State

Bioenergy

Primer

Information and Resources for States 

on Issues, Opportunities, and Options 

for Advancing Bioenergy

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

and 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

September 15, 2009
 
Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ________________________________________________________________ iv

Key Acronyms and Abbreviations______________________________________________________ v

Executive Summary ___________________________________________________ 1

Introduction _________________________________________________________ 3

1.1 How the Primer Is Organized ____________________________________________________5

1.2 References____________________________________________________________________5

What Is Bioenergy?____________________________________________________ 7

2.1 What Are Biomass Feedstocks? ___________________________________________________8

2.2 Potential for Increased Production and Use of Biomass Feedstocks____________________ 11

2.3 How Are Biomass Feedstocks Converted into Bioenergy? ____________________________ 12

2.4 Resources for Detailed Information ______________________________________________ 21

2.5 References __________________________________________________________________22

Benefits, Challenges, and Considerations of Bioenergy _____________________25

3.1 Energy Security Benefits _______________________________________________________26

3.2 Economic Benefits ____________________________________________________________ 27

3.3 Environmental Benefits, Challenges, and Considerations ____________________________29

3.4 Feedstock Supply Challenges ___________________________________________________35

3.5 Infrastructure Challenges ______________________________________________________ 37

3.6 Resources for Detailed Information ______________________________________________ 39

3.7 References __________________________________________________________________44

How Can States Identify Bioenergy Opportunities?_________________________ 47

4.1 Step 1: Determine Availability of Biomass Feedstocks _______________________________48

4.2 Step 2: Assess Potential Markets for Identified Biomass Feedstocks and Bioenergy _______53

4.3 Step 3: Identify Opportunities for Action __________________________________________59

4.4 Resources for Detailed Information ______________________________________________62

4.5 References __________________________________________________________________65

Options for States to Advance Bioenergy Goals ____________________________ 67

5.1 Favorable Policy Development __________________________________________________68

5.2 Favorable Regulatory Development ______________________________________________69

5.3 Environmental Revenue Streams ________________________________________________ 70

5.4 Direct Investment/Financing and Incentives ______________________________________ 70

5.5 Research, Development, and Demonstration ______________________________________ 74

5.6 Information Sharing___________________________________________________________ 74

5.7 Resources for Detailed Information ______________________________________________ 75

5.8 References___________________________________________________________________ 77

Resources and Tools for States _________________________________________ 79

Glossary____________________________________________________________ 93

 | State Bioenergy Primer iii
Acknowledgements

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

would like to acknowledge the many individual and 

organizational researchers and government employees 

whose efforts helped to bring this extensive report to 

fruition. The following contributors provided significant assistance through their review of the document:

■ EPA - Paul Argyropoulos, Dale Aspy, Allison Dennis, 

Karen Blanchard, William Brandes, Kim Crossman 

(now with Energy Trust of Oregon), Scott Davis, Jim 

Eddinger, Rachel Goldstein, Doug Grano, Bill Maxwell, 

Donna Perla, Felicia Ruiz, Christopher Voell, Robert 

Wayland, and Gil Wood.

■ National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) 

- Ann Brennan, Scott Haase, Victoria Putsche, John 

Sheehan (now with University of Minnesota), Phil 

Shepherd, Walter Short, and Bob Wallace (now with 

Pennsylvania State University). 

■ U.S. Forest Service - Marcia Patton-Mallory and Larry 

Swain.

The following individuals authored this report:

■ EPA - Danielle Sass Byrnett, Denise Mulholland, and 

Emma Zinsmeister.

■ NREL - Elizabeth Doris, Anelia Milbrandt, Robi 

Robichaud, Roya Stanley (now with the state of Iowa), 

and Laura Vimmerstedt.

iv State Bioenergy Primer | 
Key Acronyms and Abbreviations

 | State Bioenergy Primer v

ACORE American Council on Renewable Energy

B100 100 percent biodiesel

B20 A blend of 20 percent biodiesel and 80 percent 

petroleum diesel 

B90 A blend of 90 percent biodiesel and 10 percent 

petroleum diesel

BCAP Biomass Crop Assistance Program

BCEX Biomass Commodity Exchange

BERS Bio-Energy Recovery Systems

BPA Bisphenol A

Btu British thermal units 

CHP Combined heat and power

CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement 

program

CNG Compressed natural gas

CO Carbon monoxide

CROP Coordinated Resource Offering Protocol

DG Distributed generation

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

DOT U.S. Department of Transportation

DPA Diphenoloic acid

DSIRE Database of State Incentives for Renewable Energy

E10 A blend of 10 percent ethanol and 90 percent petroleum

E85 A blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent petroleum

EERE DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

EGRID EPA’s Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated 

Database

EIA DOE’s Energy Information Administration

EISA Energy Independence and Security Act

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

EPRI Electric Power Research Institute

ETBE Ethyl tert-butyl ether

FFVs Flexible fuel vehicles

FIDO USFS Forest Inventory Data Online

FPW Food processing waste

GHG Greenhouse gas

GIS Geographic Information System

GREET Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use 

in Transportation

GW Gigawatts

IEA International Energy Agency

IGCC Integrated gasification combined cycle

JEDI Job and Economic Development Impact model

kWh Kilowatt-hours

LCA Life-cycle assessment

LCFS Low carbon fuel standard

LFG Landfill gas

LMOP EPA’s Landfill Methane Outreach Program

LRAMs Lost revenue adjustment mechanisms 

MACT Maximum available control technologies

MSW Municipal solid waste

MTHF Methyl tetrahydrofuran

MW Megawatts

MWh Megawatt-hours

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NACAA National Association of Clean Air Agencies

NESHAP National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants

NREL DOE’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory

NSPS New Source Performance Standards

ORNL DOE’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory

PBF Public benefits fund

PEDA Pennsylvania Energy Development Authority

PHMSA DOT’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration 

PLA Polylactide

PM Particulate matter

RDF Refuse-derived fuel

REC Renewable energy credit

RFA Renewable Fuels Association

RFS Renewable fuels standard

RPS Renewable portfolio standard

SABRE State Assessment for Biomass Resources

SIP State Implementation Plan

SSEB Southern States Energy Board

Syngas Synthesis gas

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture

USFS U.S. Forest Service

VOCs Volatile organic compounds

WARM EPA’s WAste Reduction Model 

WGA Western Governors’ Association

WREZ Western Renewable Energy Zones Project

WWTP Wastewater treatment plant
vi State Bioenergy Primer | 
Executive 

Summary 

Across the country, states are 

looking for ways to tackle their 

energy, environmental, and climate 

change challenges through a variety 

of approaches. One frequently 

discussed option is the use of 

biomass resources to develop 

bioenergy—bioheat, biopower, 

biofuels, and bioproducts. 

Executive Summary | State Bioenergy Primer 1

CHAPTer one 

introduction

CHAPTer TWo 

what is bioenergy?

CHAPTer THree 

benefits and challenges

CHAPTer foUr 

identifying bioenergy opportunities

CHAPTer five 

options for advancing bioenergy

docUmEnt maP

Many information resources are available that discuss 

biomass/bioenergy in a highly technical manner and/

or that focus only on one feedstock (e.g., forest residues, agricultural crops) or product (e.g., biofuels). 

Alternately, some entities present bioenergy information that is relevant to the general public but is too 

simplified for decision makers. 

This State Bioenergy Primer is designed to bring many 

of these resources together and provide useful, targeted 

information that will enable a state decision maker to 

determine if he/she wants or needs more details. 

The primer offers succinct descriptions of biomass 

feedstocks (Chapter 2), conversion technologies (Chapter 2), and the benefits/challenges of promoting bioenergy (Chapter 3). It includes a step-wise framework, 

resources, and tools for determining the availability of 

feedstocks (Chapter 4), assessing potential markets for 

biomass (Chapter 4), and identifying opportunities for 

action at the state level (Chapter 4). The primer also 
describes financial, policy, regulatory, technology, and 

informational strategies for encouraging investment 

in bioenergy projects and advancing bioenergy goals 

(Chapter 5). Each chapter contains a list of selected 

resources and tools that states can use to explore topics 

in further detail.

Bioenergy Considerations

Biomass energy, or bioenergy—fuel or power derived 

from organic matter—can be used to produce transportation fuel, heat, electric power, or other products. 

Bioenergy currently represents approximately 3 to 4 

percent of the United States’ total energy production 

(EIA, 2008). 

