Biomass
Overview
When talked about as a part of the solution to Global Warming, Biomass refers to the conversion of organic material into fuel, which is known as biofuel. The material used in biomass ranges from plants and trees to organic waste from factories or municipal dumps. Biomass is known as a renewable fuel because it takes energy from easily renewable sources, such as plants and waste, though it does emit carbon into the atmosphere [1]. Fossil fuels are limited and destructive to the balance of carbon in the atmosphere because of their carbon cycle – the time it takes for new coal or oil to develop and ‘ingest’ the carbon that it emits when used as a fuel. The carbon cycle of this kind of energy takes incredibly long to complete – hence fossil – and therefore cannot be considered biomass.
In 2005, research from the Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, recently noted as a leader in the field of biomass[2] concluded that approximately 10 percent of total energy used comes from biomass, “making biomass by far the most important renewable energy source used to date” (CITATION → Faaij). Because of its technological readiness, can become a viable and effective way to combat global warming, especially in the next few years. It does, however, come with certain obstacles.
Technology
What about the technical process of biomass, at least in theory, makes it such an attractive solution? The process of Biomass essentially mimics the natural process of carbon cycles, and, although it emits greenhouse gases, can create carbon neutral fuels if paired with forestation and protection of biodiversity (see: find correct Paragraph). When plants are alive, they consume carbon through photosynthesis, only to die and eventually release the carbon back into the atmosphere. This delicate balance is a symbiotic relationship – plants and trees need carbon to survive and the earth’s eco-system needs to maintain a certain level of carbon in order to function. Yet when humans began processing huge amounts of fossil fuels, such as coal or oil, it upset the balance of carbon in the atmosphere. In other words, the more biomass we create, the more unbalanced and non-renewable energy sources can be replaced with renewable ones. Waste biomass, on the other hand, goes through the same process as plants, trees, and crops, though it relies on a different justification. Public and industrial waste can give off dangerous methane regardless of whether or not it is processed (CITATION NEEDED), so by taking advantage of the inevitable carbon emissions that waste creates, biomass can reduce the overall carbon in the atmosphere.
More specifically, the biomass process consists of collection of the organic/ waste material, the conversion of that matter to liquid known as feedstock, and the subsequent conversion of feedstock into biofuel. There are many technologies to convert feedstock into biofuels; they are usually categorized into thermochemical, biochemical, and chemical processes. Thermochemical strategies use heat to break down the feedstock, biochemical strategies use enzymes and bacteria, while chemical strategies use chemical reactions. Specific processes are usually chosen according to the matter the feedstock is comprised of (CITATION → epa). See the chart above for a more detailed summary of biomass techniques.
Environmental Implications
It is difficult to assess the environmental impact of biomass on a regional or national level because of the unique complexity of each individual biomass facility. Every unit has different ecosystems, whether agricultural, natural, or industrial, to draw resources from. As a result, the overall carbon output is a large part due to how well the biofuel material used from ecosystems is replenished so that that it can neutralize the carbon emitted by biomasses (CITATION- b + a 151). So what can be said with confidence about the environmental effectiveness of biofuel? There is more consensus about the need for biofuel in the transportation sector, mainly because other renewable energies lack the technological efficiency needed to power transport. Biofuel does emit considerably less carbon than fossil fuel (CITATION NEEDED), and can be implemented on a wider scale fairly easily.
Biomass can also play an important role in two related fields, sequestration of CO2 and renewable hydrogen power. Sequestration (hyperlink) is the capture of carbon that arises after fuel has been created so that it doesn’t enter the atmosphere. If done in conjuction with biomass, sequestration could potentially solve one of its major obstacles – biomass could then be both renewable and close to carbon neutral. In fact, it is thought that combining biomass and sequestration can produce overall negative carbon emissions (CITATION- fulltext). If combined with hydrogen power, another important piece of the puzzle in solving global warming (CITATION- P + ), sequestration from biomass can become a truly powerful force in solving this crisis. Renewable hydrogen power can be extracted through the biomass process, and since carbon is simply extracted from hydrogen (CITATION- fulltext), creating hydrogen power using sequestration strategies can truly find an environmentally effective way to utilize biomass. (CITATION, below P + S) warming.
Socio-cultural and Geographic Implications
As mentioned above, the effectiveness of biomass largely depends on its geographical placement. Since biomass on its own does produce carbon emissions, there needs to be a balance of agricultural protection (keeping crop-land, forests, other eco-systems diverse and lush) and protection against deforestation (since wood is such an excellent source of biomass). FIND SPECIFIC EXAMPLE In Middlebury, Vermont, for example, the local college is constructing a biomass plant with their surrounding eco-system in mind. At the same time that the plant is being constructed, they have decided to focus on “sustainable forestry methods,” (CITATION- middlebury website), to combat the inevitable carbon emissions that the plant will produce (CITATION- midd biomass assessment). If planned with the nearby ecosystems in mind, biomass plants can even have a positive impact on biodiversity through initiatives such as reforestation (CITATION: fulltext).
Comprehensive plans for biomass based on specific communities and regions can also have economic benefits for farmers. In the European Union, farmers seem to be quite willing to participate, whether on a communal or continental level. However, it is up to the specific regions and communities to ensure that the crops and plants harvested by farmers, which will likely be specifically for biomass, are guaranteed to be sold or subsidized. Farmers would also need detailed instruction on how to most efficiently farm for their region, since biomass is such new territory. Generally, farmers need to be given the opportunity to succeed in order for biomass to grow on any geographical scale (A + B, 354). This kind of approach has happened particularly well in Austria, where a concept called “systematic management” has been made the implementation of biomass for heating homes a success. Systematic management is a complex system that takes into account social structures of an area in order to figure out the best way to introduce new technology. Austria has used this system to introduce more than 600 biomass plants in the last 20 years. (A + B, 307). Although comprehensive approaches such as this are difficult to achieve, Austria has shown that it is by no means impossible.
Yet economic opportunity is not the only social necessity in the implementation of biofuel. There also needs to be a balance between food production and crops for biomass. An example of an unbalanced surge in biomass crop was the food crisis in 2007. Across the globe, farmers were taken advantage of the new and expanding biomass market, selling crops like corn and sugarcane usually put on the food market to the renewable energy sector. Because there was little regulation, and even in some cases subsidies for selling biomass-intended crops, food prices shot up (CITATION, food crisis article). The price rise affected people and countries everywhere, but it most devastatingly affected the poor in developed countries (CITATION, find other source). Despite this crisis, biomass does not have to affect people in developing countries this negatively. In fact, since more conventional forms of cooking and heating used in those countries, such as firewood, are part of the spectrum of biomass, these countries might be well prepared to make the transition to larger scale biomass plants (A +B, 93). NOTE: I haven't included political and economic yet because I wasn't sure if that could be interweaved into the essay or made their own topic, but I have all the info.
