a

GAO

United States Government Accountability Office

Report to the Chairman, Committee on 

Resources, House of Representatives

May 2005 NATURAL 

RESOURCES

Federal Agencies Are 

Engaged in Various 

Efforts to Promote the 

Utilization of Woody 

Biomass, but 

Significant Obstacles 

to Its Use Remain

GAO-05-373
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-373.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Robin M. 

Nazzaro at (202) 512-3841 or 

nazzaror@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-05-373, a report to the 

Chairman, Committee on Resources, 

House of Representatives 

May 2005

NATURAL RESOURCES 

Federal Agencies Are Engaged in Various 

Efforts to Promote the Utilization of 

Woody Biomass, but Significant 

Obstacles to Its Use Remain 

Most woody biomass utilization activities are implemented by the 

Departments of Agriculture (USDA), Energy (DOE), and the Interior, and 

include awarding grants to businesses, schools, Indian tribes, and others; 

conducting research; and providing education. Most of USDA’s woody 

biomass utilization activities are undertaken by the Forest Service and 

include grants for woody biomass utilization, research into the use of woody 

biomass in wood products, and education on potential uses for woody 

biomass. DOE’s woody biomass activities focus on research into using the 

material for renewable energy, while Interior’s efforts consist primarily of 

education and outreach. Other agencies also provide technical assistance or 

fund research activities. 

Federal agencies coordinate their woody biomass activities through formal 

and informal mechanisms. Although the agencies have established two 

interagency groups to coordinate their activities, most officials we spoke 

with emphasized informal communication—through e-mails, participation in 

conferences, and other means—as the primary vehicle for interagency 

coordination. To coordinate activities within their agencies, DOE and 

Interior have formal mechanisms—DOE coordinates its activities through its 

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, while Interior and BLM 

have appointed officials to oversee, and have issued guidance on, their 

woody biomass activities. In contrast, while the Forest Service recently 

issued a woody biomass policy, it has not assigned responsibility for 

overseeing and coordinating its various woody biomass activities, potentially 

leading to fragmented efforts and diluting the impact of these activities. 

 

The obstacles to using woody biomass cited most often by agency officials 

were the difficulty of using woody biomass cost-effectively and the lack of a 

reliable supply of the material; agency activities generally are targeted 

toward addressing these obstacles. Some officials told us their agencies are 

limited in their ability to address these obstacles and that incentives—such 

as subsidies and tax credits—beyond the agencies’ authority are needed. 

However, others disagreed with this approach for a variety of reasons. 

Examples of Uses for Woody Biomass 

Source: Forest Service.

Sign made from wood-plastic composite. Power generator that uses woody biomass for fuel.

In an effort to reduce the risk of 

wildland fires, many federal land 

managers—including the Forest 

Service and the Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM)—are placing 

greater emphasis on thinning 

forests and rangelands to help 

reduce the buildup of potentially 

hazardous fuels. These thinning 

efforts generate considerable 

quantities of woody material, 

including many smaller trees, 

limbs, and brush—referred to as 

woody biomass—that currently 

have little or no commercial value. 

GAO was asked to determine 

(1) which federal agencies are 

involved in efforts to promote the 

use of woody biomass, and actions 

they are undertaking; (2) how these 

agencies are coordinating their 

activities; and (3) what agencies 

see as obstacles to increasing the 

use of woody biomass, and the 

extent to which they are addressing 

these obstacles. 

What GAO Recommends

To improve the Forest Service’s 

effectiveness in promoting woody 

biomass utilization, GAO 

recommends that the Secretary of 

Agriculture direct the Chief of the 

Forest Service to appoint an 

official or organization responsible 

for overseeing and coordinating the 

agency’s woody biomass activities. 

In responding to a draft of this 

report, USDA concurred with its 

findings and recommendation, 

while DOE had no comments. 

Interior provided no response. 
Page i GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Contents

Letter 1

Results in Brief 2

Background 5

Most Woody Biomass Utilization Activities Are Implemented by the 

Departments of Agriculture, Energy, and the Interior, and Include 

Grants, Research, and Education 11

Woody Biomass Coordination Efforts among and within Federal 

Agencies Include Both Formal and Informal Mechanisms, but 

Unlike DOE and Interior, the Forest Service Has Not Assigned 

Responsibility for Overseeing Woody Biomass Activities 30

Most Officials Cited Economic Obstacles to Woody Biomass 

Utilization, and While Agencies Generally Targeted These 

Obstacles, Some Officials Believe Additional Steps beyond the 

Agencies’ Authority Are Needed 36

Conclusions 44

Recommendation for Executive Action 45

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 45

Appendixes

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 46

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Agriculture 50

Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 51

Figures Figure 1: Before and After Photos of Thinning Project, Lassen 

National Forest, California 5

Figure 2: Chip Truck Being Emptied, California Power Plant 7

Figure 3: Wood Chips Being Conveyed to a Boiler, California Power 

Plant 8

Figure 4: The BioMax 15 Power Generator 14

Figure 5: Automated Wood Chip Conveyor, Darby School District 

Project, Darby, Montana 17

Figure 6: Signs Produced from Woody Biomass Mixed with 

Plastic 21

Figure 7: Kiosk Built from Roundwood and Small-Diameter 

Wood 22

Figure 8: Interior of Darby Community Library Built from 

Roundwood, Darby, Montana 23

Figure 9: Slash Bundler Processing Small-Diameter Trees 24
Contents

Page ii GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Abbreviations

BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs

BLM Bureau of Land Management

CSREES Cooperative State Research, Education, 

and Extension Service

DOE Department of Energy

EAP Economic Action Programs

EERE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FEMP Federal Energy Management Program

FWS Fish and Wildlife Service

NPS National Park Service

NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory

TMU Technology Marketing Unit

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

A

May 13, 2005 Letr

The Honorable Richard Pombo

Chairman

Committee on Resources

House of Representatives

Dear Mr. Chairman:

Much attention has been paid in recent years to the state of our nation’s 

forests. Dense, dry forest conditions have fueled extensive wildland fires 

and have raised the specter of severe fires in the future. In an effort to 

reduce the risk of fire, federal land management agencies—including the 

Forest Service in the Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Bureau of 

Land Management (BLM) in the Department of the Interior—are placing 

greater emphasis on thinning forests and rangelands to help reduce the 

buildup of potentially hazardous fuels.

These thinning efforts will generate considerable quantities of woody 

material, including some larger trees that are commercially valuable timber 

and many smaller trees, limbs, and brush that generally have little or no 

commercial value today. This low commercial value material is often 

referred to as woody biomass.1

 Unlike commercial timber, this material 

typically has been piled and burned, left in the forest, or deposited in 

landfills because there is often little or no demand for it.

Some industries make use of this woody biomass, however—for example, 

by burning it to generate electricity or turning it into products such as road 

signs or animal bedding. Using woody biomass in these or other ways can 

have several beneficial side effects, including stimulating local economies 

and potentially facilitating fuel reduction efforts by creating a demand for 

thinned material. However, the cost of harvesting and transporting the 

material, combined with the relatively low value of the products produced, 

has meant that woody biomass has not been widely utilized.

1

Although biomass can be considered any sort of organic material—including trees, grasses, 

agricultural crops, and animal wastes—the term woody biomass in this report refers to 

small-diameter trees and other traditionally noncommercial material cut as part of thinning, 

harvesting, or other activities on forests or rangelands. The term “woody” is used to 

distinguish this material from agricultural biomass such as corn stalks or sugar cane 

residue.
Page 2 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

In this context, you asked us to determine (1) which federal agencies are 

involved in efforts to promote the use of woody biomass, and the actions 

they are undertaking; (2) how these federal agencies are coordinating their 

activities related to woody biomass; and (3) what these agencies see as the 

primary obstacles to increasing the use of woody biomass, and the extent 

to which they are addressing these obstacles.

In conducting our review, we used a structured interview guide to collect 

information from headquarters and field officials from the Departments of 

Agriculture, Energy, and the Interior, and the Environmental Protection 

Agency. In total, we interviewed 44 officials using this guide. We also met 

with officials from nonfederal organizations, including state governments, 

Indian tribes, academia, environmental organizations, and others. We 

reviewed agency policies, regulations, strategic plans, and other 

documents; federal and nonfederal studies regarding technological, 

economic, and other issues related to woody biomass utilization; and 

pertinent laws and other documents. We also toured the Forest Service’s 

Forest Products Laboratory in Madison, Wisconsin; a woody biomassheated community center in Nederland, Colorado; and a wood-fired power 

plant in Burney, California. Appendix I provides further details on the 

scope and methodology of our review. We conducted our work between 

June 2004 and March 2005 in accordance with generally accepted 

government auditing standards.

Results in Brief Most woody biomass utilization activities within the federal government 

are being undertaken by USDA, the Department of Energy (DOE), and the 

Department of the Interior, and include awarding grants to businesses, 

schools, Indian tribes, and others; conducting research; and providing 

education and outreach. Some of these activities involve multiagency 

efforts—for example, the three departments signed an agreement in 2003 

to support the utilization of woody biomass, and USDA and DOE jointly 

award grants for biomass research and development. Each department also 

carries out its own activities. Most of USDA’s woody biomass utilization 

activities are undertaken by the Forest Service and include grants for 

woody biomass utilization, research into wood products by the Forest 

Products Laboratory, and outreach and technical assistance conducted by 

agency field staff. Most of DOE’s woody biomass utilization activities focus 

on research into the use of woody biomass for renewable energy. DOE also 

is engaged in programs that assist federal agencies and tribal governments 

in switching to renewable energy, including woody biomass. Interior’s 

woody biomass efforts generally consist of education and outreach, as well 
Page 3 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

as some grant programs; within Interior, BLM is expanding its efforts to 

conduct education and outreach and recently established a woody biomass 

utilization strategy that will provide a framework for future activities 

related to woody biomass. Other federal agencies, including the 

Environmental Protection Agency and the National Science Foundation, 

implement some activities indirectly related to woody biomass utilization.

Federal agency efforts to coordinate their woody biomass utilization 

activities, both among and within agencies, occur through both formal and 

informal mechanisms. Although the departments have established the 

interagency Woody Biomass Utilization Group to coordinate their 

activities, most agency officials we spoke with emphasized informal 

communication—such as telephone discussions, e-mails, participation in 

conferences, and other means—rather than this group as the primary 

vehicle for interagency coordination. To coordinate activities within their 

agencies, both DOE and Interior have formal mechanisms—DOE 

coordinates its activities through its Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, while both Interior and BLM have appointed officials to 

oversee, and have issued guidance on, their woody biomass activities. In 

contrast, while the Forest Service issued a woody biomass policy in 

January 2005, the agency has not assigned a specific individual or office 

with responsibility for implementing this policy. As a result, the agency 

risks diluting the impact of its activities because different units within the 

Forest Service may be emphasizing different priorities—and indeed, some 

officials we interviewed told us that the Forest Service’s lack of a 

coordinated approach has resulted in poor coordination between 

headquarters and field units. Without assigning responsibility for 

overseeing the implementation of its new policy, the Forest Service cannot 

ensure that its multiple activities each contribute to its overall objectives. 