The benefits of increased use of bioenergy depend 

upon the intended use and source, but can include: improved energy security and stability through reduced 

dependence on foreign sources of energy; increased 

economic development and job growth through 

creation of new domestic industries and expansion 

of existing industries; and expanded environmental 

benefits, including reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) 

emissions. 

Along with the opportunities, however, are potential 

challenges—among them the need for reliable feedstock supplies, the problems of infrastructure constraints for delivering of feedstocks and distribution of 

products, the potential for ancillary environmental and 

land use impacts resulting from increasing biomass 

supplies to produce bioenergy, and the potential for 

tradeoffs in air emissions resulting from direct combustion of biomass.

2 State Bioenergy Primer | Executive Summary

Each state’s individual geography, economic base, market conditions, climate, and state-specific incentives 

and regulations will impact the feedstocks and bioenergy outputs that make economic and environmental 

sense for that state to pursue. 

A decision maker starts identifying potentially fruitful 

bioenergy opportunities by examining all potential 

feedstocks—both agricultural/energy crops (e.g., corn, 

soybeans, switchgrass) and waste/opportunity fuels 

(e.g., wastewater treatment biogas, wood waste, crop 

residues, manure, landfill gas, solid waste)—and their 

specific location and costs within the state. The evaluation of biomass resources is followed by an assessment 

of the potential markets and competition for those 

feedstocks and what steps would be required to capitalize on the bioenergy potential. 

If a decision maker determines that the benefits of 

bioenergy outweigh the challenges for their state, numerous options are available for advancing bioenergy 

goals. Favorable policy development, favorable regulatory development, capitalization of environmental 

revenue streams, direct investment/financing or incentives, and research and development are all options for 

effectively promoting bioenergy in a state. 

Each of the chapters in this Bioenergy Primer describes 

how states consider these and other issues as they 

decide whether or not to develop a bioenergy promotion strategy, and is augmented by case studies about 

how states have successfully implemented a variety of 

approaches. 
Chapter ONE

Introduction

 Chapter One | State Bioenergy Primer 3

Chapter One Contents

1.1

1.2

How the Primer Is Organized

References

Doc

u

m

ent 

M

a

p

Chapter One 

Introduction

Chapter Two 

What Is Bioenergy?

Chapter Three 

Benefits and Challenges

Chapter Four 

Identifying Bioenergy Opportunities

Chapter Five 

Options for Advancing Bioenergy

Biomass energy, or bioenergy—fuel 

or power derived from organic 

matter—is one of the keys to a 

sustainable energy future in the 

United States and throughout the 

world. Bioenergy has the potential to:

■ Improve energy security and stability by reducing dependence on fossil sources of energy. 

■ Increase economic development and job growth 

through creation of new domestic industries.

■ Produce environmental benefits, including reduction 

of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 

Along with the potential opportunities, however, 

are challenges—among them the need for reliable 

feedstock supplies, the problem of infrastructure constraints, and the potential for environmental and land 

use impacts resulting from increasing biomass supplies 

to produce bioenergy. 

In 2006, and for the sixth year in a row, biomass was 

the leading source of renewable energy in the United 

States, providing more than 3 quadrillion British thermal units (Btu) of energy. Biomass was the source for 

49 percent of all renewable energy, or nearly 3.5 percent of the total energy produced in the United States 

(EIA, 2008). 
Does the market for bioenergy look 

promising in my state?

The questions below can help state officials evaluate the potential for a bioenergy market 

in their state. 

1. Does the state have sufficient biomass resources to support bioenergy development?

2. Are energy (electricity, propane, fuel oil, 

natural gas, or liquid fuel) costs in the state 

relatively high?

3. Is the cost of energy (e.g., electricity, gasoline, natural gas, oil) projected to increase?

4. Are electricity demand, renewable electricity demand, and/or biofuels demand projected to increase?

5. Are policy makers in the state inclined to 

hedg e against potential future volatility? 

6. Does the state have an electrical or thermal renewable portfolio standard that requires use of renewable energy?

7. Does the state have a renewable fuel 

standard that requires use of biofuels?

8. Are financial incentives for production 

of bioenergy (e.g., production incentives, 

tax incentives, low-interest loans, rebates, 

environmental revenue streams) offered in 

the state?

9. Does the state have standardized, simplified utility interconnection requirements for 

smaller bioenergy producers?

If a state has answered yes to two or more of the questions above, the market for bioenergy 

could be promising. Chapters 3 and 5 of this primer may be of most interest. 

If a state does not yet have the answers to these questions, the resources in this primer should 

be helpful for determining what approaches can be taken to answer them.

Figure 1-1. The Role of Renewable Energy Consumption in the Nation’s Energy Supply, 2006

Source: EIA, 2008

4 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter One

Solar 1%

Hydroelectric 41%

Geothermal 5%

Biomass 49%

Wind 4%

Total = 6.922 Quadrillion Btu

Renewable

7%

Coal

22%

Natural Gas

22%

Nuclear

8%

Petroleum

40%

Total = 99.861 Quadrillion Btu
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) estimates that 

the land resources of the United States could produce 

enough biomass to replace 30 percent of the current 

U.S. demand for petroleum on a sustainable basis by 

the mid-21st century (U.S. DOE, 2005). 

Ultimately, the outlook for bioenergy depends heavily 

on policy choices made at the state and federal levels. 

The federal government and many states are exploring 

the role of biomass as a means to achieve economic, 

energy, and environmental goals.

EPA has produced this State Bioenergy Primer with the 

following objectives:

■ To provide a basic overview of bioenergy, including what it is, its potential benefits, and its potential 

challenges. 

■ To describe the steps that state decision makers can 

take to assess whether and how to promote bioenergy. 

■ To identify opportunities for state actions to support 

bioenergy.

■ To present resources for additional information. 

■ To provide examples and lessons learned from state 

experiences with bioenergy. 

1.1 How the Primer 

Is Organized

In addition to providing basic information and 

overviews of relevant issues, each chapter includes 

an extensive list of resources for additional, 

detailed information. These resources are also 

complied into a stand-alone resource kit found in 

Appendix A. 

1.2 References

■EIA (Energy Information Administration), 

2008. Renewable Energy Annual 2006., Washington, 

DC, 2008.

■U.S. DOE (Department of Energy), 2005. Biomass as 

Feedstock for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry: 

The Technical Feasibility of a Billion-Ton Annual 

Supply. DOE/DO-102995-2135. Washington, DC, 

April 2005. http://feedstockreview.ornl.gov/pdf/billion_ton_vision.pdf.

How the STATE Bioenergy primer Is organized

CHAPTER TWO: What Is Bioenergy?

Describes biomass feedstocks and conversion technologies for 

producing bioenergy

CHAPTER FOUR: Identifying Bioenergy Opportunities

Presents steps for identifying biomass resource availability, 

assessing market potential, and evaluating existing policies and 

opportunities for action

APPENDIX A: Tools and 

Resources for States

Lists all resources referenced 

throughout the document

APPENDIX B: Glossary 

of Bioenergy Terms

Provides an at-a-glance guide to 

key terms

CHAPTER FIVE: Options for Advancing Bioenergy 

Describes how states can facilitate projects through policies 

and regulations, incentives, direct investment, research and 

development, and information sharing

CHAPTER THREE: Benefits and Challenges

Discusses energy security, economic benefits and 

challenges, and environmental issues

 Chapter One | State Bioenergy Primer 5
6 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter One
Chapter TWO

What Is Bioenergy?

 Chapter Two | State Bioenergy Primer 7

Chapter Two Contents

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

What Are Biomass Feedstocks?

Potential for Increased Production and Use of 

Biomass Feedstocks 

How Are Biomass Feedstocks Converted 

into Bioenergy?

Resources for Detailed Information

References

Doc

u

m

ent 

M

a

p

Chapter One 

Introduction

Chapter Two 

What Is Bioenergy?

Chapter Three 

Benefits and Challenges

Chapter Four 

Identifying Bioenergy Opportunities

Chapter Five 

Options for Advancing Bioenergy

Bioenergy refers to renewable energy 

produced from biomass, which 

is organic material such as trees, 

plants (including crops), and waste 

materials (e.g., wood waste from 

mills, municipal wastes, manure, 

landfill gas (LFG), and methane from 

wastewater treatment facilities).

■ Biopower refers to the use of biomass to produce 

electricity. Biomass can be used alone or cofired with 

another fuel, typically coal, within the same combustion chamber.

■ Bioheat refers to the use of biomass to produce heat. 

