What use is it? That would be the obvious one, when better alternatives not requiring ludicrously high subsidies are readily available.
– – –
A new report from climate change think tank Ember reveals the cost of burning wood for power, with energy billpayers committed to subsidies of more than £13 billion, including £10bn at Drax power station alone.
In addition to the direct subsidy, we estimate biomass generators are receiving carbon tax breaks of £333 million a year.
The UK has now left the EU, and there’s an opportunity to reassess carbon pricing – including in the design of the UK emissions trading system.
In this research, we demonstrate why the UK should abandon the carbon tax break afforded to large power stations burning biomass (mostly wood in the form of pellets or chips).
Unlike other large thermal generators, biomass power plants do not pay for their carbon emissions.
This is because biomass is assumed to be inherently carbon neutral under the EU Emissions Trading System and the UK Carbon Price Support.
That assumption, however, is not supported by the weight of recent science, or by data provided by power plant operators themselves.
As other countries consider biomass as a bridge out of coal, the UK can send an international signal that biomass must no longer be assumed to be carbon neutral.
Continued here.
– – –
Ember report: The Burning Question.
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
June 16, 2020 at 01:33PM
Iowa Climate Science Education 