Therefore, to capitalize more fully on the Forest Service’s potential to 

promote greater woody biomass utilization, we are recommending that the 

Secretary of Agriculture direct the Chief of the Forest Service to assign 

responsibility for overseeing and coordinating the agency’s woody biomass 

utilization activities to a specific official or office within the agency. 

Agency officials cited two principal obstacles to increasing the use of 

woody biomass: the inherent difficulty in using woody biomass costeffectively and the lack of a reliable supply of the material. Although 

agency activities are generally targeted toward these obstacles and others 

identified by agency officials, some officials told us that additional steps 

beyond the agencies’ authority to implement are needed. Most importantly, 

officials with whom we spoke cited the relatively high costs of converting 
Page 4 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

woody biomass into marketable products as a primary challenge to 

increasing the utilization of woody biomass—in other words, using woody 

biomass is often not cost-effective given the price that can be obtained for 

the products produced. For example, a Forest Service researcher estimated 

the cost of producing electricity from woody biomass at about 7.5 cents per 

kilowatt hour but noted that this electricity could be sold for only about 5.3 

cents per kilowatt hour in the wholesale market. The costs cited most 

frequently were those for harvesting and transporting the material. 

Additional costs can be involved as well, such as exit fees charged by 

electrical utilities to customers seeking to disconnect from the electrical 

grid and rely on their own woody biomass-generated electricity. The other 

major obstacle agencies cited was the lack of a reliable long-term supply of 

woody biomass from federal lands, which inhibits potential investment in 

woody biomass utilization projects because investors are reluctant to 

commit to projects without assurances of a steady supply of raw material. 

The agency activities we identified are generally targeted at overcoming the 

obstacles identified—for example, working to reduce woody biomass 

processing costs by conducting research into less expensive ways to 

convert woody biomass into wood products or energy. 

Some agency officials believe that their agencies are limited in their ability 

to fully address these obstacles, and that additional steps beyond the 

agencies’ authorities will be required to increase woody biomass 

utilization. Such steps include subsidies or tax credits to offset the costs 

involved in using woody biomass and federal or state policies requiring the 

use of renewable energy sources, including woody biomass, in generating 

electricity. Other officials disagreed with this view, stating that neither 

subsidies nor tax credits were appropriate mechanisms for promoting the 

use of woody biomass and that such incentives could have adverse, 

unintended consequences on the ecological health of the national forests. 

In responding to a draft of this report, USDA concurred with our findings 

and recommendation, while DOE officials stated that they had no 

comments. We requested, but did not receive, comments from Interior. 

USDA’s comments appear in appendix II. 
Page 5 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Background The Forest Service and Interior manage about 700 million acres of federal 

land between them, much of which is considered to be at high risk of fire. 

Federal researchers estimate that from 90 million to 200 million acres of 

federal lands in the contiguous United States are at an elevated risk of fire 

because of abnormally dense accumulations of vegetation, and that these 

conditions also exist on many nonfederal lands.2

 Addressing this fire risk 

has become a priority for the federal government, which in recent years has 

significantly increased funding for fuels reduction. Fuels reduction is 

generally done through prescribed burning, in which fires are deliberately 

lit in order to burn excess vegetation, and mechanical treatments, in which 

mechanical equipment is used to cut vegetation. Figure 1 shows before and 

after photos of a site that was thinned to reduce the risk of fire.

Figure 1: Before and After Photos of Thinning Project, Lassen National Forest, California

2

For more information about the risks and effects of wildland fire, see GAO, Wildland Fires: 

Forest Service and BLM Need Better Information and a Systematic Approach for 

Assessing the Risks of Environmental Effects, GAO-04-705 (Washington, D.C.: June 24, 

2004).

Source: Forest Service.
Page 6 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Although prescribed burning is generally less expensive than mechanical 

treatment, prescribed fire may not always be the most appropriate method 

for accomplishing land management objectives—and in many locations it is 

not an option, either because of concerns about smoke pollution or 

because vegetation is so dense that agency officials fear that a prescribed 

fire could escape and burn out of control. In such situations, mechanical 

treatments are required, generating large amounts of wood—particularly 

small-diameter trees, limbs, brush, and other material that serve as fuel for 

wildland fires.3

Woody biomass can be put to many uses. Small logs can be peeled and used 

as fence posts, or can be joined together with specialized hardware to 

construct pole-frame buildings. Trees also can be milled into structural 

lumber. Using computer-operated equipment, some mills can manufacture 

lumber from logs as small as 4 inches in diameter. Other wood products 

such as furniture, flooring, and paneling can be produced. Woody biomass 

also can be chipped for use in paper pulp production and other uses—for 

example, a New Mexico company combines juniper chips with plastic to 

create a composite material used to make road signs.

Woody biomass also can be converted into other products, including liquid 

fuels such as ethanol and other products such as adhesives. Finally, woody 

biomass can be chipped or ground for energy production—for example, to 

fire power plants, or produce steam or hot water heat for manufacturing 

processes or buildings. Figure 2 shows a trailer full of wood chips being 

emptied into a container at a California power plant fueled by woody 

biomass; figure 3 shows chips ready to be fed into a boiler.

3

Fuel reduction efforts are not the only source of this material. Woody biomass can result 

from a variety of activities related to improving or maintaining forest and rangeland health, 

as well as forest management activities such as timber harvests. Further, according to 

Forest Service officials and others, millions of acres of pine trees in the southeastern United 

States face a depressed market because of the closure of pulp mills. These trees thus 

constitute another potential source of woody biomass.
Page 7 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Figure 2: Chip Truck Being Emptied, California Power Plant

Source: GAO.
Page 8 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Figure 3: Wood Chips Being Conveyed to a Boiler, California Power Plant

Citing biomass’s potential to serve as a source of electricity, fuel, 

chemicals, and other materials, the President and the Congress have 

encouraged federal activities regarding biomass utilization—but until 

recently, woody biomass received relatively little emphasis. A list of major 

congressional direction follows:

The Biomass Research and Development Act of 20004

• directed the Secretaries of Agriculture and Energy to coordinate their 

research and development efforts, leading to the production of biobased 

industrial products;5

4

Pub. L. No. 106-224, Title III, 114 Stat. 428, as amended (2000).

5

The act defined biobased industrial products to include fuels, chemicals, building materials, 

electric power, or heat produced from biomass, but did not specify the type of biomass—

agricultural, woody, or other—to be used.

Source: GAO.
Page 9 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

• created the interagency Biomass Research and Development Board, 

supported by a Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory 

Committee;6

• directed the Secretaries of Agriculture and Energy to implement a 

“Biomass Research and Development Initiative” under which the 

agencies would provide grants, contracts, and financial assistance for 

research on biobased industrial products; and

• authorized an appropriation of $49 million for each of fiscal years 2000 

through 2005 to carry out the act’s provisions.

The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 20027

• established a federal procurement preference for biobased products 

requiring federal agencies purchasing items costing more than $10,000 

to give preference to biobased products;8

• directed the Secretary of Agriculture to award grants for developing and 

constructing biorefineries (equipment and processes that convert 

biomass into fuels and chemicals and that may produce electricity); 

6

These groups replaced interagency groups created by Executive Order 13134, “Developing 

and Promoting Biobased Products and Bioenergy.” See 64 Fed. Reg. 44639 (Aug. 16, 1999). 

Executive Order 13134 directed the establishment of the Interagency Council on Biobased 

Products and Bioenergy, as well as an Advisory Committee on Biobased Products and 

Bioenergy, to provide information and advice for consideration by the council. 

7

Pub. L. No. 107-171, Title IX, 116 Stat. 475 (2002).

8

Specifically, the statute requires the Secretary of Agriculture to develop a list of items that 

are or can be produced with biobased products and whose procurement by federal agencies 

will carry out the statute's objectives. Federal agencies then must generally give preference 

to such items composed of the highest percentage of biobased products practicable, 

consistent with maintaining a satisfactory level of competition. Procurement preference is 

to be given to biobased products for items costing more than $10,000 or “where the quantity 

of such items or of functionally equivalent items purchased or acquired in the course of the 

preceding fiscal year was $10,000 or more.”
Page 10 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

• directed the Secretary of Agriculture to provide grants, loans, and loan 

guarantees to farmers, ranchers, and rural small businesses to purchase 

renewable energy systems and make energy efficiency improvements, 

and to make available from the Commodity Credit Corporation $23 

million for these activities for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007;9

and

• directed the Secretary of Agriculture to make available from the 

Commodity Credit Corporation $5 million in fiscal year 2002 and $14 

million for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007 to carry out the 

provisions of the Biomass Research and Development Act of 2000, and 

extended through fiscal year 2007 the Biomass Research and 

Development Act’s authorization of $49 million each fiscal year.

The Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 200310

• authorized appropriations of $5 million for each of fiscal years 2004 

through 2008 for each of two grant programs—a Forest Service program 

focusing on community-based enterprises and small businesses using 

biomass, and a USDA program providing grants to offset the costs of 

purchasing biomass by facilities that use it for wood-based products or 

other commercial purposes; and

• increased the authorization contained in the Biomass Research and 

Development Act of 2000 from $49 million to $54 million for each of 

fiscal years 2002 through 2007.

The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 contained tax incentives 

promoting the use of woody biomass to generate electricity.11

9

The Commodity Credit Corporation is a government-owned corporation within USDA. 

10Pub. L. No. 108-148, Title II, 117 Stat. 1901 (2003).

11Pub. L. No. 108-357, § 710, 118 Stat. 1552 (2004).
Page 11 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Utilization of woody biomass also is emphasized in the federal 

government’s National Fire Plan, a strategy for planning and implementing 

agency activities related to wildland fire management. For example, a 

National Fire Plan strategy document cites biomass utilization as one of its 

guiding principles, recommending that the agencies “employ all 

appropriate means to stimulate industries that will utilize small-diameter, 

woody material resulting from hazardous fuel reduction activities.”12

Federal agencies also are carrying out research concerning the utilization 

of small diameter wood products as part of the Healthy Forests Initiative, 

the administration’s initiative for wildland fire prevention.

Most Woody Biomass 

Utilization Activities 

Are Implemented by 

the Departments of 

Agriculture, Energy, 

and the Interior, and 

Include Grants, 

Research, and 

Education 

Most of the federal government’s woody biomass utilization efforts are 

being undertaken by USDA, DOE, and Interior. Some activities are 

performed jointly. For example, USDA, DOE, and Interior signed a 

Memorandum of Understanding to promote the utilization of woody 

biomass, and USDA and DOE conduct a joint biomass grant program. Each 

department also conducts its own woody biomass activities, which 

generally involve grants for small-scale woody biomass projects, research 

on woody biomass uses, and education, outreach, and technical assistance 

aimed at woody biomass users.

Some Woody Biomass 

Activities Are Performed 

Jointly by Multiple Agencies 

USDA, DOE and Interior have undertaken a number of joint efforts related 

to woody biomass. In June 2003, the three departments signed a 

Memorandum of Understanding on Policy Principles for Woody Biomass 

Utilization for Restoration and Fuel Treatments on Forests, Woodlands, 

and Rangelands. The purpose of the memorandum is “to demonstrate a 

12Departments of Agriculture and the Interior and the Western Governors’ Association, A 

Collaborative Approach for Reducing Wildland Fire Risks to Communities and the 

Environment: A 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy (Washington, D.C.; August 2001). Note 

that the National Fire Plan is not a single document. Rather, it is composed of several 

strategic documents that set forth a priority to reduce wildland fire risks to communities. 

