They assumed that all biomass is carbon neutral. Amongst those scientists who have studied the carbon impacts of bioenergy, there is a now effectively a consensus that bioenergy is not in principle carbon neutral and that soil carbon losses, carbon emissions from direct and indirect land conversion and the time-delay between carbon emissions from burning wood and future carbon sequestration by new trees must be accounted for. Some of those studies can be found here. Scientists who have published on this topic might disagree about the scale of carbon emissions linked to different types of bioenergy and some are far more optimistic about others about the potential for genuinely low-carbon bioenergy. But none of the scientists who have studied these questions claims that there are zero carbon emissions associated with all types of bioenerg. Sequestering 5 billion tonnes of carbon through BECCS, would require at least 10 billion tonnes of wood – more of other types of biomass were included. The Chalmers University researchers assume that 10 billion tonnes of wood can be harvested every year without a single molecule of carbon lost from soils and ecosystems. It seems worrying that such an assumption could pass the journal’s peer-review process.
Science or propaganda? New hype about Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage | Hands Off Mother Earth