“Green” Biomass Boom Leaves Trail of Dirty Air and Decimated Forests
By Jillian Du and Deborah Behles
This blog is part of a series focused on the inequitable, false promises of the energy transition.
Photo credit: Flickr/Creative Commons.
From Southampton, Virginia, to Cook County, Georgia, residents have been wearing masks before the coronavirus pandemic. They have been protecting themselves from another health threat for years: wood dust. There is so much wood dust from nearby pellet mills that residents hardly leisure outside and often return home to dust-covered cars and lawns.
These pellet mills are part of the supply chain for biomass energy. They clear-cut forests, process the wood into pellets, and ship them mostly to international markets like Europe to be burned for electricity. In many places, this process for power is considered “green.”
For folks that live near these pellet mills, it sure doesn’t feel “green.” Residents have reported “not being able to spend more than five minutes outside without coughing” and “unable to sleep at night” due to the constant noise from mill operations.
“Every day, several hundred thousand households breathe in dust-filled, toxic air; hundreds of acres of trees are cut down; and biomass power plants spew out more planet-warming emissions than if they were burning coal.”
It didn’t used to be this way. The construction of pellet mills surged when, in 2009, the European Union pledged to shift from fossil fuels to renewables, but included biomass in its list of “renewable” alternatives. In fact, since 2008, at least 15 “new generation” wood pellet mills have been constructed in the US’s southeast specifically to supply international demand. This means that every day, several hundred thousand households breathe in dust-filled, toxic air; hundreds of acres of trees are cut down; and biomass power plants spew out more planet-warming emissions than if they were burning coal.
How Trees Are Made Into Biomass Energy
The Heavy Toll of Burning Trees for Energy
A new policy brief from the Equity Fund, Biomass: The Heavy Toll of Burning Trees for Energy, explains why biomass – particularly woody biomass – is not a “green” solution and actually does more harm than good. Here’s why:
1. Local communities face disproportionate harms while others claim progress
The process to turn trees into pellets, then into energy releases a significant amount of air and water pollution. The associated health risks are not only alarming, but unavoidable for nearby neighborhoods – which, unsurprisingly, are predominantly made up with lower-income, Black households. Year-round exposure to wood dust pollution has been linked to asthma, respiratory issues, and increased risk of cancer. Add in the toxic cocktail of soot, carbon monoxide, and other hazardous emissions, plus the risk of fires and explosions and all-night noises, and the irreparable harm of biomass becomes pretty clear.
And yet, European power plants burning biomass can claim they have made steps to go greener – at least on paper. Studies have shown that using biomass energy does not actually reduce emissions in Europe, but outsources emissions and the burden of pollution to the US – specifically to frontline communities in the US’s southeast.
2. Biomass does not help address climate change, but makes it worse
Biomass production and usage often emits more greenhouse gas emissions than the fossil fuels they are intended to replace. Plus, even more carbon is released by logging, processing the logs into pellets, and then transporting them thousands of miles. Above that, logging trees for electricity destroys valuable carbon sinks – natural areas that absorb more carbon than it releases, such as forests and the ocean.
3. Biomass is just not a smart economic decision
“Without massive subsidies, the biomass industry simply could not compete with wind and solar.”
Renewable mandates that include “biomass” in Europe and the US direct billions of subsidies to the biomass industry each year. For example, a coal plant in the U.K. has received over $1 billion worth of annual subsidies to switch to woody biomass. In Virginia, a utility’s biomass electricity was still more than double the cost of energy efficiency measures and 50% more expensive than renewable energy. Without massive subsidies, the biomass industry simply could not compete with wind and solar.
Protecting Communities and Forests
Fortunately, communities are mobilizing against biomass expansion and seeing progress. In Robeson County, North Carolina, a coalition of community-based groups was able to block plans for a pellet mill sited in a predominantly Black and Native-American area and in a flood zone. In Cook County, Georgia, community advocates are closely monitoring air quality permits that would enable yet another pellet mill in a predominantly Black and Latino community.
But tackling each pellet mill and their harms one-by-one is not sustainable. As Dogwood Alliance puts it, “It should not be the responsibility of communities and watchdog organizations to do the jobs of their elected officials and state agencies.” Policymakers need to set up policies that better protect vulnerable communities and our forests, such as ending incentives and preferential treatment for biomass and strengthening air quality standards. Recent legislation in Massachusetts to remove woody biomass from the state’s definition of renewables showed immense promise, but then it was later weakened to only apply to new facilities.
Organized advocacy to interrogate what is considered “renewable energy” will continue to be critical. At the end of the day, burning trees for energy is just not compatible with goals for better climate, justice, and health.
For more information on the problems with waste incineration and alternative policy paths, check out the full policy brief.
Jillian Du is the research and engagement strategist at the Equity Fund. Deborah Behles is a policy consultant to the Equity Fund.