The various documents that make up the National Fire Plan include (1) a September 2000 

report from the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior to the President in response to 

the wildland fires of 2000, (2) congressional direction accompanying substantial new 

appropriations in fiscal year 2001, and (3) several approved and draft strategies to 

implement all or parts of the plan.
Page 12 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

commitment to develop and apply consistent and complementary policies 

and procedures across three federal departments to encourage utilization 

of woody biomass.” The departments also sponsored a 3-day conference on 

woody biomass in January 2004. To discuss woody biomass developments 

and to coordinate their efforts, the departments established an interagency 

Woody Biomass Utilization Group, which meets quarterly.

Another interdepartmental collaboration effort is the Joint Biomass 

Research and Development Initiative, a joint USDA and DOE grant 

program authorized under the Biomass Research and Development Act of 

2000. The program provides funds for research on biobased products. In 

fiscal year 2004, the two departments awarded $25 million to 22 projects, 

and cost sharing by private sector partners raised the value of the projects 

to nearly $38 million. While the program generally promotes all forms of 

biomass rather than targeting woody biomass, in 2004 the grant solicitation 

included woody biomass as an area of emphasis and, according to a USDA 

official, 10 projects emphasizing or incorporating woody biomass were 

funded that year, for a total of about $7.7 million. For example, the Hayfork 

Biomass Utilization and Value Added Model for Rural Development project 

in California received about $503,000 to support the design and early 

implementation phases of a biomass utilization facility, including a log sort 

yard, small log processor, and wood-fired electrical generation plant. 

Another California project, the Small-Scale, Biomass-Fired Gas Turbine 

Plants Suitable for Distributed and Mobile Power Generation, received 

about $242,000 to evaluate the economic benefits of using forestry residues 

for generating power in small-scale power plants. USDA and DOE also have 

collaborated on an assessment of biomass availability, including woody 

biomass, and have prepared a report summarizing their findings.13

13Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Biomass as Feedstock for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts 

Industry: The Technical Feasibility of a Billion-Ton Annual Supply (Oak Ridge, 

Tennessee; April 2005).
Page 13 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

In another interagency effort, BLM worked with DOE’s National Renewable 

Energy Laboratory (NREL) to identify and evaluate renewable energy 

resources—including biomass—on public lands, resulting in a February 

2003 report titled “Assessing the Potential for Renewable Energy on Public 

Lands.” More recently, USDA and Interior entered into a cooperative 

agreement with the National Association of Conservation Districts in 2004 

to promote woody biomass utilization.14 Activities to be performed by the 

association under the agreement include organizing national and regional 

workshops on woody biomass utilization and developing outreach 

materials to stimulate investment in small wood industries and bioenergy.

USDA, DOE, and Interior also participate in joint activities at the field level. 

NREL and the Forest Service have collaborated in developing and 

demonstrating small power generators that use woody biomass for fuel. 

These generators, known as BioMax units, are being demonstrated at 

several sites, including a high school in Walden, Colorado, and a furnituremaking business at the Zuni Pueblo in New Mexico. Figure 4 shows the 

BioMax 15 power generator.

14The National Association of Conservation Districts is a nonprofit organization that 

represents the nation’s 3,000 conservation districts—local units of government established 

under state law to carry out natural resource management programs at the local level.
Page 14 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Figure 4: The BioMax 15 Power Generator

The Forest Service also collaborates with Interior in awarding and funding 

grants under the Fuels Utilization and Marketing program, a jointly funded 

grant program targeting woody biomass utilization efforts in the Pacific 

Northwest. Another collaborative effort at the field level involves a Forest 

Service rural community assistance coordinator specialist in the Southwest 

Region and includes officials from BLM and the state of New Mexico, as 

well as environmental group and utility company representatives. In 

addition to studying woody biomass availability and conducting market 

assessments, this biomass working group is proposing policy changes 

favorable to woody biomass. It also has studied barriers to biomass use and 

provided input on project designs so that projects are less likely to be 

challenged. 

Source: Forest Service.
Page 15 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

The agencies also are collaborating with state and local governments to 

promote the use of woody biomass. The Forest Service, NREL, and BLM 

entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with Jefferson County, 

Colorado, in 2004 to study the feasibility of developing an electricity 

generating facility using woody biomass from forest thinning projects 

intended to reduce the risk of wildland fire. In addition to the agencies and 

Jefferson County, the agreement included the Colorado State Forest 

Service and a local energy utility. In its January 2005 feasibility study, the 

partnership reported that about 166,000 tons of biomass would be available 

each year from forest thinnings and new construction waste. With this 

development, the local energy utility announced that it would consider 

converting a boiler at one of its plants to burn biomass to generate steam 

heat for downtown Denver buildings.

Another example of federal agencies working with local governments 

involves a power plant in Canon City, Colorado, that uses coal and wood 

chips to fire its boilers. The power plant announced in January 2005 that it 

plans to sell renewable energy certificates to help recover costs associated 

with introducing the renewable fuel source.15 The wood chips used in the 

power plant are produced by forest-thinning operations conducted by BLM, 

the Forest Service, and state and local governments, while the 

environmental and market analysis for the project was co-funded by DOE. 

Yet another example of local cooperation involves a January 2005 

“declaration of cooperation” signed in central Oregon by officials from the 

Forest Service, BLM, state and tribal government, the timber industry, and 

environmental groups. The groups have agreed to work together to 

stabilize the supply of woody biomass as a way of helping create a market 

for the material.

15Renewable energy certificates represent the environmental attributes of renewable energy 

generation and can be sold separately from the underlying commodity electricity. Because 

the certificates are sold separately from electricity, they can be purchased from locations 

anywhere, enabling organizations to purchase renewable energy even if their local utility or 

power marketer does not offer a renewable energy product. Customers do not need to 

switch from their current electricity supplier to purchase certificates, and they can buy 

certificates based on any fixed amount of electricity.
Page 16 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

USDA’s Efforts Related to 

Woody Biomass Utilization 

Are Concentrated in the 

Forest Service, with Some 

Efforts Under Way in Other 

USDA Agencies 

Most of USDA’s woody biomass utilization activities are undertaken by the 

Forest Service, with other USDA services playing a smaller role. USDA’s 

activities involve grants, research and development, and education, 

outreach, and technical assistance. 

Grants USDA implements several grant programs related to woody biomass. The 

Forest Service provides grants through its Economic Action Programs 

(EAP), created to help rural communities and businesses dependent on 

natural resources become sustainable and self-sufficient. In 2003, 

according to Forest Service officials, the Forest Service funded 73 projects 

related to woody biomass utilization; grants ranged from $5,000 to 

$225,000, for a total of about $3.5 million.16 A Forest Service official told us 

that similar levels of effort existed in 2001 and 2002, but that the level of 

effort in 2004 declined because of reduced funding levels. The Forest 

Service currently is preparing a report summarizing the activities carried 

out under EAP grants nationwide.

Forest Service officials told us that EAP grant funds are distributed among 

Forest Service regional and national units, which in turn allocate the funds 

according to regional or national priorities, respectively. For example, the 

Northern and Intermountain Regions decided to use their regional EAP 

allocations not only to fund Economic Recovery—a Forest Service 

program providing financial and technical assistance to improve the 

economic, environmental, and social conditions of rural communities—but 

also to fund two regional woody biomass grant programs, one focusing on 

using small-diameter wood to create specialty products such as flooring, 

paneling, and wood-plastic composites and the other focusing on biomass 

utilization for energy production.17 This second program, known as the 

Fuels for Schools program, provides grant funds to help public schools 

retrofit their fuel and gas heating systems to woody biomass heating 

16Forest Service officials noted that the data do not include grants made by the Forest 

Service’s Southern Region or Northeast Area Office because these units did not provide 

information on their EAP grant programs.

17The Northern and Intermountain Regions administer national forests and grasslands in all 

of Idaho, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, and Utah, and in parts of South Dakota, 

Washington, and Wyoming.
Page 17 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

systems that reduce heating costs. The Darby School District in Montana, 

for example, provides heat to three schools with wood burning boilers; this 

conversion reduced its fuel bill by about 43 percent during the first year of 

operation. The project requires about 500 tons of woody biomass per year, 

the byproduct of about 50 acres’ worth of fuel reduction treatments, 

according to project officials. As of December 2004, according to Forest 

Service officials, three Fuels for Schools projects (including the Darby 

School District) had been completed, and about 20 schools had completed 

engineering analyses and were preparing to apply for grant funds. Figure 5 

shows the automated wood chip conveyor installed to provide fuel to the 

boiler as part of the Darby School District project.

Figure 5: Automated Wood Chip Conveyor, Darby School District Project, Darby, 

Montana

Source: Forest Service.
Page 18 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

The Forest Service has created an additional grant program in response to 

a provision in the Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2005,18

authorizing up to $5 million for grants to create incentives for increased use 

of biomass from national forest lands. A congressional committee report 

accompanying the act directed the Forest Service “to develop this program 

with the clear intent to make grants that will result in increased 

commercial use of biomass products, and which will thereby result in 

reduced overall hazardous fuels program costs.” Specific Forest Service 

goals for the grant program are to (1) help reduce management costs by 

increasing the value of biomass and other forest products generated by 

hazardous fuel treatments, (2) create incentives and reduce the business 

risk for increased use of biomass from national forest lands, and (3) 

institute projects that target and help remove economic and market 

barriers to using small-diameter trees and woody biomass. Grants will be 

awarded for up to 3 years in amounts from $50,000 to $250,000, and will 

require a 20 percent match on the part of grantees; applications are due 

May 16, 2005, with awards to be announced by June 1, 2005. 

Two other USDA agencies---the Cooperative State Research, Education, 

and Extension Service (CSREES) and USDA Rural Development—maintain 

grant programs that potentially include woody biomass utilization 

activities.19 CSREES oversees the Biobased Products and Bioenergy 

Production Research grant program, under which a total of $5.4 million is 

available to support research into the use of agricultural materials—

including woody biomass—for fuels or products. CSREES also provides 

grants to states for research under the McIntyre-Stennis Act of 1962, which 

was enacted to promote forestry research by state colleges and 

universities. Projects can fall into one of eight areas listed in the act, one of 

which is the utilization of wood and other forest products. However, this 

grant program does not emphasize wood products over the other areas, 

and a CSREES official told us that most funded projects address issues 

other than woody biomass. 

18Pub. L. No. 108-447.

19CSREES’s mission is to advance knowledge for agriculture, the environment, human 

health and well-being, and communities by supporting research, education, and extension 

programs. CSREES does not perform actual research, education, and extension, but rather 

helps fund it at the state and local level and provides program leadership in these areas. 

