Legislating that bioenergy produces no carbon pollution makes as little sense as legislating that climate change does not exist.
Representative Beyer (VA) to EPA: Treating biomass as carbon neutral allows Virginia's forests to be harvested for fuel
"I share the concern that Virginia will become known as a state that harvests forests to reduce its dependence on coal, rather than one that develops renewable technologies that clearly reduce emissions, such as solar and wind"
Letter from Rep. Connolly (VA) to EPA: Treating bioenergy as carbon neutral may undermine the Clean Power Plan
Treating biomass as carbon-neutral may have unintended consequences that could actually undermine and inhibit our ability to reduce carbon emissions.
Since this resolution was offered last year, Washington, DC has eliminated renewable energy subsidies for low efficiency biomass power, meaning that Dominion will not be able to benefit from this market.
Dominion Power and other big utilities want to replace coal with wood, threatening forests and the climate.
Lax regulations allowing contaminated wastes to be burned as biomass mean that communities need to protect themselves - they can’t count on air permits to minimize bioenergy pollution.
Dominion should conduct a study explaining the risk to their substantial biomass power investments if, and when, bioenergy CO2 is regulated
Investors With $100 Billion in Assets Complain to SEC of Misleading and Incomplete Statements About Climate Benefits, Carbon Neutrality, and Risk of Regulatory Action.
It’s a measure of how pervasive the “biomass benefits climate” myth has become that even the well-respected Climate Progress blog, edited by the great Joe Romm, seems to have bought into the propaganda.