Justin Catanoso is no stranger to wood pellet plants, as he lives near four of them in the U.S. state of North Carolina, where biomass giant Enviva has several facilities. While that company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy this year, it remains the single largest producer of wood pellets globally. This firm is one of […]
I agree with you, but it’s worth mentioning that a lot of goverments (such as the UK) are classing burning wood pellets as 0 carbon energy. The argument being that burning wood releases recently absorbed carbon (from the last 20 years or so) so doesn’t increase overall levels of carbon in the same way as coal.
I kinda see the argument, but it does sound like a dangerous path towards “eco-accounting” like we’ve seen with offsetting, where calculations for carbon release are out of wack with the scientific reality.
Edit: I get that the writer is conflating two seperate terms btw, but think there’s a version of this argument that makes sense.