USDA Rural Development assists rural individuals, communities, and businesses in 

obtaining financial and technical assistance to address their needs.
Page 19 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

USDA Rural Development oversees grant and loan programs targeting 

renewable energy, potentially providing support to woody biomass 

utilization activities. Within Rural Development, the Rural BusinessCooperative Service oversees the renewable energy grant program 

authorized by the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, 

emphasizing renewable energy systems and energy efficiency among rural 

small businesses, farmers, and ranchers. In September 2004, $22.8 million 

was awarded to a total of 167 recipients; however, most grants were 

directed toward projects using wind power or agricultural biomass rather 

than woody biomass. Also within Rural Development, the Rural Utilities 

Service maintains a loan program for renewable energy projects. A Rural 

Utilities Service official told us that none of the $119 million loaned under 

this program since fiscal year 2000 has gone toward woody biomass, 

although the program would welcome such projects. 

Research and Development Forest Service researchers are conducting research into a variety of woody 

biomass issues. Researchers have conducted assessments of the woody 

biomass potentially available through land management projects—for 

example, in 2003, Forest Service researchers prepared an assessment of the 

land suitable for mechanical treatment in the western states and the woody 

biomass that could potentially be produced.20 Researchers also have 

developed models of the costs and revenues associated with thinning 

projects, such as the Fuel Treatment Evaluator. In using this model, users 

can input the specific area to be treated (by state or county), the desired 

end condition of the area to be treated, and so forth. Users also can enter 

prices for forest products—sawtimber, small-diameter biomass, and the 

like. The tool then estimates the amount of material in each of various size 

classes that would have to be removed to achieve the desired end 

condition, the project cost, and the likely revenues from the project. 

Researchers also are studying the economics of woody biomass use in 

other ways; one researcher, for example, is beginning an assessment of the 

economic, environmental, and energy-related impacts of using woody 

biomass for power generation.

The Forest Service also conducts extensive research into uses for woody 

biomass, primarily at its Forest Products Laboratory. The laboratory’s 

strategic plan includes the goal of developing new and improved 

technologies to use low-value, underutilized forest resources, including 

20USDA Forest Service, A Strategic Assessment of Forest Biomass and Fuel Reduction 

Treatments in Western States (April 2003).
Page 20 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

thinnings and small-diameter timber, and the laboratory Director told us 

the laboratory has changed its research approach over the past several 

years to focus more on the issue of small-diameter trees. Woody biomassrelated research at the laboratory includes research into a variety of 

potential uses for the material, including wood-plastic composites; 

structures made from small-diameter roundwood; improved paper pulping 

processes that can accommodate small-diameter trees; water filtration 

systems using woody biomass fibers; flooring, paneling, and laminated 

wood beams made from small-diameter trees; and others. For example, one 

scientist we met with told us that the laboratory is using woody biomass to 

make water filters that can remove heavy metals, oils, phosphates, and 

pesticides from water. The laboratory is currently testing the use of these 

filters to remove heavy metal contaminants from mining site runoff. 

Another scientist we met with described his efforts to develop techniques 

for using sound waves to test the strength of small-diameter timber in order 

to assess its suitability for particular applications. Still other officials are 

working on less expensive ways of converting woody biomass to liquid 

fuels; researchers at the laboratory told us they are working on new ways 

of separating wood into its constituent components—lignin, hemicellulose, 

and cellulose—in order to improve the conversion process. 

Education, Outreach, and 

Technical Assistance

The Forest Service conducts extensive education, outreach, and technical 

assistance activities through a variety of staff—small-diameter utilization 

specialists, rural development program managers, regional EAP 

coordinators, and others. Much of this activity is conducted by the 

Technology Marketing Unit (TMU) at the Forest Products Laboratory,21

which provides technical assistance and expertise in wood products 

utilization and marketing. TMU has produced an extensive array of 

publications conveying information about specific aspects of smalldiameter wood utilization and marketing—for example, publications on 

biomass for small-scale heat and power, structural grading of logs from 

small-diameter trees, and the economic feasibility of making wood 

products from small-diameter trees—and issues a bimonthly newsletter 

titled Forest Products Conservation & Recycling Review.

TMU staff also provide direct technical assistance to individuals or 

companies seeking information or assistance. One such user in New 

21Although TMU is located at the Forest Products Laboratory, it is funded by the Forest 

Service’s State and Private Forestry branch—in contrast to other activities at the laboratory, 

which are funded by the Forest Service’s Research and Development branch. 
Page 21 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Mexico was interested in finding a use for local woody biomass. TMU staff 

worked with the individual to develop a wood-plastic composite using 

juniper fibers that could be made into road signs; the composite signs, 

unlike wooden signs, are not chewed on by animals—and are thus favored 

by the Forest Service because they do not have to be replaced as 

frequently. The individual now operates a 15-employee sign-making 

business utilizing low-value woody biomass. Figure 6 shows signs made 

from woody biomass mixed with plastic.

Figure 6: Signs Produced from Woody Biomass Mixed with Plastic

Similarly, TMU has worked with businesses in Montana to find uses for 

roundwood, including roundwood buildings and bridges. Roundwood 

structures developed with TMU assistance include wood kiosks displayed 

at the 2002 Winter Olympics in Utah; a roundwood community pavilion in 

Westcliffe, Colorado; and the Darby Community Library in Darby, Montana. 

In addition, a 165-foot suspension bridge designed with TMU assistance 

and being built primarily with 6-inch diameter lodgepole pine is currently 

under construction in Lolo, Montana. Figure 7 shows a roundwood kiosk 

made from small-diameter wood; figure 8 shows the interior of the library 

in Darby, Montana, which was constructed from roundwood.

Source: Forest Service.
Page 22 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Figure 7: Kiosk Built from Roundwood and Small-Diameter Wood

Source: Forest Service.
Page 23 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Figure 8: Interior of Darby Community Library Built from Roundwood, Darby, 

Montana

The Forest Service also has partnerships with state and regional entities 

that provide a link between scientific and institutional knowledge and local 

users. One such group, the Colorado Wood Utilization and Marketing 

Assistance Center, housed at Colorado State University, provides small 

grants in Colorado and assists communities in identifying technologies that 

will utilize forest thinnings to heat buildings and generate electricity. 

Another such partnership is through the Forest Service’s Wood Education 

and Resource Center in West Virginia, which assists constituents in 

addressing economic, environmental, technological, and social challenges 

through training, technology transfer, and applied research. Yet another 

partnership with state and regional entities involves the Forest Service and 

the Greater Flagstaff Partnership in Arizona, an alliance of 27 

environmental and governmental organizations that researches and 

demonstrates approaches to forest ecosystem restoration in the ponderosa 

pine forests surrounding Flagstaff, Arizona. 

Source: Forest Service.
Page 24 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Staff in Forest Service field offices also provide education, outreach, and 

technical assistance. Each region has an EAP coordinator, and 

coordinators we spoke with provided numerous examples of their 

involvement in woody biomass. For example, one EAP coordinator 

organized a “Sawmill Improvement Short Course” designed to provide 

information to small sawmill owners regarding how to better handle and 

use small-diameter material, how to find small-diameter markets, and so 

forth. EAP coordinators also have conducted demonstrations of equipment 

for handling woody biomass cost-effectively, including several 

demonstrations of a “slash bundler” that can bundle and compress woody 

biomass for more efficient transportation.22 Figure 9 shows the slash 

bundler in operation. 

Figure 9: Slash Bundler Processing Small-Diameter Trees

22A Forest Service official told us that the slash bundler was the result of a research effort 

led by the Forest Service’s Research and Development branch.

Source: Forest Service.
Page 25 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Other field staff also provide technical assistance; for example, the 

Fremont-Winema National Forest in Oregon employs a Forest Products 

and Economic Development Specialist, who told us he provides general 

information about new technologies and economic issues to entities 

looking to engage in woody biomass-related activities; provides assistance 

in assessing the woody biomass harvesting, processing, and utilization 

infrastructure; and works with potential grant applicants to help them 

develop appropriate projects with defined goals and outcomes, which are 

more likely to be funded. An EAP official told us that the assistance 

provided to small groups or businesses is critical to getting them 

established and making them competitive for other assistance, such as 

USDA Rural Development grants; the official stated that many small 

businesses lack the expertise to prepare a competitive business plan or to 

adequately estimate future costs and revenues.

Until November 2004, the Forest Service employed a small-diameter 

utilization specialist who served as a national resource to provide 

education and technical assistance. This specialist told us he conducted 

frequent presentations to both agency and nonagency audiences on using 

woody biomass and worked as a liaison between parties interested in using 

woody biomass and agency officials or private companies that can assist 

them. He also maintained a small-diameter utilization Web site. However, in 

November 2004 he transferred out of the position, and the position has not 

yet been refilled. 

DOE Is Primarily Engaged 

in Biomass Research and 

Development Activities 

Although DOE maintains some grant programs and provides technical 

assistance to assist federal, state, and tribal agencies in switching to 

renewable energy, most of its activities focus on research and 

development. Following a recent reorganization, most of DOE’s woody 

biomass activities are overseen by its Office of the Biomass Program, 

although some activities also are conducted within the Federal Energy 

Management Program and the Tribal Energy Program.

Grants DOE maintains several grant programs that emphasize renewable energy, 

potentially including woody biomass. DOE’s Golden Field Office in 

Colorado administers the National Biomass State and Regional 

Partnership, which provides grants for biomass-related activities through 

five regional partners: the Coalition of Northeastern Governors Policy 

Research Center, the Council of Great Lakes Governors, the Southern 

States Energy Board, the Western Governors’ Association, and DOE’s 

Western Regional Office. DOE provides funds to each regional partner; the 
Page 26 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

partners, in turn, provide grants to states. Although the overall DOE 

partnership does not emphasize woody biomass over other types of 

biomass, the Western Governors’ Association is directing its DOE funds 

toward projects involving woody biomass, according to an official with the 

association.

Another DOE grant program that potentially involves woody biomass is the 

State Energy Program, which provides grants to states to design and carry 

out their own renewable energy and energy efficiency programs. States 

manage the funds and are required to match 20 percent of the DOE grants. 

In 2004, about $44 million was directed in grants to the states, and another 

$16 million was directed to special state projects. While the grant program 

does not emphasize woody biomass over other energy sources, woody 

biomass projects may be included among those funded, depending on state 

priorities.

The Tribal Energy Program promotes tribal energy sufficiency, economic 

development, and employment on tribal lands through renewable energy 

and energy efficiency technologies. Over the past 2 years, DOE has funded 

a total of 45 tribal energy projects, for a total of $8.4 million; the projects 

are primarily for energy and electricity, with some specifically targeting the 

utilization of woody biomass. A DOE-funded study involving the YavapaiApache Reservation in Arizona, for example, will examine the feasibility of 

a proposed power generation facility using woody biomass, while another 

study involving the Red Lake Band of the Chippewa Indians in Minnesota 

will examine the use of woody biomass for producing power, fuels, and 

products. 

Research and Development DOE’s woody biomass research and development activities are managed by 

its Office of the Biomass Program, which has overall responsibility for 

managing DOE’s research activities relating to the use of biomass for fuels, 

chemicals, and power. Many woody biomass research and development 

activities within DOE are carried out by the National Bioenergy Center, a 

“virtual center” intended to unify DOE’s efforts to advance technology for 

producing fuels, chemicals, materials, and power from biomass. These 

activities generally encompass research into the conversion of biomass, 

including woody biomass, to liquid fuels, power, chemicals, or heat. In 

addition, a new biomass laboratory—the Biomass Surface Characterization 

Laboratory—was dedicated at NREL in January 2005. An NREL official told 

us that DOE does not have an effort specific to woody biomass, though its 

activities can be applied to the material. DOE also supports research into 

woody biomass through partnerships with industry and academia. Program 
Page 27 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

management activities for these partnerships are conducted by DOE 

headquarters, and project management through DOE field offices. 

