A new study released by the Biomass Thermal Energy Council (BTEC) and four other organizations outlines a bold plan that calls for a significant increase in the use of renewable resources for space heating to 25% by the year 2025.  In the plan, biomass gains the largest ground from 4% to over 18% followed by an increase in solar thermal (hot water) to 5% in the same period.

At first pass this is indeed bold with many competing interests – industry, regulation, environmental. However, it also has some merit worth considering. First, the Northeast has plentiful wood and biomass resources (see figure on forest land) and has a culture in many regions of wood-burning. Second, the use of wood for space heat (when done properly) is the “highest and best use” of this natural resource. If you do the math, you quickly realize that solar is not an economical option which is contrasted by wood heat which converts 80%+ of the stored energy in the wood to usable energy (heat).

Next, with the Northeast adopting stricter regulations on wood burning appliances, the new units that are installed reduce wood smoke emissions by 90% or more. One need look no further than Northern Europe where wood heat accounts for up to 30% of energy used with countries targeting even higher consumption to reduce their dependence on foreign energy sources.

Certainly there are limitations to the study, but to make progress one must begin with a plan, even a bold one.

You can find a summary of the report here and a copy of the full report here.

Imagine a biomass fuel that:

• Produces more biomass per acre (20-25 dry tons) than any other non-food biomass plan,
• Can be grown on a wide variety of soil types and under a wide range of climatic conditions,
• Reaches harvest-able maturity in 18 months and may be harvested every 9 months,
• Has a plant lifespan of 25 years,
• Does not require tillage, fertilizer or pesticide.

Sounds too good to be true, right? Not if you are familiar with Arundo donax. You will certainly here more about this wonder-plant since several companies, including local company TreeFree Biomass Solutions, have figured out how to grow the plant as a crop.

For more information here is an article from North American Clean Energy magazine.

With fuel prices where they are these days, there is a lot of talk about domestically available options. One type of fuel that is central to the debate is biofuel. You may recognize them by their other names – ethanol, biodiesel, biocrude, methanol and methane to name a few.

Don’t freak out on me, this is not your high school chemistry class, but there are some big questions that arise that are still under debate and as consumers of the product/byproduct it is important that we understand what is being discussed.

Central to the biofuel discussion are two fundamental debates:

1. Energy and Food Supply. Early biofuel supplies were built using a corn and other food supply feedstocks. Should energy products compete with the food supply?
2. Energy Conversion. Biofuels are created from organic material (e.g. corn, switchgrass & crop residues). What amount of energy is required to create the fuel from these feedstocks? If the amount of energy required to produce the fuel is less than the output from the resulting fuel, is it worthwhile? The conversation is a bit heated.

These are not simple questions. However, their answers are arguably simple – each resource should be used to provide its greatest return. In the questions we ask above — I would argue that food supply should remain as food supply. We can use the crop residue for energy. As far as energy conversion, I don’t need to look any further than modern biomass heating options with efficiencies greater than 70% (per US standards). Until the economics or science indicate otherwise perhaps we should be selective in our choice of the feedstocks for biofuels.

As someone who has made it this far, implies some level of interest, so I encourage you to take a look at this resource from Farm Credit of Canada that provides an overview on the biofuel discussion.