Pirate's Cove

You know what biomass is, right? In essence, it is a fancy way of saying “incinerating trees and garbage.” Yes, it does encompass a few more types of organic matter, but the predominant sources are wood and garbage. And, now it is having some difficulties

An energy technology that has long been viewed as a clean and climate-friendly alternative to fossil fuels is facing tough new regulatory hurdles that could ultimately hamper its ability to compete with renewable power sources like wind and solar.

So, they need more handouts, er, government tax incentives and investment.

But a long-simmering debate in Massachusetts questioning the environmental benefits of biomass has culminated in new rules that will limit what sorts of projects will qualify for renewable energy incentives there. If other states — or even Congress, which is writing energy legislation of its own — follow suit, it could have wide implications for biomass developers, as well as for states trying to meet renewable energy production targets.

They are writing new regulations regarding how climate friendly the plants can be. Say, if you are burning lots of wood, and pushing for more and more of these plants, wouldn’t that be pushing human existence back to before the 19th Century?

Biomass power — a $1 billion industry in the United States, according to the Biomass Power Association, a trade group based in Maine — has long been considered both renewable and carbon-neutral on its most basic level. Trees and plants can be replanted, its proponents point out, and while they emit carbon dioxide when burned, they absorb it while alive, resulting in no net gains in greenhouse gases.

Helpful hint for you alarmists: it takes quite a bit longer to grow a tree than burn a tree. And, of course, the wackos are not particularly happy about this

But many environmental groups say that the benefits of biomass power — and all forms of energy derived from organic sources, including biofuels — are realized only in carefully controlled circumstances. The cycle of carbon emission and absorption also unfolds over long periods of time that need to be carefully monitored.

“Whether you call it biomass or simply chopping down trees, it’s still deforestation,” said Franz A. Matzner, climate legislative director for the Natural Resources Defense Council in Washington, which supports the sensible use of biomass power. “Burning trees for energy is an age-old practice that we know can cause some pretty bad effects if we don’t get our heads around doing it the right way.”

See? Alarmists like to talk a good game about “alternative energy sources,” but, when push comes to shove, they would prefer we go back to before the discovery of fire.