Education, Outreach, and 

Technical Assistance

In addition to its research activities, the National Bioenergy Center 

provides information and guidance to industry, stakeholder groups, and 

users through presentations and lectures, according to DOE officials. 

Information also is made available through the DOE Web site. DOE also 

provides outreach and technical assistance through its State and Regional 

Partnership, Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP), and Tribal 

Energy Program. FEMP provides assistance to federal agencies seeking to 

implement renewable energy and energy efficiency projects, including 

assistance in designing renewable energy systems and obtaining privatesector financing. Among these efforts is a program focused on using 

biomass and alternative methane fuels in energy projects at federal 

facilities, and although the program does not focus specifically on woody 

biomass, a FEMP official told us that military and civilian agencies 

(including the Forest Service) across the country are increasingly 

contemplating projects in which woody biomass would be used to heat and 

power federal installations. In addition to grants, the Tribal Energy 

Program also provides technical assistance to tribes, including strategic 

planning and energy options analysis. 

Interior’s Woody Biomass 

Activities Include 

Education, Outreach, and 

Grant Programs 

Interior’s activities include limited grant programs and education and 

outreach; department agencies do not conduct research and development 

into woody biomass utilization issues. Interior also works with its land 

management agencies to develop policy and direction regarding woody 

biomass activities. Interior now requires that the agencies’ land 

management service contracts include an option allowing contractors to 

remove woody biomass generated through the contracts where 

ecologically appropriate, and has directed the agencies to develop contract 

mechanisms to include biomass removal in timber sale contracts.

Many of Interior’s woody biomass activities are implemented by BLM, 

which recently established a woody biomass utilization strategy that will 

provide a framework for future agency activities and allow it to expand its 

biomass utilization efforts. The strategy, made final in July 2004, includes 

overall goals related to increasing the utilization of biomass from 

treatments on BLM lands, and individual action items within three 

substrategies: developing tools, building expertise within BLM and 

building networks with other agencies and organizations, and increasing 

the percentage of acres treated from which harvested biomass is 
Page 28 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

subsequently used. Individual action items include developing contract 

specifications for appraising biomass and guidelines for estimating 

biomass volume; training BLM staff in the use of biomass guidance and 

tools; facilitating technology transfer with key partners such as 

governments, tribes, and contractors; and increasing funding available for 

biomass projects. BLM also is contemplating a small-scale preferred 

procurement initiative for woody biomass products, similar to the 

preferred procurement program for biobased products established in the 

Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002.

In addition to BLM, three other Interior agencies—the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs (BIA), the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and National Park 

Service (NPS)—conduct activities related to woody biomass. An official 

from the U.S. Geological Survey told us that her agency does not conduct 

activities to promote woody biomass utilization. 

Grants Interior generally does not have grant programs specifically targeted 

toward woody biomass. However, BIA has provided a limited number of 

grants to Indian tribes, including a 2004 grant to the Confederated Tribes of 

the Warm Springs Reservation in Oregon to conduct a feasibility study for 

updating and expanding a woody biomass-fueled power plant.

Education, Outreach, and 

Technical Assistance

Interior agencies conduct education, outreach, and technical assistance, 

but not to the same degree as the Forest Service. The primary BLM official 

responsible for woody biomass activities told us that BLM does not have 

staff at field locations assigned to identify community resources and to 

build community capacity, as does the Forest Service. According to this 

official, BLM’s community outreach is conducted primarily through its land 

use and management planning activities, which include interaction with 

environmentalists, community leaders, and others. This official said that 

BLM is making a concerted effort to promote woody biomass utilization, 

has hired new forest management staff, and is studying the possibility of 

engaging in outreach activities through proposed demonstration projects 

called “incubators,” which would serve as examples of successful woody 

biomass utilization. Funding has not yet been appropriated for these 

projects, according to this official. Interior also will use the National 

Association of Conservation Districts, with whom it signed a cooperative 

agreement, to conduct outreach activities related to woody biomass.

BIA provides technical assistance to tribes seeking to implement 

renewable energy projects; specifically, the agency works with tribes to 

determine appropriate management activities and offers technical 
Page 29 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

assistance in marketing forest products. Tribal projects include a proposal 

by the Northern Cheyenne Tribe in Montana to use woody biomass to 

provide steam and electricity for a manufacturing plant and a study by the 

Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of the feasibility of 

producing energy from forest thinning projects. BIA also sponsored a 

renewable energy conference, including an emphasis on woody biomass, in 

September 2004. Interior’s primary woody biomass official told us that 

tribal officials are very interested in biomass.

Although FWS and NPS conduct relatively few woody biomass utilization 

activities, according to agency officials, in some cases the agencies will 

work to find a woody biomass user nearby if a market exists for the 

material. After a 2004 thinning project in Denali National Park, for example, 

NPS used some cut trees in cabin restoration projects and for firewood for 

backcountry cabins; however, the bulk of the biomass generated was 

provided to a nearby coal mine, which wanted material for use in a 

reclamation project at the mine site. NPS officials told us that their agency 

did not charge the mine for the material, but that the arrangement saved 

NPS several hundred thousand dollars in transportation and disposal fees 

because the material would otherwise have been sent to a landfill. The 

officials stated that finding a market for this material “represented a lot of 

time and effort on the part of local Park Service planners.” Both FWS and 

NPS officials told us that the agencies’ woody biomass activities are limited 

because the agencies produce only modest amounts of the material; most 

FWS and NPS fuel reduction activities use fire rather than mechanical 

thinning. Further, according to agency officials, in those instances where 

woody biomass is generated, the agencies often use the material for their 

own purposes—for example, using chipped biomass to stabilize soils 

during restoration projects. 

Several Other Federal 

Agencies Implement or 

Participate in Woody 

Biomass Activities 

Aside from USDA, DOE, and Interior, several other federal agencies also 

are engaged in woody biomass activities through their advisory or research 

activities. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provides technical 

assistance through its Combined Heat and Power Partnership to power 

plants that generate combined heat and power from various sources, 

including woody biomass and other sources of renewable energy. An EPA 

official told us that the partnership is fuel neutral, meaning that it does not 

promote the use of one fuel over another when producing combined heat 

and power. EPA also has a Green Power Partnership Program to assist 

federal agencies and companies in procuring power for their facilities from 

renewable sources.
Page 30 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Three other agencies also have limited involvement in biomass activities 

through their membership on the Biomass Research and Development 

Board, created by the Biomass Research and Development Act of 2000. The 

board, which is intended to focus on all biomass issues, not solely woody 

biomass, is responsible for coordinating federal activities for the purpose 

of promoting the use of biobased industrial products. The board consists of 

membership from USDA, DOE, Interior, and EPA, as well as the National 

Science Foundation, the Office of the Federal Environmental Executive, 

and the Office of Science and Technology Policy (both within the Executive 

Office of the President). Officials we spoke with from the National Science 

Foundation, Office of Science and Technology Policy, and the Office of the 

Federal Environmental Executive told us that their involvement in issues 

specifically related to woody biomass is minimal.

We also contacted officials from the Departments of Commerce and 

Transportation. Officials from both told us their departments do not 

conduct woody biomass utilization activities.

Woody Biomass 

Coordination Efforts 

among and within 

Federal Agencies 

Include Both Formal 

and Informal 

Mechanisms, but 

Unlike DOE and 

Interior, the Forest 

Service Has Not 

Assigned 

Responsibility for 

Overseeing Woody 

Biomass Activities 

Federal agency efforts to coordinate their woody biomass utilization 

activities, both among and within agencies, occurred through both formal 

and informal mechanisms. Formal coordination between agencies occurs 

through both the Woody Biomass Utilization Group and the Biomass 

Research and Development Board, although most agency officials we 

spoke with emphasized informal communication—through telephone 

discussions, e-mails, participation in conferences, and other means—rather 

than these groups as the primary vehicle for interagency coordination. To 

coordinate internal activities, both DOE and Interior have formal 

mechanisms—DOE coordinates its activities through the Office of Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), while both Interior and BLM 

have appointed officials to lead their woody biomass efforts; further, 

Interior’s woody biomass policy and BLM’s woody biomass strategy guide 

these organizations’ efforts. In contrast, the Forest Service—the USDA 

agency with the most woody biomass activities—has not assigned 

responsibility for coordinating its woody biomass activities, potentially 

leading to fragmentation of effort and diluting the impact of these 

activities.
Page 31 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Coordination among 

Agencies Includes Formal 

Groups, but Officials Often 

Cited Informal Coordination 

Efforts as More Common

Two groups serve as formal vehicles for coordinating federal agency 

activities related to woody biomass utilization. The Woody Biomass 

Utilization Group, open to all national, regional, and field-level staff across 

numerous agencies, is a multiagency group that meets quarterly on woody 

biomass utilization issues. According to the group’s draft charter (which 

has not been made final), the group’s objectives are to (1) implement the 

policy principles of the June 2003 Memorandum of Understanding between 

USDA, DOE, and Interior; (2) coordinate, plan, and encourage woody 

biomass utilization; (3) serve as technical and policy advisers on woody 

biomass utilization; and (4) function as an information clearing house to 

help identify relevant woody biomass utilization technologies, foster joint 

demonstrations and pilot projects, identify research and development 

needs, and highlight successful woody biomass projects. The draft charter 

calls for a chair position to be rotated on an annual basis, generally 

between USDA, DOE, and Interior. 

The other formal group is the Biomass Research and Development Board, 

which is responsible for coordinating federal activities to promote the use 

of biobased industrial products. The board consists of membership from 

USDA, DOE, and Interior, as well as EPA, the National Science Foundation, 

the Office of the Federal Environmental Executive, and Office of Science 

and Technology Policy, and is co-chaired by USDA’ s Under Secretary for 

Natural Resources and Environment and DOE’s Assistant Secretary for 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. The board is supported by the 

Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory Committee, which 

includes representatives of nonfederal groups such as industry, academia, 

trade associations, and the like. 

When discussing coordination among agencies, however, agency officials 

more frequently cited using informal mechanisms for coordination than the 

formal groups described above. For example, two officials we spoke with 

in the Forest Service’s Northwest Region told us that although they were 

aware of the interagency Woody Biomass Utilization Group, they were not 

aware of any of the group’s activities—or even whether the group has a 

charter. Several officials told us that informal communication among 

networks of individuals was essential to coordination among agencies; one 

Forest Service field official told us that, in contrast to formal groups, the 

more common method for coordinating among agencies is frequent, 

informal communication through e-mail, telephone calls, and discussions 

at regional or local conferences or workshops. Another Forest Service field 

official emphasized that his informal network of officials—both within and 

outside the agency and with whom he converses by telephone and e-mail 
Page 32 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

regularly—helps him keep abreast of woody biomass developments by 

providing reports, documents, and other information. Similarly, a 

headquarters official in another agency described a network of 

individuals—both within and outside of the agency—with whom he 

remains in frequent e-mail and telephone contact. These individuals 

exchange information regarding projects, policies, potential impacts of 

legislation, success stories, and the like. In each case, the officials stated 

that they relied much more upon informal means of coordination than on 

formal interagency groups. 