■ Biomass combined heat and power (CHP) refers 

to the cogeneration of electric energy for power and 

thermal energy for industrial, commercial, or domestic heating or cooling purposes through the use of 

biomass.

■ Biofuels are fuels (often for transportation) made from 

biomass or its derivatives after processing. Examples of 

commercially available biofuels include ethanol, biodiesel, and renewable diesel.

■ Bioproducts are commercial or industrial products 

(other than food or feed) that are composed in whole 

or in significant part of biomass. Examples of bioproducts include soy ink, cellophane, food utensils, and 

paints made from biomass-based materials.
Bioenergy is becoming an increasingly attractive 

energy choice because of high or volatile fossil fuel 

prices, concerns about national energy independence, 

the impacts of conventional energy use on the environment, and global climate change. More production and 

use of bioenergy can improve environmental quality 

(provided best available technologies and pollution 

controls are used); provide opportunities for economic 

growth, often in rural areas; support state energy and 

environmental goals; and increase domestic energy 

supplies, which will enhance U.S. energy independence 

and security. 

The basic process for using the energy in biomass to 

produce biopower, bioheat, biofuels, or bioproducts is 

shown in Figure 2-1. 

2.1 What Are Biomass

Feedstocks?

A feedstock is a material used as the basis for manufacture of another product. Biomass feedstocks are 

sources of organic matter that are used as key inputs in 

production processes to create bioenergy. Both agricultural/energy crops and waste/opportunity fuels can be 

used as biomass feedstocks. 

Agricultural/Energy Crops

Several traditional crops that are grown for food and 

other uses can also be used to produce bioenergy, 

primarily as biofuels. Crops currently used as biomass 

feedstocks include:

■ Corn. Corn is the primary biomass feedstock currently 

used in the United States to produce ethanol (and coproducts, as described in Section 2.2.2).

■ Rapeseed. Rapeseed is the primary feedstock used in 

Europe to produce biodiesel (EERE, 2008). 

■ Sorghum. Sorghum is used in the United States as an 

alternative to corn for ethanol production. As of 2008, 

15 percent of U.S. grain sorghum is being used for 

ethanol production at eight plants (Biomass Research 

and Development Initiative, 2008).

■ Soybeans. Soybeans are the primary biomass feedstock 

currently used in the United States to produce biodiesel 

from soybean oil. 

■ Sugarcane. Brazil uses sugarcane to produce ethanol 

and uses the sugarcane residue for process heat. 

Other crops that are planted and harvested specifically 

for use as biomass feedstocks in the production of bioenergy are referred to as “energy crops.” Energy crops 

are fast-growing and grown for the specific purpose of 

producing energy (electricity or liquid fuels) from all 

or part of the resulting plant. The advantages of using 

crops specifically grown for energy production include 

consistency in moisture content, heat content, and 

processing characteristics, which makes them more 

cost-effective to process efficiently (U.S. EPA, 2007a). 

Emerging energy crops include:

■ Microalgae. The oil in microalgae can be converted 

into jet fuel or diesel fuel (National Renewable Energy 

Laboratory (NREL), 2006). Microalgae with high lipid 

content are best suited to production of liquid fuel. 

Figure 2-1. Stages of Bioenergy Production

Source: Biomass Research and Development Board, 2008

8 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Two
Microalgae are highly productive, do not use agricultural land or products, and are carbon-neutral (Mayfield, 2008). More than 50 companies are researching 

microalgal oil production, including development of 

new bioreactors and use of biotechnologies to influence 

microalgal growth (NREL, 2008).

■ Switchgrass; poplar and willow trees. These energy 

crops are not yet being grown commercially in the 

United States for bioenergy, but may have the greatest potential for dedicated bioenergy use over a wide 

geographic range. The U.S. Department of Energy (U.S. 

DOE) estimates that about 190 million acres of land 

in the United States could be used to produce energy 

crops such as switchgrass and poplar and willow trees 

(U.S. EPA, 2007a; Antares, 2003). Several states in the 

Midwest and South could produce significant biopower 

using switchgrass, which is currently grown on some 

Conservation Reserve Program1

 acres and on hay acres 

as a forage crop (U.S. EPA, 2007a; Ugarte et al., 2006). 

Waste/Opportunity Fuels

Biomass feedstocks from waste materials are often 

referred to as “opportunity” fuels because they would 

otherwise go unused or be disposed of; bioenergy 

production is an opportunity to use these materials 

productively. Common opportunity fuels include:

■ Biogas. Biogas, consisting primarily of methane, is 

released during anaerobic decomposition of organic 

matter. Facilities that deal with large quantities of organic waste can employ anaerobic digesters and/or gas 

collection systems to capture biogas, which can be used 

as a source of on-site bioheat and/or biopower. Major 

sources of biogas include:

■ Wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs). Anaerobic 

digesters can be used during treatment of wastewater 

to break down effluent and release biogas, which can 

then be collected for subsequent use as a source of 

bioenergy. According to an analysis by the U.S. EPA 

Combined Heat and Power Partnership, as of 2004, 

544 municipal WWTPs in the United States use anaerobic digesters. Only 106 of these facilities utilize 

the biogas produced by their anaerobic digesters to 

generate electricity and/or thermal energy. If all 544 

facilities were to install CHP systems, approximately 

1 The Conservation Reserve Program, administered by USDA, provides 

technical and financial assistance to eligible farmers and ranchers to address 

soil, water, and related natural resource concerns on their lands in an environmentally beneficial and cost-effective manner. For more information see www.

nrcs.usda.gov/programs/CRP/.

 Chapter Two | State Bioenergy Primer 9

340 megawatts (MW) of biogas-fueled electricity 

could be generated (U.S. EPA, 2007a).

■ Animal feeding operations. EPA’s AgSTAR Program 

has identified dairy operations with more than 500 

head and swine operations with more than 2,000 

head as the most viable candidates for anaerobic 

digestion of manure and subsequent methane capture 

(U.S. EPA, 2007a). As of April 2009, 125 operators in 

the United States collect and use their biogas. In 113 

of these systems, the captured biogas is used to generate electrical power, with many of the farms recovering waste heat from electricity-generating equipment 

for on-farm use. These systems generate about 

244,000 MWh of electricity per year. The remaining 

12 systems use the gas in boilers, upgrade the gas for 

injection into the natural gas pipeline, or simply flare 

the captured gas for odor control (U.S. EPA, 2009b).

For more information on how anaerobic digestion is 

used to produce biogas for bioenergy, refer to Section 2.2.1 — Conversion Technologies for Biopower 

and Bioheat.

■ Landfills. As the organic waste buried in landfills 

decomposes, a gas mixture of carbon dioxide (CO2) 

and methane (CH4) is produced. Gas recovery 

systems can be used to collect landfill emissions, 

providing usable biogas for electricity generation, 

CHP, direct use to offset fossil fuels, upgrade to pipeline quality gas, or use in the production of liquid 

fuels. As of December 2008, EPA’s Landfill Methane 

Outreach Program estimated that, in addition to the 

approximately 445 landfills already collecting LFG to 

produce energy, 535 landfills are good candidates for 

landfill gas-to-energy projects (U.S. EPA, 2008a).

■ Biosolids. Biosolids are sewage sludge from wastewater 

treatment plants. Biosolids can be dried, burned, and 

used in existing boilers as fuel in place of coal, or cofired with coal to generate steam and power. Biosolids 

can also be converted into biogas for bioenergy (see 

Biogas section above). The high water content of most 

biosolids can present challenges for combustion. As a 

result, biosolids must generally go through a drying 

process prior to being used for energy production.

■ Crop residues. More than 300 million acres are used 

for agricultural production in the United States. As of 

2004, the most frequently planted crops (in terms of 

average total acres planted) were corn, wheat, soybeans, 

hay, cotton, sorghum, barley, oats, and rice.Following 
the harvest of many traditional agricultural crops, residues such as crop stalks, leaves, cobs, and straw are left 

in the field. Some of these residues could be collected 

and used as bioenergy feedstocks (U.S. EPA, 2007a).

■ Food processing wastes. Food processing wastes 

include nut shells, rice hulls, fruit pits, cotton gin trash, 

meat processing residues, and cheese whey, among 

others. Because these residues can be difficult to use 

as a fuel source due to the varying characteristics of 

different waste streams, the latter two of these food 

processing wastes are often disposed of as industrial 

wastewater. Work is under way in the food processing 

industry to evaluate the bioenergy potential of these 

residues, including collection and processing methods 

to allow more effective use as biomass feedstocks. 

