Using trees, or biomass, has been suggested as a form of renewable energy, since the trees grow back. However, the drawbacks to biomass as an energy source could hurt our forests as much as they help.

The climate impact

Carbon pollution, like that created by cars, is the main contributor to climate change. 

In order to slow down climate change, we need energy sources that don’t add carbon to the air. Burning leftover branches and other wood from timber cutting could provide such energy. The trees would grow back and absorb the carbon they release when they are burned. In this way, biomass is thought to be “carbon-neutral.” However, there are some concerns with using trees as fuel:

• Accounting, or making sure the carbon released is all recaptured
• Availability, or making sure that energy needs don’t outstrip the supply of healthy forests

Accounting

Using trees as fuel is a renewable energy source, but only if an equal amount of carbon that is released from the burning of tress is then absorbed by new trees. But unless every ounce of carbon released is absorbed by a new tree, biomass is not carbon neutral and cannot be considered a renewable energy. 

Protecting healthy forests

Another concern with biomass is the effect it would have on the healthy forests of the Northeast. Even if it is carbon-neutral, cutting down forests can destroy ecosystems, threatening clean water and wildlife habitat. If biomass is going to be an energy source, it has to be collected in ways that don’t threaten healthy forests. This map, from The Wilderness Society research department, shows potential conflicts that existing biomass power plants could have.