What’s the problem with bioenergy?

Burning wood for energy on an industrial-scale damages forests and the climate.  

Yet for more than a decade it has been embraced across the European Union as a means of fighting climate change. 

Since 2009, the EU’s Renewable Energy Directive (RED) has allowed EU Member States to reward energy companies burning wood, and to count the resulting energy towards their renewable energy targets.

Billions of Euros of taxpayer funded government support has driven companies to convert coal power stations to woody biomass burning ones and build thousands of new installations across the continent. Yet like their predecessors, these plants remain ‘carbon bombs’.

Today, the energy from wood burning still represents more than 40 per cent of the EU’s “renewable” energy production. 

The RED’s laudable aim of reducing fossil fuels, ignored the real-world consequences of burning millions more tonnes of wood. It only takes days to clear-cut and burn a forest, but centuries to regrow, and because there are no upper limits to the subsidies, the policy has increased the pressure to log forests in Europe and beyond. Wood pellets imports to Europe come from across the globe, in particular North America and previously, Russia. This undermines forests’ ability to capture carbon dioxide and thereby the EU’s own climate and biodiversity goals. Increased wood burning also adds harmful particles to the air we breathe. 

This policy has been disastrous for the climate, forests and people’s health and is the opposite of the just, low-carbon energy transition. These billions of Euros would be much better used helping citizens to insulate their homes, and warm them with less polluting solutions. Public money would be best deployed supporting foresters to better manage forests, and to turn away from the clear-cut-plantation model. This would make forests more resilient to the threats of the climate crisis.

Fern’s work on bioenergy

What do Fern and our partners want? 

To achieve socially and environmentally friendly EU climate and energy policies, the EU must stop subsidising the burning of forest biomass and exclude bioenergy from counting towards renewable energy targets. 

What are we doing? 

Fern is helping coordinate individuals and organisations from around the world that are campaigning to reduce reliance on forest biomass for energy. Our strategy is simple: support NGOs and experts to battle corporate lobbyists and remove the market and government incentives for burning biomass, so as to reduce the overall amount of wood burned for energy to pre-2009 levels.

Frequently asked questions

What is Bioenergy?

Bioenergy is the combination of the terms biomass and energy.

Bioenergy is gas, electricity or heat that comes from renewable sources, such as plant matter or animal waste.

This is known as biomass.

Biomass contains energy stored from the sun. This energy is absorbed during the photosynthesis process.  

When biomass is burned, its chemical energy is released as heat.

Biomass is often burned on a local scale to heat homes and to provide heat for cooking (mainly in tropical countries), and as such is an important part of many peoples’ livelihoods. 

However, bioenergy is more often spoken about in terms of the large-scale and intensive harvesting and burning of wood from forests in the United States, Canada, and Europe. Today, most biomass which is burnt for energy comes from trees, and more worryingly, from forests. 

Find out more here

What is BioEnergy Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS)?

The climate emergency is on the verge of becoming a climate crisis. Years of inaction have meant that climate scientists are no longer just discussing the need to reduce emissions, they are also talking about having to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Sometimes known as negative emissions, carbon dioxide removals are now at the centre of the climate conversation.

Governments are responding by looking for technological fixes, and one of the most often discussed is Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS). But the belief that BECCS would remove emissions is based on the faulty assumption that bioenergy is carbon neutral. This is not the case. BECCS would also have massive social, environmental and economic costs. It offers the false promise of a get-out clause and must not be allowed to distract from the urgent need to stop burning fossil fuels and to protect and restore forests, soils and other ecosystems. 

Read more about BECCS

What are the alternatives to bioenergy and BECCS?

The answers are surprisingly simple.

Instead of burning forests for energy, we can reduce the amounts of energy we use and invest in and subsidise local, real renewable energy technologies such as wind and solar.

The best way to achieve negative emissions is to protect and restore natural forests. This also benefits biodiversity, the climate and people. Unlike BECCS, the climate benefits of restoring natural forests are tried and tested. Forests already store large quantities of carbon and they have been sequestering carbon for hundreds of millions of years. If protected and managed with the full inclusion of the people that live in and depend upon them, they can help us achieve the targets of Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals. But first we must reject a heavy reliance on negative emissions and rapidly reduce emissions from fossil fuels to zero, stop destroying ecosystems, and reduce the overconsumption of natural resources. 

Read more about the alternatives to bioenergy and BECCS

Who’s involved?

In Europe we’re working with our partners the Finnish Association for Nature Conservation, the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation, Estonian Fund for Nature, and in the United States, with Dogwood Alliance and Partnership for Policy Integrity.

What are the next steps?

Although the autumn 2023 RED review did not solve the policy’s fundamental problems, it tightened the sustainability criteria applicable to biomass installations. Member States also gained the power to implement this policy in a more climate-friendly way. We strongly encourage them to use this opportunity to transpose this policy so that it protects forests, the climate, public health and biodiversity. They have until June 2025 to do this, and we have published a guide to explain how.

Does burning trees for energy harm the environment?

These fact sheets explain how bioenergy reduces biodiversity.

Why bioenergy is not a solution 

How bioenergy harms biodiversity

NGO position paper

"To be compatible with the European Green Deal ambitions, the RED must stop allowing public subsidies for forest biomass, stop allowing Member States to count it towards renewable energy targets, and phase out crop-based biofuels."

Read more

Talk to us

Martin Pigeon

Martin Pigeon

Forest and Climate Campaigner

You are currently offline. Some pages or content may fail to load.