Utilities and universities have used food wastes such as 

peanut hulls and rice hulls for biopower. Many anaerobic digester operators are currently adding agricultural 

and food wastes to their digesters to provide enhanced 

waste management and increased biogas generation 

(U.S. EPA, 2007a). 

■ Forest residues. Residues from silviculture (wood 

harvesting) include logging residues such as limbs 

and tops, excess small pole trees, and dead or dying 

trees. After trees have been harvested from a forest 

for timber, forest residues are typically either left in 

the forest or disposed of via open burning through 

forest management programs because only timber of a 

certain quality can be used in lumber mills and other 

processing facilities. An advantage of using forest residues from silviculture for bioenergy production is that 

a collection infrastructure is already in place to harvest 

the wood. Approximately 2.3 tons of forest residues are 

available for every 1,000 cubic feet of harvested timber 

(although this number can vary widely); these residues 

are available primarily in the West (U.S. EPA, 2007a). 

■ Forest thinnings. Forest thinnings can include underbrush, saplings, and dead or dying trees removed 

from dense forest. Harvesting, collecting, processing, 

and transporting loose forest thinnings is costly. The 

use of forest thinnings for power generation or other 

facilities is concentrated in the western United States; 

in other areas not already used for silviculture, there is 

no infrastructure to extract forest thinnings. Typically, 

the wood from forest thinnings is disposed of through 

controlled burning due to the expense of transporting 

it to a power generation facility (U.S. EPA, 2007a). 

Cellulosic Feedstocks

Cellulosic feedstocks include opportunity fuels (e.g., wood 

waste, crop residues) and energy crops (e.g., switchgrass, 

poplar, and willow trees). In using cellulosic feedstocks, 

the fiber, or cellulose, is broken down into sugars or other 

intermediate products that can be converted to bioenergy. 

Using cellulosic feedstocks such as wood waste and municipal 

solid waste for ethanol or other biofuel production or 

bioproducts development could reduce the waste stream 

in the United States. Ethanol production from cellulosic 

feedstocks has not yet occurred on a commercial scale but is 

actively under development (see Section 2.2.2 — Conversion 

Technologies for Biofuels). For discussions of the benefits and 

challenges of ethanol production, see Chapter 3, Benefits, 

Challenges, and Considerations of Bioenergy.

10 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Two

■ Municipal solid waste. Municipal solid waste 

(MSW)—trash or garbage—can be collected at landfills, dried, and burned in high-temperature boilers to 

generate steam and electricity. Mass burn incineration 

is the typical method used to recover energy from 

MSW, which is introduced “as is” into the combustion chamber; pollution controls are used to limit 

emissions into the air. Some waste-to-energy facilities 

have been in operation in the United States for more 

than 20 years. More than one-fifth of incinerators use 

refuse-derived fuel (RDF), which is MSW that has 

been thoroughly sorted so that only energy-producing 

components remain (U.S. EPA, 2008b). RDF can be 

burned in boilers or gasified (U.S. DOE, 2004). (See the 

related section above on biogas, which describes collection of biogas from landfills for use as bioenergy.) The 

waste-to-energy industry currently generates 17 billion 

kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity per year. However, 

based on the total amount of MSW disposed of in the 

United States annually (250 to 350 million tons), MSW 

could be used as fuel to generate as much as 70 to 130 

billion kWh per year (U.S. EPA, 2008e). 

■ Restaurant wastes. Used vegetable oils, animal fats, 

and grease from restaurants can be used as biomass 

feedstocks to produce biodiesel. Small-scale efforts 

have been successfully implemented in a number of 

cities, counties, and universities across the country. 

For example, San Francisco initiated a program to 

use restaurant wastes to fuel the city’s fleet of more 

than 1,600 diesel vehicles, which were retrofitted 

to accept the biodiesel (City and County of San 

Francisco, 2007). The use of restaurant wastes may 

be less expensive than using new vegetable oil as the 

feedstock to produce biodiesel if collection costs can 

be minimized—collection of small volumes from numerous locations can increase costs (Commonwealth 

of Massachusetts, 2008). 
■ Wood waste. Wood waste includes mill residues from 

primary timber processing at sawmills, paper manufacturing, and secondary wood products industries 

such as furniture makers. It also includes construction 

wood waste, yard waste, urban tree residue, and discarded consumer wood products that would otherwise 

be sent to landfills (U.S. EPA, 2007a). Wood wastes 

such as woodchips, shavings, and sawdust can be compressed into pellets, which offer a more compact and 

uniform source of energy (Biomass Energy Resource 

Center, 2007). 

■ Mill residues. Mill residues include bark, chips, 

sander dust, edgings, sawdust, slabs, and black liquor 

(a mixture of solvents and wood byproducts, usually 

associated with the pulp and paper industry manufacturing process). They come from manufacturing 

operations such as sawmills and pulp and paper companies that produce lumber, pulp, veneers, and other 

composite wood fiber materials. Almost 98 percent of 

mill residues generated in the United States are currently used as fuel or to produce wood pellets or fire 

logs, or fiber products, such as hardboard, mediumdensity fiberboard, particle board, and other wood 

composites (U.S. EPA, 2007a). The U.S. Department 

of Agriculture (USDA) estimates that 2 to 3 percent 

of mill residues are available as an additional fuel 

resource because they are not being used for other 

purposes. The largest concentrations of mill residues 

are in the West and Southeast (U.S. EPA, 2007a). 

■ Construction (and demolition) wood waste. 

Wood waste comprises about 26 percent of the total 

construction and demolition waste stream; about 

30 percent of that debris is uncontaminated by 

chemical treatment and available for recovery (U.S. 

EPA, 2007a).

■ Discarded consumer wood products. These products 

include discarded wood furniture, cabinets, pallets, 

containers, and scrap lumber (U.S. EPA, 2007a). 

■ Yard trimmings. Yard trimmings can be generated 

from residential landscaping and right-of-way trimming near roads, railways, and utility systems such 

as power lines. Yard trimmings comprise about 

14 percent of the MSW stream. Approximately 36 

percent of yard trimmings are recoverable, and thus 

about 5 percent of the total MSW waste stream is 

yard trimmings that could be useable as a feedstock 

(U.S. EPA, 2007a). 

For more information about biomass feedstocks, see 

EPA’s CHP Biomass Catalog of Technologies at www.

epa.gov/chp/basic/catalog.html#biomasscat.

Wood Pellets

Wood pellets, briquettes, fire logs, and other compressed 

wood products are made from byproducts of forest products 

manufacturing, forest management, and recycled urban wood 

waste. These products are held together by the lignin in the 

wood when they are condensed through subjection to heat 

and pressure. Pellets are manufactured in uniform sizes and 

shapes (usually between 1-11⁄2 inches by approximately 1/4-

5/16 inches in diameter) and have a higher energy content by 

weight (roughly 7,750 Btu per pound at six percent moisture 

content) than many other biomass feedstocks due to their 

high density and low-moisture content. These characteristics 

alleviate many of the potential issues associated with storing 

biomass residues. Wood pellets are sold in different grades 

based on the ash produced during combustion relative to the 

amount of fuel fed into the wood pellet boiler (ranging from 1 

to 3 percent). States regulate the disposal and/or subsequent 

use of the ash.

Source: Biomass Energy Resource Center, 2007

 Chapter Two | State Bioenergy Primer 11

2.2 Potential for Increased 

Production and Use of Biomass

Feedstocks

Current Production and Use

In 2006, renewable energy accounted for 7 percent of 

the nation’s energy supply; of that, biomass was the 

source of 49 percent of renewable energy consumption 

(see Figure 1-1). Wood (used as fuel wood), forest 

residue, and wood waste feedstocks supplied the most 

bioenergy in 2005 (64 percent), followed by other types 

of wastes (e.g., MSW, LFG, agricultural residues, biosolids) (18 percent), and corn and soybean oil used to 

produce biofuels and related coproducts (18 percent) 

(EIA, 2008a; EIA, 2008b). 

Future Production and Use

Significant potential exists to increase the production 

and use of many different types of biomass feedstocks. 

In 2005, U.S. DOE and USDA convened an expert panel to assess whether the land resources of the United 

States could produce a sustainable supply of biomass 

sufficient to displace 30 percent of the nation’s current 

petroleum consumption (U.S. DOE, 2005). The panel 

concluded that by the mid-21st century:
■ The amount of wood, forest residue, and wood waste 

feedstocks sustainably produced for bioenergy each 

year could be increased nearly three times. 