Officials also described other forms of coordination. Two officials 

described a regional grant application review team that included Forest 

Service, BLM, BIA, and FWS staff that jointly reviewed applications for 

fuels treatment grants. Although the main emphasis of the grants was not 

woody biomass, there was discussion within the review team about 

biomass issues that ensue from fuels treatment projects. Another program 

that involves interagency coordination is the joint review of applications by 

USDA and DOE for renewable energy projects authorized by the Biomass 

Research and Development Act of 2000. In addition, two officials told us 

that the Forest Service was trying to organize a multiagency team to 

collaborate on woody biomass efforts within the agency’s Northwest 

Region. Other officials mentioned state-level interagency working groups 

focusing on fire and fuels reduction issues and consisting of 

representatives from the Forest Service, Interior agencies, and nonfederal 

entities. These groups are primarily concerned with fire suppression 

capacity, fuel reduction treatments, and community wildland fire planning 

efforts, not with woody biomass. However, according to these officials, the 

woody biomass issue is interwoven with these other issues and is often 

discussed. Further, the networks established by these interagency groups 

facilitate communication on a variety of issues, including woody biomass, 

among the states and agencies involved. 

While DOE and Interior 

Have Formal Mechanisms 

for Coordinating Internal 

Activities, the Forest 

Service Does Not

DOE’s woody biomass utilization activities are coordinated through EERE. 

Within this office, the Office of the Biomass Program directs biomass 

research at DOE national laboratories and contract research organizations, 

while a small number of woody biomass activities are undertaken within 

two other programs, the Federal Energy Management Program and the 

Tribal Energy Program.

Interior has appointed a single official to oversee its woody biomass 

activities and is operating under a woody biomass policy in the form of an 
Page 33 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

April 2004 memorandum from the Assistant Secretary for Policy, 

Management and Budget. This memorandum directs all Interior bureaus 

and offices to implement the policy principles of the June 2003 

Memorandum of Understanding between USDA, DOE, and Interior. 

According to the official responsible for overseeing Interior’s woody 

biomass efforts, this memo serves as departmental policy until a 

departmental manual can be updated. Interior also has appointed a 

Renewable Energy Ombudsman to coordinate all of the department’s 

renewable energy activities, including woody biomass. Similarly, BLM has 

appointed a single official to oversee woody biomass efforts, and, as noted, 

has developed a woody biomass utilization strategy to guide its activities, 

including overall goals related to increasing the utilization of biomass from 

treatments on BLM lands. 

In contrast, although the Forest Service developed a woody biomass policy 

in January 2005, unlike DOE and Interior, it has not assigned a specific 

individual or office with responsibility for overseeing its woody biomass 

activities. The agency does have an internal group—the Woody Biomass 

Utilization Team—that meets to discuss woody biomass issues, but this 

group does not have responsibility for implementing the policy. And 

according to some Forest Service officials we spoke with, agency woody 

biomass activities have been opportunistic, arising from local awareness of 

and interest in the issue rather than from a national strategy for 

approaching the issue. One Forest Service headquarters official told us that 

the agency’s woody biomass activities have been “a grassroots effort on the 

part of those who have a real burning passion for improving utilization.” 

However, according to this official, individuals who do not share that 

passion have not been involved in woody biomass because there has been 

no central requirement or strategy for addressing the woody biomass issue. 

Another headquarters official told us that the extent to which woody 

biomass has been addressed has depended on the knowledge, interest, and 

availability of the local forest staff and the presence of local markets for 

woody biomass. Several field officials we spoke with share this view; one 

field official told us that there is a great deal of interest in woody biomass 

technology on the part of field staff, but not much coordination and no 

formal strategy, while another noted that woody biomass activities are 

“largely dependent on local risk taking.” Yet another field official told us 

that there is no coordinated approach within the Forest Service to woody 

biomass; instead, determining what activities to undertake is left up to the 

forests and ranger districts, and depends on local leadership. 
Page 34 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

The Forest Service does have an individual, located within the agency’s 

State and Private Forestry branch, who generally serves as the agency’s 

primary point of contact for woody biomass utilization. However, two 

officials noted that this individual serves primarily as a consultant, with no 

influence over budgets or activities. They also stated that, because this 

official works within the State and Private Forestry branch, he has no 

influence over agency activities regarding public lands and no influence 

over the Forest Service’s National Forest System or Research and 

Development branches, with their associated land bases or budgets. One 

headquarters official within the agency stated that without stronger central 

authority or a stronger woody biomass policy, the Forest Service will find it 

difficult to effect change because while the agency’s primary woody 

biomass official can discuss technology, innovation, supply, and other 

issues, he lacks the authority to influence land management practices.

Two officials attributed the Forest Service’s lack of a coordinated woody 

biomass effort to the agency’s decentralized culture, with autonomy at the 

ranger district, national forest, and regional level. One official told us that 

this culture serves the agency well for some purposes but works against the 

agency when it tries to promote an idea or issue—such as woody biomass 

utilization—that has not been widely emphasized. Another official noted 

that each region in the Forest Service has considerable autonomy in 

developing its own policies, setting its own priorities, and establishing its 

own procedures, and that, while there is often value in having ideas 

originate from the field, a more formalized structure is often more effective 

at accomplishing overall agency objectives. According to this official, the 

woody biomass issue has reached the stage where a formalized, 

coordinated national strategy is appropriate.
Page 35 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

One official told us that the Forest Service’s emphasis on fuel reduction 

planning and implementation efforts under the National Fire Plan had 

focused the agency’s attention away from woody biomass. The 10-year 

comprehensive strategy for implementing the National Fire Plan contains 

four overall goals: (1) improving fire prevention and suppression, (2) 

reducing hazardous fuels, (3) restoring fire-adapted ecosystems, and (4) 

promoting community assistance, which includes woody biomass 

utilization. This official told us that the Forest Service’s emphasis on goals 

1 and 2 has reduced its ability to focus on the other goals, and “now that the 

biomass is starting to pile up,” it is time for the Forest Service to begin 

focusing on woody biomass. The Western Governors’ Association issued a 

report in November 2004 concurring with this view, stating “Goal 4 must be 

given the same emphasis Goals 1 and 2 have received in order for its action 

items—and the 10-Year Strategy as a whole—to be accomplished.”23

Without an individual or office with responsibility for overseeing woody 

biomass activities within the agency, the Forest Service risks diluting the 

effects of its activities because individual units within the agency may 

undertake woody biomass activities that are not consistent with the 

activities of other units—or they may choose to undertake no woody 

biomass activities at all. Further, given the magnitude of the woody 

biomass issue and the finite funds available to the agency, it is important 

that the Forest Service ensure that activities on which it places a high 

priority are undertaken so that it can maximize its accomplishments within 

its budget.

23Western Governors’ Association Forest Health Advisory Committee, Report to the Western 

Governors on the Implementation of the 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy (Denver, 

November 2004).
Page 36 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Most Officials Cited 

Economic Obstacles to 

Woody Biomass 

Utilization, and While 

Agencies Generally 

Targeted These 

Obstacles, Some 

Officials Believe 

Additional Steps 

beyond the Agencies’ 

Authority Are Needed

Agency officials cited two principal obstacles to increasing the use of 

woody biomass: the difficulty in using woody biomass cost-effectively—

particularly the obstacles posed by the high cost of harvesting and 

transporting woody biomass—and the lack of a reliable supply of the 

material. Agency activities—grants, education and outreach, and research 

and development—are generally targeted toward the obstacles identified 

by agency officials. Many officials, however, told us that their agencies are 

limited in their ability to fully address these obstacles and that additional 

steps—such as subsidies and tax credits—beyond the agencies’ authority 

to implement are needed. But agency officials generally did not specify the 

level of subsidies or tax credits they believe would be necessary, and not all 

agree that such additional steps are appropriate.

Most Officials Noted the 

Difficulty in Using Woody 

Biomass Cost-Effectively, 

and Many Also Cited the 

Lack of a Reliable Woody 

Biomass Supply

Most officials we spoke with cited the difficulty in using woody biomass 

cost-effectively—that is, in using the material to create products that 

generate more revenue than is required for their creation. Other obstacles 

cited include the lack of a reliable supply of woody biomass; internal 

agency barriers to effectively promoting woody biomass, including the lack 

of agency commitment to the issue; and the lack of a local infrastructure to 

harvest, transport, and process woody biomass.
Page 37 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Most Officials Cited Economic 

Factors, Particularly the High 

Cost of Harvesting and 

Transporting Woody Biomass 

Relative to Its Value, as Primary 

Obstacles to Increasing Woody 

Biomass Utilization

The obstacle most commonly cited by officials we spoke with (30 of 44 

officials) is the difficulty of using woody biomass cost-effectively. Officials 

told us that the products that can be created from woody biomass—

whether wood products, liquid fuels, or energy—often do not generate 

sufficient income to overcome the costs of acquiring and processing the 

raw material. For example, a Forest Service researcher in California 

estimated that the cost of generating electricity from woody biomass was 

about 7.5 cents per kilowatt hour, including costs to harvest, transport, and 

process the material, as well as operations, maintenance, and capital 

amortization costs. However, the same researcher noted that at the time of 

his study, the wholesale price paid for power in California was 5.3 cents per 

kilowatt hour—meaning that, without receiving additional income for their 

electricity, producers of woody biomass-generated electricity would lose 

about 2.2 cents for each kilowatt hour generated if they sold their 

electricity on the wholesale power market.24

One factor contributing to the difficulty in using woody biomass costeffectively, according to 23 officials, is the cost incurred in harvesting and 

transporting woody biomass. For example, one Forest Service official 

pointed out that while a single 18-inch-diameter tree of a given height 

contains the same volume as 20 4-inch-diameter trees of the same height, it 

is much more expensive to harvest 20 trees than 1. Two officials told us that 

when the end use for woody biomass calls for chipped or ground 

material—for example, for use in power plants—it is often more efficient 

to chip the material in the forest and haul the chips to the plant rather than 

hauling the unprocessed woody biomass. However, these officials noted 

that the vehicles typically used to haul chips—known as chip vans—cannot 

navigate many forest roads, which were designed for logging trucks. 

Because hauling material in smaller vehicles is more costly, this adds to the 

difficulty in using the material cost-effectively. Officials pointed out that 

small installations located close to woody biomass sources will have lower 

transportation costs, enhancing their ability to use the material costeffectively. Schools and other buildings located in communities near 

forests are thus particularly well-positioned for woody biomass use, 

according to officials—especially if these buildings are heated with natural 

gas or fuel oil, because once buildings convert their heating infrastructure 

to accept woody biomass, they can be heated at a lower cost by using 

24Officials pointed out that some power plants, particularly in California, are able to burn 

woody biomass cost-effectively. However, these officials stated that this is in part due to 

economic incentives offered by the state.
Page 38 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

woody biomass than by using natural gas or fuel oil. However, officials also 

noted that such installations consume relatively small amounts of woody 

biomass.

Five officials primarily involved in research and development noted the 

costs involved in converting woody biomass to liquid fuels such as ethanol. 

