{"id":2587,"date":"2010-10-18T07:44:34","date_gmt":"2010-10-18T11:44:34","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/2010\/10\/biomass-a-sub-prime-carbon-mortgage.html"},"modified":"2010-10-18T07:44:34","modified_gmt":"2010-10-18T11:44:34","slug":"biomass-a-sub-prime-carbon-mortgage","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/2010\/10\/biomass-a-sub-prime-carbon-mortgage.html","title":{"rendered":"Biomass: “a sub-prime carbon mortgage”"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n<\/a>
\nBirdLife International writes about
\n
\nBioenergy \u2013 a carbon accounting time bomb<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\nThe first study, carried out by Joanneum Research, identifies a major
\nflaw in the way carbon savings from forest-derived biomass are calculated
\nin EU law as well as under UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol mechanisms. It
\nconcludes that harvesting trees for energy creates a \u2018carbon debt\u2019:
\nthe carbon contained in the trees is emitted upfront while trees grow
\nback over many years. The true climate impact of so-called woody biomass
\nin the short to medium term can, as a result, be worse than the fossil
\nfuels it is designed to replace.<\/p>\n

\n\u201cThe EU is taking out a sub-prime carbon mortgage that it may never be
\nable to pay back. Biomass policy needs to be fixed before this regulatory
\nfailure leads to an ecological crisis that no bail out will ever fix\u201d,
\ncommented Ariel Brunner, Head of EU Policy at BirdLife International.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Hm, this seems to contradict VLCIA’s assertion that
\nthe document they gave me proves their proposed wood
\nincinerator would be carbon neutral.<\/a>
\nThat document openly admits that biomass produces more CO2<\/sub> than
\ncoal, and calls for national or regional studies, which didn’t exist.
\nNonetheless,
\n
\nwhen I pointed that out (again) to VLCIA Executive Director
\nBrad Lofton,<\/a>
\nhe asserted that
\n
\n“Carbon is absolutely not an issue with our plant.”<\/a>
\nHm, well, now there is a study, and it shows that burning woody
\nbiomass is not carbon neutral.<\/p>\n

\nAnd this excess production of CO2<\/sub> isn’t limited to
\n
\nburning whole trees.<\/a>
\nLooking at the actual
\n
\nstudy<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\nWhen residues are left on the forest floor, they gradually decompose. A
\ngreat deal of the carbon contained in their biomass is released over time
\ninto the atmosphere and a small fraction of the carbon is transformed
\ninto humus and soil carbon. When the residues are burnt as bioenergy,
\nthe carbon that would have been oxidized over a longer time and carbon
\nthat would have been stored in the soil is released immediately to the
\natmosphere. This produces a short term decrease of the dead wood and
\nlitter pools that is later translated into a decrease of soil carbon.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

So it doesn’t really matter that VLCIA asserts that their proposed
\nplant will never burn whole trees.
\nThe tops and limbs they want to burn produce the same problem.<\/p>\n

\nThe study also includes comparisons with CO2<\/sub> saved by
\nbiomass offsetting coal burning.
\nThe catch for the proposed biomass incinerator in Lowndes County
\nis that it’s not offsetting anything: it’s in addition to the
\ncoal burned at Plant Scherer.
\nWe could offset some coal through efficiency and conservation,
\nplus solar power.
\nNone of those things produce any emissions.<\/p>\n

\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

BirdLife International writes about Bioenergy \u2013 a carbon accounting time bomb: The first study, carried out by Joanneum Research, identifies a major flaw in the way carbon savings from forest-derived biomass are calculated in EU law as well as under UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol mechanisms. It concludes that harvesting trees for energy creates a \u2018carbon […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[97,120,141,216,16,740,2,21,32,23,289,24,178],"tags":[5263,8738,5264,1747,4921,4129,8745,5260,8701,5259,5261,7,5262,2599,155,6,180,8749,4123],"class_list":["post-2587","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-activism","category-biomass","category-co2","category-coal","category-environment","category-forestry","category-government","category-planning","category-pollution","category-renewable-energy","category-science","category-solar","category-vlcia","tag-ariel-brunner","tag-biomass","tag-birdlife-international","tag-brad-lofton","tag-carbon-debt","tag-carbon-dioxide","tag-co2","tag-forest-derived-biomass","tag-georgia","tag-joanneum-research","tag-litter","tag-lowndes-county","tag-roots","tag-soil","tag-trees","tag-valdosta","tag-valdosta-lowndes-county-industrial-authority","tag-vlcia","tag-wiregrass-power-llc"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2587","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2587"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2587\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2587"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2587"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2587"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}