■ The amount of agricultural feedstocks sustainably harvested while continuing to meet food, feed, and export 

demands each year could be increased five times. 

The panel believes the potential increases in all of these 

biomass feedstocks can occur with relatively modest 

changes in agricultural and forestry practices and land 

use, including technological advances that increase 

feedstock yields, adoption of certain sustainable crop 

cultivation practices (e.g., no-till), and land use changes 

that allow for large-scale production of perennial crops. 

For more information on determining the potential 

for increased use of feedstocks in a particular state, 

refer to Chapter 4, How Can States Identify Bioenergy 

Opportunities? 

2.3 How Are Biomass Feedstocks

Converted into Bioenergy?

The processes, or “conversion technologies,” used to 

convert biomass feedstocks from solids, liquids, or 

gases into bioenergy are shown in the middle column 

of Figure 2-2. This figure illustrates how different biomass feedstocks are converted into power, heat, fuels, 

and products.

All of the technologies shown in Figure 2-2 can and 

have been used for converting biomass; however, not 

all are currently deployed on a commercial scale. Table 

2-1 indicates the commercialization status of some of 

the more commonly used conversion technologies for 

bioenergy production.

The conversion technologies listed in Figure 2-2 and 

Table 2-1 are described in Section 2.3.1. 

Biorefineries

A biorefinery integrates biomass conversion technologies to 

produce biopower, biofuels, and/or bioproducts. A biorefinery 

is similar in concept to a petroleum refinery, producing 

multiple fuels and products. Biorefineries may play a key role 

in developing a domestic, bioenergy-based economy. Ideally, a 

biorefinery would be highly flexible, capable of using a variety 

of biomass feedstocks and changing its processes as needed, 

based on product demands. Such flexibility will help make 

biorefineries economically viable. Successful biorefineries 

already exist in the forest products and agricultural industries, 

producing food, feed, fiber, and/or chemicals (including 

plastics), as well as on-site power generation or CHP for facility 

operations (U.S. DOE, 2003).

Table 2-1. Commercialization Status of Common Bioenergy Conversion Technologies

Conversion Technology Commercialization Status of Technology

Direct combustion Commercially available

Cofiring Commercially available

Landfill Gas systems Commercially available

Anaerobic digestion Commercially available

Gasification (thermochemical process) Emerging technology

Pyrolysis (thermochemical process) Emerging technology

Thermochemical conversion of sugars Commercially available

Plant extraction (biochemical process) Emerging technology

Transesterification Commercially available

Fermentation (biochemical process) Commercially available for conventional ethanol production and bioproducts

Emerging technology for cellulosic ethanol production

12 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Two
Figure 2-2. Biomass Conversion Technologies

 Chapter Two | State Bioenergy Primer 13
2.3.1 Conversion Technologies for

Biopower and Bioheat

The three main types of conversion technologies used 

for producing electricity and heat are direct combustion, 

cofiring, and gasification systems. An important smaller 

scale conversion technology is anaerobic digestion. 

Direct Combustion

Solid Fuels to Electricity, Heat, or CHP. In direct 

combustion systems used to produce electricity, a 

solid biomass feedstock (e.g., agriculture residues, 

forest residue, municipal solid waste, wood waste) is 

combusted with excess oxygen (using fans) in a boiler 

to produce steam that is used to create electricity. Direct combustion, commonly used in existing fossil-fuel 

power plants, is a dependable and proven technology, 

and is the conversion technology most often used for 

bioenergy power plants. However, the typically small 

size of bioenergy power plants (often due to high costs 

of transporting feedstocks), coupled with the low efficiency rates associated with the direct combustion 

process, can result in higher costs to produce electricity 

than with conventional fossil-fueled power plants (U.S. 

DOE, 2007). Some new combustion technologies are 

using compressed hot air (either directly or indirectly 

through a heat exchanger) to fire a combustion turbine.

In direct combustion systems used to produce heat, 

biomass feedstock loaded into a boiler or furnace can 

be used to create steam, hot water, or hot air which is 

then used for thermal applications. Large open buildings can be heated very efficiently with wood-fired 

furnaces or hydronic heating systems such as radiant 

floors. Direct combustion technologies for producing 

heat can utilize modern, computer-controlled systems 

with automatic fuel feeders, high-efficiency boilers, 

and add-on controls to reduce particulate matter (PM) 

and toxics emissions to relatively low levels (provided 

best available technologies are used). These systems are 

typically less expensive to operate than systems that use 

electricity, fuel oil, or propane but more expensive than 

natural gas systems (U.S. EPA, 2007a). However, all 

economic comparisons are site-specific. 

CHP systems generate electricity and recapture waste 

heat from the electricity generation process, resulting 

in higher efficiency of fuel use. The electricity and heat 

can be used by the entity producing them as on-site 

power and heat, sold to others (such as an electric 

utility company), or in some combination of the two 

approaches. The forest products, chemical, and foodprocessing industries use on-site CHP systems widely. 

Increased use of biomass in CHP systems at pulp and 

paper mills has contributed to bioenergy surpassing 

hydropower as the leading source of renewable energy 

in the United States since 1999 (EIA, 2008a). Increasingly, on-site CHP (and to a limited degree, biomass 

CHP) is also being used at ethanol production facilities 

due to its increased efficiency and lower fuel costs (U.S. 

EPA, 2007b).

For more detailed information on direct combustion 

technologies used for combined heat and power from 

biomass, see EPA’s CHP Biomass Catalog of Technologies (U.S. EPA, 2007a) at www.epa.gov/chp/basic/

catalog.html#biomasscat.

Gaseous Fuels to Electricity, Heat, or CHP. As solid 

waste decomposes in a landfill, a gas is created that 

typically consists of about 50 percent methane and 50 

percent CO2

.

2

 The gas can either disperse into the air or 

be extracted using a series of wells and a blower/flare 

(or vacuum) system. This system directs the collected 

gas to a central point where it can be processed and 

treated. The gas can then be used to generate electricity, heat, or CHP via direct combustion; replace fossil 

fuels in industrial and manufacturing operations; be 

upgraded to pipeline quality gas, compressed natural 

gas (CNG) or liquid natural gas (LNG) for vehicle 

fuel; or be flared for disposal. As of December 2008, 

approximately 490 LFG energy projects were operational in the United States. These 490 projects generate 

approximately 11 million megawatt-hours (MWh) of 

electricity per year and deliver more than 230 million 

cubic feet per day of LFG to direct-use applications. 

EPA estimates that approximately 520 additional 

landfills present attractive opportunities for project 

development (U.S. EPA, 2007a, U.S. EPA, 2009c).

For more information about LFG systems, see information on converting LFG to energy from EPA’s 

Landfill Methane Outreach Partnership at www.epa.

gov/landfill/overview.htm#converting.

Cofiring

Solid Fuels to Electricity. Cofiring to produce electricity involves substituting solid fuel biomass (e.g., wood 

waste) for a portion of the fossil fuel (typically coal) 

used in the combustion process. In most cases, the 

existing power plant equipment can be used with only 

minor modifications, making this the simplest and 

2 The amount of methane generated by a landfill over its lifetime depends on 

the composition of the waste, quantity and moisture content of the waste, and 

design and management practices of the facility.

14 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Two
most economical option for biopower. Pulverized coal 

boiler systems are the most widely used systems in 

the United States; cofiring is also used in other types 

of boilers, including coal-fired cyclones, stokers, and 

fluidized bed boilers.

To evaluate the efficacy of biomass cofiring, a study by 

U.S. DOE and the Electric Power Research Institute 

(EPRI) modeled the performance of a pulverized coal 

power plant using only coal and the same power plant 

operating with biomass cofiring. The study identified 

a 15 percent biomass cofiring rate as realistic given 

biomass resource limitations and requirements to 

maintain unit efficiency. Cofiring biomass for up to 

15 percent of the fuel was demonstrated during preliminary testing to result in little or no loss in boiler 

efficiency (EPRI and U.S. DOE, 1997).

For more information on cofiring, see EPA’s CHP 

Biomass Catalog of Technologies (U.S. EPA, 2007) at 

www.epa.gov/chp/basic/catalog.html#biomasscat. 

Gasification and Pyrolysis

Solid Fuels to Electricity, Heat, or CHP. Gasification, 

plasma arc gasification, and pyrolysis are thermal 

degradation processes that can convert solid biomass 

feedstocks to a gas. 