For example, the chemical makeup of wood makes it more difficult and 

expensive to convert into ethanol than other substances such as corn, 

according to officials.25 Thus, although ethanol represents a potentially 

large opportunity for utilizing woody biomass (because of the demand for 

transportation fuels), the availability of cheaper raw materials such as corn 

presents an obstacle to its use. 

Other Obstacles Cited Include 

the Lack of a Reliable Supply of 

Woody Biomass from Federal 

Lands and Internal Barriers to 

Effective Promotion of Woody 

Biomass

Of the 44 officials we spoke with, 22 told us that even if cost-effective 

means of using woody biomass were found, the lack of a reliable supply of 

woody biomass from federal lands presents an obstacle because business 

owners or investors will not establish businesses without assurances of a 

dependable supply of material. Officials identified several factors 

contributing to the lack of a reliable supply, including the lack of widely 

available long-term contracts for forest products, environmental 

opposition to federal projects, and the shortage of agency staff to conduct 

activities. Regarding long-term contracts, projects that use stewardship 

contracting authority may include contracts of up to 10 years—potentially 

stabilizing the long-term supply of woody biomass—whereas projects 

conducted outside of this authority must use contracts of a shorter 

duration.26 Agency officials cited one stewardship project—the White 

Mountain project in Arizona, which has a 10-year duration and is expected 

to treat 50,000 to 250,000 acres—as an example of the benefits of 

stewardship contracting in stabilizing supply. An official told us that two 

manufacturers are negotiating with the contractor to establish 

manufacturing plants using woody biomass removed as part of the project. 

According to this official, without the assurance of supply offered by a 

25Officials told us that corn is higher in starches, which can be converted into sugar and then 

fermented into ethanol. In contrast, wood contains lower amounts of starch and also 

contains lignin, which cannot be converted into ethanol. 

26Stewardship contracting involves the use of any of several contracting authorities first 

authorized in 1998, including the ability to enter into contracts of up to 10 years in length. 

For a description of the agencies’ use of stewardship contracting authority, see GAO, 

Federal Land Management: Additional Guidance on Community Involvement Could 

Enhance Effectiveness of Stewardship Contracting, GAO-04-652 (Washington, D.C.: June 

14, 2004).
Page 39 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

long-term contract, these manufacturers would not have shown interest. 

However, another official pointed out that Forest Service stewardship 

contracts must be approved at the regional level, making their use more 

cumbersome than other contract types. 

Adding further to the uncertainty of supply, 10 officials told us that 

environmental opposition poses an obstacle—for example, in the form of 

appeals and litigation that delay planned projects. Finally, according to five 

officials, staffing constraints make accomplishing projects in a timely 

manner difficult even without external opposition; two Forest Service 

officials told us that even if long-term contracts were available and 

environmental opposition were not a factor, the lack of staff still hampers 

the agency’s ability to implement projects.

Six officials cited internal agency barriers that hamper agency 

effectiveness in promoting woody biomass utilization. Prior to the Forest 

Service’s January policy statement on woody biomass, one Forest Service 

official told us that the lack of a strong policy stating that using woody 

biomass is preferable to piling and burning it hampered the agency because 

no incentive existed for “field staff to think creatively about how to move 

[woody biomass] to potential users.” This official told us that even if the 

Forest Service received no payment for the material, putting it to use was 

better than piling and burning it—which also brings no revenue—and this 

preference should be embedded in policy. Two Forest Service officials also 

noted that the agency’s mechanisms for designing and implementing 

projects were still geared toward larger, merchantable timber to the 

detriment of woody biomass. One official stated that “the Forest Service 

needs to improve its capabilities to design treatments, contracts, and 

agreements that will encourage utilization of smaller diameter material,” 

while another official echoed this view by stating that “timber operations 

[in contrast to woody biomass] account for the bulk of institutional 

knowledge about material removal.” Finally, several officials stated that 

federal agencies have not been effective in communicating the potential 

benefits of fuel reduction. According to the officials, fuel reduction would 

reduce fire suppression and rehabilitation costs, avoid damage to 

watersheds, avoid smoke pollution, and the like. Officials told us that 

communicating these benefits could reduce opposition to fuel reduction 

projects, which was cited as a factor in the uncertainty of woody biomass 

supply.

Other officials cited the lack of agency commitment to the issue. For 

example, a BIA official told us that BIA has not provided the resources and 
Page 40 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

structure required for promoting and developing woody biomass utilization 

projects. Six officials told us that more funds should be devoted to 

researching new or less expensive ways to use woody biomass in order to 

overcome economic obstacles to its use. And two Forest Service officials 

cited that agency’s lack of a woody biomass policy as an obstacle to 

effective agency promotion of woody biomass utilization.

A variety of other obstacles were noted as well. One official told us that 

some large facilities such as prisons could use woody biomass to generate 

their own electricity for less than the cost of electricity sold by electrical 

utilities. However, such facilities generally would need to have electricity 

available from the grid in the event that their own generators were 

unavailable—and, according to this official, utilities can charge rates for 

this electricity (known as standby power) that are equal to the rates 

charged for electricity that is actually delivered. In other words, for every 

hour the utility is prepared to deliver electricity to the facility, the utility 

charges a fixed portion of the rate that would have been charged had the 

electricity actually been delivered—100 percent of the rate in some cases, 

according to this official. As a result, installations would pay not only the 

costs of generating their own electricity but also the standby power rates 

charged by the utility—costs that, when combined, may exceed the cost of 

simply purchasing electricity from the utility. Withdrawing from the 

electricity grid entirely can be problematic as well; this official stated that 

utilities can charge fees—known as exit fees—for doing so.

Another obstacle cited by officials is the lack of a local infrastructure for 

harvesting, transporting, and processing woody biomass, including loggers, 

mills, and appropriate equipment for treating small-diameter material. 

Three Forest Service officials we spoke with told us that in some cases the 

decline in federal logging has left areas without any infrastructure at all, 

while in other cases the infrastructure that is left is equipped to handle 

large trees rather than woody biomass. According to officials, contractors 

need equipment designed for handling woody biomass rather than larger 

trees in order to cost-effectively harvest and transport the material. 

However, contractors may not have the capital to purchase this new 

equipment, and may be unable to obtain loans without assurances of a 

long-term supply of woody biomass.
Page 41 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Agency Efforts Are 

Generally Targeted toward 

the Obstacles Identified, but 

Officials Cited the Need for 

Additional Actions Such As 

Subsidies and Tax Credits

The agency activities we identified were generally targeted toward the 

obstacles agency officials cited. Agencies provided grants, engaged in 

outreach, and conducted research aimed at overcoming economic 

obstacles to woody biomass use, and conducted activities to address other 

obstacles as well. However, several officials believe that additional steps 

beyond the agencies’ authorities are needed to fully address the woody 

biomass issue.

Agency Activities Are Generally 

Targeted at Overcoming the 

Challenges Identified

Agency activities related to woody biomass were generally aimed at 

overcoming the obstacles agency officials identified, including many aimed 

at overcoming economic obstacles. For example, staff at the Forest 

Service’s TMU have worked with potential users of woody biomass to 

develop products whose value is sufficient to overcome the costs involved 

in harvesting and transporting the material; EAP coordinators have worked 

with potential woody biomass users to overcome economic obstacles; and 

Forest Products Laboratory researchers are working with NREL to 

increase the yield of ethanol from woody biomass, making wood-to-ethanol 

conversion more cost-effective.

Some agency activities also are targeted at providing more certainty of 

supply. A Forest Service official in New Mexico has been meeting with 

environmental groups to try to obtain consensus on the need for forestthinning activities. Obtaining consensus can reduce the likelihood of 

environmental opposition, making Forest Service projects easier to 

accomplish and allowing a steadier supply of biomass. Although not all 

groups will support the projects, according to this official, obtaining 

agreement from major groups can blunt opposition from other groups. 

Other officials are working on models to predict the amount of woody 

biomass potentially available, giving users a better sense of the supply of 

raw materials.

Some Officials Stated That 

Additional Actions beyond the 

Agencies’ Authorities, Such As 

Subsidies and Tax Credits, Are 

Needed to Stimulate the Market 

for Woody Biomass

Despite ongoing agency activities, 14 officials told us that additional 

steps—such as subsidies or tax credits—that are beyond the agencies’ 

authorities are necessary to develop a market for woody biomass. 

According to several officials, the obstacles to using woody biomass costeffectively are simply too great to overcome by using the tools—grants, 

outreach and education, and so forth—at the agencies’ disposal. One 

official stated that “in many areas the economic return from smallerdiameter trees is less than production costs. Without some form of market 

intervention, such as tax incentives or other forms of subsidy, there is little 

short-term opportunity to increase utilization of such material.” Three 
Page 42 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

officials stated that subsidies have the potential to reduce the per-acre cost 

of thinning, because if there is a market for woody biomass, contractors 

will be willing to harvest the material for a lower fee, knowing that they can 

recoup some of their costs by selling the material. According to these 

officials, subsidies thereby create an important benefit—reduced fire risk 

through hazardous fuels reduction—if they promote additional thinning 

activities by stimulating the woody biomass market.

Officials told us that tax incentives, subsidies, and low-interest loans may 

serve to stimulate infrastructure for harvesting, processing, and 

transporting woody biomass, and that such assistance should target not 

only larger plants and facilities but smaller operators as well. Harvesters 

and loggers, for example, could use the assistance to purchase the 

expensive equipment and machinery required to treat woody biomass and 

thus help to build the required infrastructure. 

It is not only federal officials who hold this view. In testimony before the 

Congress, the owner of a sawmill that uses woody biomass to generate 

electricity for the mill stated that woody biomass-to-energy does not work 

as a stand-alone enterprise. According to this individual, “The cost 

structure associated with removing woody biomass from the forest, 

hauling the material to a facility and converting the fiber into a product 

suitable for electricity production is prohibitive without massive 

subsidization.”

Others see a need for state requirements that utilities procure or generate a 

portion of their electricity by using renewable resources, known as 

renewable portfolio standards.27 Forest Service officials in the Southwest 

Region are encouraging states in the region to enact renewable portfolio 

standards that include a woody biomass component. These officials are 

urging states to go beyond simply requiring electricity from renewable 

resources and require, or provide favorable treatment of, electricity 

generated from woody biomass produced as part of forest restoration 

projects. The official primarily responsible for this effort stated that “using 

this biomass source will help lower costs and allow restoration activities to 

occur on many more thousands of acres than present budgets allow.”

27According to the Database of State Incentives for Renewable Energy, a DOE-funded 

project, 19 states and the District of Columbia had renewable portfolio standards as of 

February 2005.
Page 43 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Agency officials generally did not specify the level of subsidies or tax 

credits they thought necessary, and not all officials believe that these 

additional steps are efficient or appropriate. One official told us that, 

although he supports these activities, the creation of tax incentives and 

subsidies would create enormous administrative and monitoring 

requirements. Another official stated that although federal policy changes 

such as increased subsidies could address obstacles to woody biomass 

utilization, he does not believe they should be made. Rather, he believes 

that research and development efforts, combined with market forces, will 

eventually result in “equilibrium”—in other words, in woody biomass 

utilization finding its appropriate level. If cost-effective uses of woody 

biomass can be found, its utilization will increase. Yet another official 

stated that while production tax credits or subsidies may be successful in 

getting businesses or industries started, he does not believe they are 

sustainable over the long term. In addition, he is reluctant to create creditor subsidy-dependent businesses that would be at the mercy of the annual 

appropriations cycle. Instead, market-driven solutions are more 

appropriate—for example, providing information to exploit the existing 

market, or developing requirements or incentives (such as renewable 

portfolio standards) that create a market on their own.

