Tatiana Schlossberg, Columnist

Europe Needs to Be Frank About Biomass

Wood pellets burn more cleanly than coal but come with costs for forests and the climate.

Cleaner than coal.

Photographer: Anna Gowthorpe/PA Images via Getty Images
Lock
This article is for subscribers only.

Great Britain, the country that, during the Industrial Revolution, got the rest of the world hooked on burning coal, is planning to end its own dependence on the dirtiest of fossil fuels. Drax, the operator of Britain’s largest coal-fired power plant, plans to stop using coal by 2020, in line with the country’s effort to phase out coal entirely by 2025.

How will Britain make this happen? In part, by switching to biomass, largely in the form of wood pellets. Biomass already accounts for about 8 percent of U.K. electricity generation, four times as much as coal does. This step away from coal is a good one, but biomass carries costs of its own -- for the climate and the environment -- and those costs need to be recognized and accounted for.