■ Gasification is a chemical or heat process that converts 

a solid fuel to a gas. To create bioenergy, solid biomass 

feedstocks (e.g., wood waste) are heated above 700 

degrees Celsius inside a gasifier with limited oxygen, 

which converts the feedstock into a flammable, synthesis gas (syngas). Depending on the carbon and hydrogen content of the biomass and the gasifier’s properties, 

the heating value of the syngas can range from about 

15 to 40 percent of natural gas. Syngas can be burned 

in a boiler or engine to produce electricity and/or heat. 

Syngas can also be converted thermochemically to a 

liquid fuel (Kent, 2007). 

Gasification has high efficiencies and great potential 

for small-scale power plant applications. Because the 

gas can be filtered to remove potential pollutants, the 

process can produce very low levels of air emissions. 

For more information on gasification, see EPA’s CHP 

Biomass Catalog of Technologies at www.epa.gov/

chp/basic/catalog.html#biomasscat or DOE’s Biomass 

primer at www.eere.energy.gov/de/biomass_power.html.

■ Plasma Arc Gasification is a waste treatment technology that uses the high temperatures of an electrical 

 Chapter Two | State Bioenergy Primer 15

discharge (“arc”) to heat a gas, typically oxygen or 

nitrogen, to temperatures potentially in excess of 3000 

degrees Celsius. The gases heated by the plasma arc 

come into contact with the waste in a device called 

a plasma converter and vitrify or melt the inorganic 

fraction of the waste and gasify the organic and hydrocarbon (e.g., plastic, rubber, etc.) fraction. The extreme 

heat pulls apart the organic molecular structure of the 

material to produce a simpler gaseous structure, primarily CO, H2, and CO2 (Beck, 2003).

Plasma arc gasification is intended to be a process for 

generating electricity, depending upon the composition 

of input wastes, and for reducing the volumes of waste 

being sent to landfill sites (R. W. Beck, 2003). Most 

plasma arc systems are cost effective at only very large 

scales (1,000,000 tons of feedstock per year or more). A 

number of companies are working on the development 

and deployment of this emerging technology.

■ Pyrolysis also uses high temperatures and pressure 

in the absence of oxygen to decompose organic components in biomass into gas, liquid (bio-oil), and char 

products (bio-char) (U.S. DOE, 2003). The process 

occurs at lower temperatures than combustion or 

gasification. Controlling the temperature and reaction 

rate determines product composition (Southern States 

Energy Board, 2006). 

■ Bio-oil is an acidic complex mixture of oxygenated 

hydrocarbons with high water content. Most data 

and research come from the pyrolysis of wood, 

although it is possible to convert any biomass 

feedstock into bio-oil through pyrolysis. Bio-oil’s 

composition is influenced by several factors: feedstock properties, heat transfer rate, reaction time, 

temperature history of vapors, efficiency of char removal, condensation equipment, water content, and 

storage conditions. Bio-oil can be used for producing 

thermal energy (e.g., for heating buildings, water, 

and in industrial processes), for power generation 

using slow-speed diesel engines or combustion turbines, and for cofiring in utility-scale boilers. Bio-oil 

cannot be used as a transportation fuel without 

further refining (Easterly, 2002) (see Section 2.2.2 — 

Thermochemical and Biochemical Conversion, for a 

discussion of bio-oil and transportation fuels). 

The energy content of bio-oil ranges from 72,000 to 

80,000 Btu per gallon whereas conventional heating 

oil (No. 2) has an energy content of about 138,500 

Btu per gallon. Thus, bio-oil contains about 52 to 58 

percent as much energy and almost twice as much 

bio-oil is required to produce the same amount of 
heat as No. 2 heating oil. In addition, bio-oil weighs 

about 40 percent more per gallon than heating oil 

(Easterly, 2002).

■ A coproduct of producing bio-oil is char or bio-char 

(see Section 2.2.3 — Biochemical). 

Anaerobic Digestion

Solid Fuels to Gaseous Fuels for Electricity, Heat, or 

CHP. Anaerobic digestion is the decomposition of 

biological wastes (i.e., wastewater treatment sludge or 

animal manure) by microorganisms in the absence 

of oxygen, which produces biogas. Digestion occurs 

under certain conditions (psychrophilic, mesophilic, 

and thermophilic), which differ mainly based on 

bacterial affinity for specific temperatures. This process 

produces a gas that consists of 60 to 70 percent methane, 30 to 40 percent CO2

, and trace amounts of other 

gases (EPA, 2002). The methane can be captured (and 

sometimes filtered or cleaned) and used to produce 

electricity and/or heat, directly used to offset fossil 

fuels, upgraded to pipeline quality gas, or used in 

the production of liquid fuels. Anaerobic digestion is 

commonly used at wastewater treatment facilities and 

animal feeding operations. 

Anaerobic digestion at wastewater treatment facilities 

is used to process, stabilize, and reduce the volume of 

biosolids (sludge) and reduce odors. It is often a twophase process: First, biosolids are heated and mixed 

in a closed tank for about 15 days as digestion occurs. 

The biosolids then go to a second tank for settling and 

storage. Temperature, acidity, and other characteristics 

must be monitored and controlled. Many wastewater 

treatment plants that use anaerobic digesters burn the 

gas for heat to maintain digester temperatures and heat 

building space. The biogas can also be used to produce 

electricity (e.g., in an engine-generator or fuel cell) or 

flared for disposal. 

Anaerobic digesters at animal feeding operations are 

used to process, stabilize, and reduce the volume of 

manure, reduce odors and pathogens, separate solids 

and liquids for application to cropland as fertilizer or 

irrigation water, and produce biogas. Farm-based anaerobic digesters consist of four basic components: the 

digester, a gas-handling system, a gas-use device, and a 

manure storage tank or pond to hold the treated effluent prior to land application. The biogas can be used to 

generate heat, hot water, or electricity, directly used 

to offset fossil fuels, upgraded to pipeline quality gas, 

or used in the production of liquid fuels. The captured 

biogas is typically used to generate electrical power, 

with many farms recovering waste heat for on-farm 

use. These systems generate about 244,000 MWh of 

electricity per year in the United States. The biogas can 

also be used in boilers, upgraded for injection into the 

natural gas pipeline, or flared for odor control. 

For more information about anaerobic digestion, see 

EPA’s Guide to Anaerobic Digesters at www.epa.gov/

agstar/operational.html.

2.3.2 Conversion Technologies for

Biofuels

Conversion of biomass into ethanol and biodiesel 

liquid fuels has been increasing steadily over the past 

decade. As of November 2008, there are 180 fuel 

ethanol production facilities in operation or expansion and another 23 under construction (Renewable 

Fuels Association [RFA], 2008). Total fuel ethanol 

production in 2008 was 9 billion gallons (RFA, 2009). 

In addition, as of January 2008, 171 companies have 

invested in development of biodiesel manufacturing 

plants and were actively marketing biodiesel. The annual production capacity from these biodiesel plants 

is 2.24 billion gallons per year (National Biodiesel 

Board, n.d.). This discussion focuses on ethanol and 

biodiesel production; however, other biofuels can also 

be produced, such as methanol, butanol, synfuels, and 

algal fuel. Additional details about current and developing technologies for converting solid biomass into 

liquid fuels are available from the Western Governors’ 

2008 Association Strategic Assessment of Bioenergy 

Development in the West, Bioenergy Conversion 

Technology Characteristics (Western Governors’ Association, 2008).

Both ethanol and biodiesel can be produced using a 

variety of feedstocks and processes. Their feedstocks 

Ethanol and Biodiesel. 

Both ethanol and biodiesel are registered as fuel and fuel 

additives with the U.S. EPA. 

As initially required under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 

and subsequently revised in the Energy Independence and 

Security Act (EISA) of 2007, Congress created a Renewable 

Fuel Standard (RFS) to ensure that transportation fuel sold in 

the United States contains minimum volumes of renewable 

fuel, such as ethanol or biodiesel. The current RFS program will 

increase the volume of renewable fuel required to be blended 

into gasoline to 36 billion gallons by 2022.

Source: U.S. EPA, 2009

16 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Two
and conversion technologies are shown in Figure 2-2 

and described below. 