Further, not all agree with the assumption that the market for woody 

biomass should be expanded. One agency official told us he is concerned 

that developing a market for woody biomass may result in overuse of 

mechanical treatment (rather than prescribed burning) as the market 

begins to drive the preferred treatment. In other words, given a choice 

between mechanical thinning and prescribed burning, a forest manager 

might choose mechanical thinning not because it was the most appropriate 

tool for the project at hand but to satisfy the demand for woody biomass. 

This official stated that “if we do that, we are not being good stewards of 

the land.”

Environmental group representatives also have urged caution in taking any 

steps that expand the market for woody biomass. Representatives of one 

national environmental group told us that relying on woody biomass as a 

renewable energy source will lead to overthinning, as demand for woody 

biomass exceeds the supply that is generated through responsible thinning. 

They also questioned the incentive to create or reconstruct roads in the 

forests to facilitate inexpensive transportation of woody biomass because 

they believe doing so introduces unwanted side effects—increased erosion 

and sedimentation, increased access to areas of the forest that previously 

had no roads, and increased maintenance and enforcement costs for the 
Page 44 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

federal agencies. Finally, the representatives questioned the true energy 

gain of using woody biomass—that is, whether the energy involved in 

harvesting, transporting, and processing woody biomass exceeds the 

energy contained in the biomass—stating that “it doesn’t make economic 

sense to burn expensive gasoline to get cheap biomass.” However, they 

stated that the benefits gained by using the biomass rather than piling it in 

landfills or leaving it in the forest where in some locations it would 

continue to pose a significant fire risk may justify any net energy loss. 

Conclusions The amount of woody biomass resulting from increased thinning activities 

could be substantial, adding urgency to the search for ways to use the 

material cost-effectively rather than simply disposing of it. The use of 

woody biomass, however, will become commonplace only when users—

whether small forest businesses or large utilities—can gain an economic 

advantage by putting it to use. Federal agencies are targeting their activities 

toward overcoming this and other obstacles—for example, by providing 

technical assistance and grant funds to businesses facing economic 

challenges in using woody biomass. But some agency officials believe that 

these efforts alone will not be sufficient to stimulate a market that can 

accommodate the vast quantities of material expected.

While additional key steps may be necessary at the federal and state levels, 

we believe the agencies will continue to play an important role in 

stimulating woody biomass use. However, while both DOE and Interior 

have designated individuals or offices for coordinating woody biomass 

activities, no individual or office within the Forest Service has been 

similarly designated. Without an individual or office with responsibility for 

overseeing and coordinating woody biomass activities within the agency, 

the Forest Service can neither ensure its multiple activities contribute to 

the agency’s overall objectives nor assess the effectiveness of individual 

activities. Further, by taking a piecemeal approach to the issue, the agency 

risks diluting the impact of its activities because different agency units may 

be emphasizing different priorities. Some local variation may be 

appropriate—to account for regional differences in infrastructure, for 

example, or in forest type. Nevertheless, a coordinated approach is 

essential if the Forest Service is to capitalize fully on its potential to 

increase woody biomass utilization.
Page 45 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Recommendation for 

Executive Action

To improve the Forest Service’s effectiveness in promoting woody biomass 

utilization, we recommend that the Secretary of Agriculture direct the 

Chief of the Forest Service to assign responsibility for overseeing and 

coordinating the agency’s woody biomass utilization activities to a specific 

official or office within the agency.

Agency Comments and 

Our Evaluation

We provided a draft of this report to the Secretaries of Agriculture, Energy, 

and the Interior for review and comment. USDA concurred with our 

findings and recommendation, and the department’s comment letter is 

presented in appendix II. DOE officials stated they had no comments on 

the report, while Interior did not provide comments.

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of 

this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the 

report date. At that time, we will send copies to the Secretary of 

Agriculture, Secretary of Energy, Secretary of the Interior, Chief of the 

Forest Service, Director of BLM, and other interested parties. We also will 

make copies available to others upon request. In addition, this report will 

be available at no charge on GAO’s Web site at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me 

at (202) 512-3841. Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix III.

Sincerely yours,

Robin M. Nazzaro

Director, Natural Resources and Environment
Page 46 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Appendix I

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology ApApenednxidexiIs

The objectives of our review were to determine (1) which federal agencies 

are involved in efforts to promote the use of woody biomass, and the 

actions they are undertaking; (2) how these federal agencies coordinate 

their activities related to woody biomass; and (3) what these agencies see 

as the primary obstacles to increasing the use of woody biomass and the 

extent to which they are addressing these obstacles. To get a better 

understanding of woody biomass issues, we initially met with officials at 

the Forest Service and Office of the Chief Economist within the 

Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Department of Energy’s (DOE) 

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, the Department of the 

Interior, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Land Management 

(BLM), the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Park Service. We 

also met with representatives from nonfederal organizations, including the 

Western Governors’ Association, Colorado State University, the state of 

New Mexico, the state of California, the Santa Ana Pueblo, the Wilderness 

Society, the Nature Conservancy, Public Service Company of New Mexico, 

and others. We also visited the Forest Service’s Forest Products Laboratory 

in Madison, Wisconsin; a woody biomass-heated community center in 

Nederland, Colorado; and a wood-fired power plant in Burney, California.

We subsequently developed a structured interview guide to collect 

information on woody biomass utilization activities, coordination efforts, 

and challenges to utilizing woody biomass. Because the practical 

difficulties of developing and administering a structured interview guide 

may introduce errors—resulting from how a particular question is 

interpreted, for example, or from differences in the sources of information 

available to respondents in answering a question—we included steps in the 

development and administration of the structured interview guide for the 

purpose of minimizing such errors. We pretested the instrument at two 

locations by telephone and modified it to reflect questions and comments 

received during the pretests. 

To determine whom to interview, we began with agency headquarters 

officials who had been identified by the agencies as points of contact for 

woody biomass activities. As part of these interviews, we asked for the 

names of additional officials—regardless of location or agency affiliation—

who could provide additional information on, or insights into, woody 

biomass issues. We continued this expert referral technique until the 

references we received became repetitive. In all, we used our structured 

interview guide to interview a nonprobability sample of 44 officials in
Appendix I

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Page 47 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

various agencies and geographic locations.1 Our sample included officials 

at various levels within the agencies, including agency headquarters; Forest 

Service regional, national forest, and ranger district offices; Forest Service 

research facilities, including regional research stations and the Forest 

Products Laboratory; a BLM district office; DOE national laboratories; and 

others. Our structured interviews were conducted with officials from the 

following departments and agencies:

USDA

• Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service.

• Forest Service (including the National Forest System, Research and 

Development, and State and Private Forestry branches).

• Natural Resources Conservation Service.

DOE

• Golden Field Office.

• National Energy Technology Laboratory.

• National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

• Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (including the 

Federal Energy Management Program, the Office of the Biomass 

Program, the FreedomCAR and Vehicle Technologies Program, and the 

Tribal Energy Program).

Interior

• Department of the Interior.

• Bureau of Indian Affairs.

• Bureau of Land Management.

1

Results from nonprobability samples cannot be used to make inferences about a 

population, because in a nonprobability sample, some elements of the population being 

studied have no chance or an unknown chance of being selected as part of the sample.
Appendix I

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Page 48 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

• Fish and Wildlife Service.

• National Park Service.

• U.S. Geological Survey.

Other agencies

• Environmental Protection Agency.

• National Science Foundation.

• Office of Federal Environmental Executive, Executive Office of the 

President.

• Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the 

President.

We also contacted officials from the Departments of Commerce and 

Transportation, who told us their departments have no activities related to 

woody biomass utilization.

Federal Agency Woody 

Biomass Utilization 

Activities

To collect information on federal agency woody biomass utilization 

activities, we used our structured interview guide to ask officials to identify 

individuals or organizations responsible for biomass utilization activities 

within their agencies and to identify other federal agencies involved in such 

activities. We also asked them to provide information about the activities 

their agencies had under way as well as policies, strategic plans, and goals 

related to woody biomass. We also reviewed agency policies, strategic 

plans, and other documents; federal and nonfederal studies regarding 

technological, economic, and other issues related to woody biomass 

utilization; and pertinent laws and other documents. To corroborate the 

information we gathered through interviews, we compared interviewees’ 

responses with other information we reviewed. Because the documentary 

evidence we reviewed generally agreed with the information provided by 

key agency officials involved in woody biomass efforts, we believe the data 

are sufficiently reliable to be used in providing descriptive information on 

federal agency woody biomass utilization activities. 
Appendix I

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Page 49 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Federal Agency 

Coordination of Woody 

Biomass Activities

To determine how agencies coordinate their woody biomass activities, we 

asked officials to provide information on individuals or organizations 

responsible for coordinating activities within their agencies and those 

responsible for coordinating activities involving other agencies, as well as 

on the types of formal and informal activities they undertook. We also 

reviewed agency documentation regarding coordination issues, including 

draft and final coordinating team charters and notes from coordinating 

team meetings. We then compared the information provided by agency 

officials with this documentation. Because the documentary evidence we 

reviewed generally agreed with the information provided by key agency 

officials involved in woody biomass efforts, we believe the data are 

sufficiently reliable to be used in providing descriptive information on 

agency woody biomass coordination efforts. 

Obstacles to Increasing the 

Use of Woody Biomass

To obtain information on obstacles that federal agencies face in their 

efforts to increase the use of woody biomass, we asked agency officials to 

identify and provide their opinions on the major obstacles to increasing the 

use of woody biomass, describe agency efforts that target the obstacles 

they identified, and discuss additional steps they believe are necessary to 

address these obstacles. Because we asked only for opinions about 

obstacles to woody biomass utilization and additional steps needed to 

overcome them, we made no attempt to corroborate these responses. To 

corroborate responses regarding agency efforts to target the obstacles 

identified, we compared interviewees’ responses with the documentary 

evidence we gathered regarding the agencies’ woody biomass utilization 

activities. Because the documentary evidence we reviewed generally 

supported the information provided by interviewees, we believe the data 

are sufficiently reliable to be used in providing information about the 

extent to which the agencies are addressing these obstacles.

We performed our work from June 2004 through March 2005 in accordance 

with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Page 50 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Appendix II

Comments from the Department of 

Agriculture ApendxiI
Page 51 GAO-05-373 Uses of Woody Biomass

Appendix III

GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments ApendxiI

GAO Contacts Robin M. Nazzaro, (202) 512-3841

David P. Bixler, (202) 512-7201

Staff 

Acknowledgments

In addition to those named above, James Espinoza, Steve Gaty, Richard 

Johnson, and Judy Pagano made key contributions to this report.

(360489)
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help 

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost 

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to 

www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.”

Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to:

U.S. Government Accountability Office

441 G Street NW, Room LM

Washington, D.C. 20548

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Congressional 

Relations

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548

Public Affairs Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548