Data also recently showed that Germany’s forest has been a net source of CO₂ emissions since 2017, when ‘everyone thought it was an important carbon sink’, says Biofuelwatch’s Ernsting. ‘The combination of more extreme droughts and intensified logging is devastating Germany’s forest, yet the demands for biomass in the country could double in coming years.’

He also warns of ‘large scale rainforest clearance’ in parts of south-east Asia and Indonesia. The latter is already home to the world’s second highest rate of deforestation, according to the World Population Review (WPR).

Forecasting re-growth rates for 50-year-old trees that have been cut down is not a linear process, according to Biofuelwatch. One can’t assume that a 50-year-old cut tree will return to its current state in 50 years, due to the unpredictability of accelerated climate change. Plus, we have lost decades of environmental potential from the downed tree and the ‘waiting game’ to recover it. According to Oxfam, the number of climate-related disasters has been tripling in the last 30 years and there simply isn’t time for a ‘wait and see’ approach to forest recovery. The accuracy of environmental reporting for each tree must improve exponentially worldwide, the NGO suggests.

‘There is a true, almost tragic, lack of understanding about the wood resource. The portion of biomass from virgin harvest is not very large for the simple reason that it runs counter to the economic realities of the timber industry.’ – William Perritt, Senior Editor, Forest Products, Fastmarkets

What’s next?   
Interest in carbon sequestration linked to biomass is building, says William Perritt, Senior Editor of Forest Products at Fastmarkets. Drax’s recently announced potential plans to spend up to $12.5bn up to 2034 building wood pellet-fuelled power plants in the US, equipped with carbon capture systems. This speaks volumes, as do other mega projects in the pipeline worldwide.

It remains to be seen if the new UK Labour government will approve more subsidies for Drax and Czech energy company EPH, which operates a biomass power station in Lynemouth. There is also debate about the viability of using biomass to generate renewable energy in Europe. The Netherlands has ruled against providing future subsidies for biomass plants, which Ernsting calls a ‘positive blueprint for other European countries’. Meanwhile, Germany has proposed two coal-to-biomass conversions and several new dedicated biomass plants.

Biomass has the potential to make net zero a reality, but the guesswork and ‘murky’ reporting must be tackled with urgency on a global scale.

• Further reading: ‘National Audit Office questions biomass industry sustainability standards’. Over the past two decades, the UK government has provided more than £20bn of support to businesses using biomass in the power and heat sectors – a key part of its net zero ambitions. However, the government ‘cannot demonstrate’ that biomass fuel is sustainably sourced, and its assurance schemes are not good enough, according to a new report from the National Audit Office that raises questions about future subsidies and climate goals.
• Find out how India is boosting its biomass sector by strengthening supply chains.