Thermochemical and Biochemical Conversion 

Solid Fuels to Cellulosic Ethanol. Ethanol can be made 

from cellulosic materials such as grasses, wood waste, 

and crop residues. Cellulosic ethanol is made from 

plant parts composed of cellulose, which makes up 

much of the cell walls of plants, and hemicellulose, also 

found in plant cell walls. Lignin, another plant part that 

surrounds cellulose, can also be used to make ethanol. 

Feedstocks that use both cellulose and lignin are sometimes referred to as “lignocellulosic” feedstocks; for 

simplicity, this section uses the term cellulosic to refer 

to both cellulosic and lignin-based ethanol production. 

Breaking down the cellulose in cellulosic feedstocks 

to release the sugars for fermentation is more difficult 

than breaking down starch (e.g., in corn) to release 

sugars; thus, cellulosic ethanol production is more 

complex and more expensive than conventional ethanol production. Cellulosic biofuel production uses biochemical or thermochemical processes (NREL, 2007).

Ethanol

A type of alcohol that is used as an alternative energy 

transportation fuel, can be made from crops such as 

corn, sugarcane, sorghum, and switchgrass, as well as 

opportunity/waste fuels such as agricultural and forest/

wood residue. 

Conventional ethanol ■ has been made from corn or sugarcane 

for decades using processes that have evolved over time, but 

are nonetheless considered “conventional” ethanol production. 

Cellulosic ethanol ■ is created from cellulosic feedstocks 

using processes that have been developed more recently 

and are not yet commercially deployed. Cellulosic ethanol is 

considered “advanced” or “second generation,” using more 

complex processes and potentially a wider variety of biomass 

feedstocks. 

■ Biochemical conversion. Biochemical conversion for 

ethanol production from cellulosic feedstocks involves:

■ Pretreatment of the feedstock using high-temperature, high-pressure acid; enzymes; or other methods 

to break down the lignin and hemicellulose that surround the cellulose. 

■ Hydrolysis using enzymes and acids to break down 

the cellulose into sugars. 

■ Fermentation to convert the sugars into ethanol (as 

in conventional production).

■ Distillation to produce purer ethanol (as in conventional production).

■ Thermochemical conversion. Thermochemical 

conversion uses heat and chemicals to break down cellulosic feedstock into syngas. Depending upon the process being used, the gas can be converted to liquid fuels 

such as ethanol, bio-butanol, methanol, mixed alcohols, 

or bio-oil (through pyrolysis). Thermochemical conversion is particularly useful for lignin, which cannot 

be easily converted to ethanol using the biochemical 

process described above; up to one-third of cellulosic 

feedstock can be composed of lignin. Forest and mill 

residue feedstocks generally have high lignin contents, 

and thus would be more suitable for thermochemical 

ethanol conversion than biochemical conversion. 

The thermochemical conversion process involves: 

■ Drying the cellulosic feedstock.

■ Gasification (using heat to convert the feedstock to 

a syngas) or pyrolysis (using heat and pressure to 

produce an oil).

■ Contaminant removal.

■ Conversion of the syngas to ethanol, bio-oil, or other 

products. 

■ Distillation to separate ethanol from water (if producing ethanol).

A number of researchers and organizations are 

evaluating process changes and refinements to make 

cellulosic ethanol production more commercially 

viable and cost-competitive. For more information, see NREL’s Research Advances: NREL Leads the 

Way—Cellulosic Ethanol at www.nrel.gov/biomass/

pdfs/40742.pdf.

For more information on cellulosic ethanol production, see www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/ethanol/production_cellulosic.html.

Solid Fuels to Bio-Oil. Bio-oil has limited market presence and does not yet enjoy the popularity of other 

biofuels such as ethanol and biodiesel. Current research 

and development in pyrolysis focuses on maximizing 

liquid (bio-oil) yields because of the ability to transport 

and store liquid fuels and the ability of bio-oil to be 

further refined in existing petroleum refineries into 

transportation fuels. In 2005, successful tests produced 

syngas through gasification of bio-oil, which can be further processed into syndiesel. Syndiesel can be used in 

 Chapter Two | State Bioenergy Primer 17
all diesel end-use devices without modification (Dynamotive, 2005). Recent tests also show that it is possible 

to take bio-oil and refine it into a green diesel product 

using existing petroleum refineries. This technology 

pathway effectively takes advantage of the infrastructure 

associated with the existing petroleum industry (Holmgren et al., 2005). Beyond energy products, bio-oil can 

be further refined into a range of specialty chemicals, 

including flavor enhancers, and fuel additives. 

Fermentation

Solid Fuels to Conventional Ethanol. In the United 

States, all commercially established ethanol production 

to date has been based on the biochemical process of 

fermentation, which involves conversion of sugars in 

starchy plants (such as corn or sugarcane) by microorganisms into alcohol. As of November 2008, 171 of the 

180 operating ethanol biorefineries in the United States 

used corn as the primary feedstock (RFA, 2008). 

Ethanol from corn is produced in either dry mills or wet 

mills. In dry mills, corn is ground into flour, water and 

enzymes are added, the mixture is “cooked,” and yeast 

is added for fermentation. The mixture is then distilled 

and water is removed to produce ethanol. In wet mills, 

corn is soaked in hot water to separate starch and protein, the corn is ground and the germ is separated, the 

remaining slurry is ground, and some of the remaining 

starch is further processed to produce sugars. The material is then fermented and distilled to produce ethanol. 

In recent years, most new ethanol production facilities 

have been dry mill plants. As of July 2008, approximately 95 percent of United States corn-ethanol facilities were dry mills, accounting for nearly 90 percent of 

gallons produced. Dry mills typically produce ethanol, 

animal feed, and sometimes CO2 (U.S. EPA, 2008d). 

For more information on conventional corn-based 

ethanol production, see www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/

ethanol/production_starch_sugar.html.

Transesterification 

Oils to Biodiesel. Biodiesel production converts oils 

or fats into biodiesel, which can be used to fuel diesel 

vehicles (or stationary engines). In biodiesel production, fats and oils are converted into biodiesel through 

a process known as “transesterification.” The oils and 

fats are filtered and pretreated to remove water and 

contaminants (e.g., free fatty acids), then mixed with 

an alcohol (often methanol) and a catalyst (e.g., sodium 

hydroxide) to produce compounds known as fatty acid 

methyl esters and glycerin (U.S. DOE, 2008). The esters 

are called biodiesel when they are intended for use as 

fuel. Glycerin is used in pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, 

and other markets. Often biodiesel and glycerin are 

produced as coproducts. 

In the United States, biodiesel is made primarily from 

soybeans/soy oil or recycled restaurant grease; in 

Europe, biodiesel is produced primarily from rapeseed 

(EERE, 2008). About half of current biodiesel production facilities can use any fats or oils as a feedstock, including waste cooking oil; the other production facilities 

require vegetable oil, often soy oil. Biodiesel production 

facilities are often located in rural areas, near biodiesel 

feedstock sources such as farms growing soybeans. 

Farmers often use biodiesel in their farm equipment. 

Increased demand for biodiesel feedstocks from 

farms, as well as establishment of locally sited and/or 

owned biodiesel production facilities, can help boost 

rural economies.

For more information about biodiesel production, 

see the U.S. DOE Web site at www.afdc.energy.gov/

afdc/fuels/biodiesel_production.html and the National 

Biodiesel Board’s Web site at www.biodiesel.org/

pdf_files/fuelfactsheets/Production.PDF.

2.3.3 Conversion Technologies for

Bioproducts

Biomass feedstocks are made of carbohydrates, and 

thus contain the same basic elements—carbon and hydrogen—as petroleum and natural gas. Many products, 

such as adhesives, detergents, and some plastics, can 

be made from either petroleum or biomass feedstocks. 

Like biofuels, technologies for converting biomass 

feedstocks into bioproducts use three main processes: 

biochemical conversion, thermochemical conversion, 

or transesterification. 

Biochemical conversion for bioproducts includes 

fermentation and plant extraction. Thermochemical 

conversion technologies, such as direct combustion, gasification, and pyrolysis, use heat, chemicals, 

Biodiesel 

Biodiesel is usually blended with petroleum diesel to create 

either B20 (a 20 percent biodiesel blend) or B90 (a 90 percent 

biodiesel blend), which can be used in diesel engines with little 

or no modification and provides better engine performance 

and lubrication than petroleum fuel (U.S. EPA, 2008e). 

18 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Two
catalysts, and pressure to break down biomass feedstocks. Transesterification uses alcohols to break down 

vegetable oils for use in bioproducts.

As of 2003, use of biomass feedstocks provided more 

than $400 billion of bioproducts annually in the United 

States (U.S. DOE, 2003). Production of chemicals and 

materials from bio-based products was approximately 

12.5 billion pounds, or 5 percent of the current production of target U.S. chemical commodities (U.S. 

DOE, 2005). 

Bioproducts

Many industrial and consumer products, such as soap, 

detergent, soy-based ink, solvents, and adhesives, are already 

produced totally or partially from biomass feedstocks, primarily 

corn, vegetable oils, and wood. 

In addition, many products currently made from petroleum could 

instead be made, in whole or part, from biomass feedstocks. 

Also, new bioproducts and technologies are being developed 

with the potential to increase production and use of bioproducts.

Current Bioproduct Applications

Acrylic fibers Pharmaceuticals

Adhesives Polymers

Cosmetics Resins

Detergents Soaps

Lubricants Solvents

Paints Textiles

 Chapter Two | State Bioenergy Primer 19

Biochemical 

Biochemical conversion for bioproducts includes fermentation and plant extraction.

Sugars and Starches to Bioproducts. Fermentation 

with microorganisms or enzymes is commonly used to 

convert starches and the sugar glucose into a variety of 

organic acids and ethanol that are then used to create 

bioproducts or intermediate materials used in manufacturing bioproducts. Food processing wastes are used 

as biomass feedstocks in the fermentation process for 

bioproducts (A.D. Little, Inc., 2001).

Specifically, fermentation can also be used to convert 

sugars into:

■ Lactic acid derivatives such as acrylic acid, which can 

be used in coatings and adhesives;

■ Ethyl lactate, which can replace many petroleum-based 

solvents; and

■ Polylactide (PLA), a plastic that can be used in packaging and fiber applications, and can be melted and reused 

or composted when it reaches the end of its useful life. 

Ongoing research and pilot-scale applications of 

bioproducts made from lactic acid derivatives show 

great promise. Advances in fermentation technology 

(e.g., new microorganisms and separation techniques) 

may allow other sugars (e.g., pentose sugars such as 

xylose) to be converted to bioproducts. These advances 

would open up use of cellulosic biomass feedstocks 

(e.g., corn stover, switchgrass, wheat straw) to make 

bioproducts. Such advances may allow additional 

bioproducts to be made through fermentation at costs 

competitive with conventional petroleum-based products (U.S. DOE, 2003). 

Plant Components to Bioproducts. Lumber, paper, 

and cotton fiber are well-known examples of plants 

used to make bioproducts. Tocopherols and sterols are 

substances in plants that can be extracted and purified 

for use in vitamins and cholesterol-lowering products. 

A plant known as guayule produces nonallergenic rubber latex that can replace other types of rubber to which 

many people have developed allergies (U.S. DOE, 2003). 

Thermochemical 

Thermochemical conversion technologies—sugar 

conversion, gasification, and pyrolysis—use heat, 

chemicals, catalysts (such as acids, metals, or both), 

and pressure to break down biomass feedstocks, directly converting sugars into bioproducts or producing 

intermediate materials that can be converted into final 

bioproducts through other means.

Sugars to Bioproducts. Thermochemical conversion 

has been used for more than 50 years to convert the 

sugar glucose into sorbitol. Sorbitol derivatives—such 

as propylene glycol, ethylene glycol, and glycerin—are 

important commercial products used in solvents, 

coatings, pharmaceuticals, and other applications. Currently, propylene glycol and ethylene glycol are made 

from petroleum; thermochemical conversion uses 

biomass feedstocks (rather than petroleum) to produce 

these sorbitol derivatives. 

Thermochemical conversion can also convert sugars 

other than glucose (e.g., xylose) to sorbitol. Thermochemical conversion is also used to convert sugar 

to levulinic acid, which is then used to produce a 
variety of bioproducts, such as methyl tetrahydrofuran 

(MTHF), used in primaquine, an antimalarial drug, 

and diphenoloic acid (DPA), used as an alternative to 

bisphenol A (BPA) in polymers. 

New catalysts and thermochemical technologies are 

creating new opportunities for bioproducts, including 

use of cellulosic feedstocks to create sorbitol-related 

and other bioproducts (U.S. DOE, 2003). 

Solid Fuels to Syngas. Gasification uses high temperatures and oxygen to convert solid carbonaceous material into syngas, which is a mixture of carbon monoxide (CO), hydrogen, and sometimes CO2

. Syngas can 

be converted into chemicals such as methanol, which is 

then converted into other chemicals such as formaldehyde and acetic acid. Syngas can also be converted into 

chemicals, such as paraffins and fatty acids, by using 

catalysts (cobalt or iron) and high temperature and 

pressure (known as the Fischer-Tropsch process) (U.S. 

DOE, 2003). 

Solid Fuels to Bioproducts. Pyrolysis uses high temperatures and pressure in the absence of oxygen to decompose organic components in biomass into liquids, 

solids, and gases. The liquids, in particular, can contain 

chemicals that can be used in bioproduct manufacturing, but isolating these chemicals via separation 

technology can be difficult. The technology closest to 

commercialization is pyrolysis of cellulosic feedstocks 

containing high amounts of lignin. This technology can 

produce a replacement for the toxic chemical phenol 

in phenol-formaldehyde resins, used in plywood and 

other wood composites (U.S. DOE, 2003). 

Bio-char is another potential product from the pyrolysis process, which has multiple uses. One option is to 

use the char as a soil amendment on agricultural lands. 

Bio-char has been shown to improve soil organic matter, reduce fertilizer and water requirements, improve 

nutrient delivery to the plant (through adsorption), 

and sequester carbon (Cornell University, 2009).

Densification

Solid Fuels to Pellets or Briquettes. A robust market exists for solid biomass fuels such as pellets or 

briquettes, which are a bioproduct formed from 

compressed wood or agricultural residue feedstocks 

that can be used as fuel for heating (see Section 2.2.1 — 

Direct Combustion). 

Pellets are typically 1/4” or 5/16” diameter and are the 

most costly compressed biomass form. Bripells are the 

same shape as pellets but 1-1/2” in diameter. They are so 

named because they are between briquettes and pellets 

in size. Briquettes are compressed biomass forms larger 

than a pellet. Typically, briquettes are square or rectangular and can be the size of typical backyard barbeque fuel 

up to the size of a building brick (NREL, Unpublished).

Pellets are a refined product and require the most expensive processing. The higher cost of pellets as a fuel 

for heating is offset by the convenience of being able to 

use fuel burning equipment that can be automated and 

needs minimal attention (particularly when compared 

to bulk biomass systems). This convenience is important because pellets typically compete for market share 

against almost zero-maintenance natural gas, propane, 

or electric heat. Briquettes require less energy to produce and are processed through simpler production 

methods (NREL, Unpublished).

Transesterification 

Oils to Bioproducts. Transesterification uses alcohols 

to break down vegetable oils for use in bioproducts. 

Vegetable oils are composed primarily of triglycerides, 

which can be broken down using an alcohol (such as 

methanol) into glycerin and fatty acids. The fatty acids 

are then modified into intermediate products used to 

make bioproducts. Vegetable oils from biomass feedstocks such as soybeans, sunflowers, and linseed are 

used to manufacture bioproducts such as lubricants, 

solvents, resins, plasticizers, inks, and adhesives (U.S. 

DOE, 2003).

For more information on conversion technologies 

used to manufacture bioproducts, see U.S. DOE’s 

report Industrial Bioproducts: Today and Tomorrow at 

www.brdisolutions.com/pdfs/BioProductsOpportunitiesReportFinal.pdf.

20 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Two
2.4 Resources for Detailed Information

Resource Description URL

Bioenergy

Woody Biomass Utilization, U.S. 

Forest Service and Bureau of Land 

Management.

This U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management 

Web site provides links to a variety of resources and reports 

on woody biomass utilization, including tools and references 

specifically targeted at state governments.

www.forestsandrangelands.gov/

Woody_Biomass/index.shtml

BioWeb, Sun Grant Initiative. An online catalog of a broad range of resources on 

bioenergy, including descriptions of biomass resources, 

biofuels, and bioproducts; explanations of conversion 

technologies; and summaries of relevant policies. The 

resources are searchable by both topic and level of detail of 

information provided. The catalog is a product of the Sun 

Grant Initiative, a national network of land-grant universities 

and federally funded laboratories working together to 

further establish a bio-based economy.

http://bioweb.sungrant.org/

Biomass as Feedstock for a 

Bioenergy and Bioproducts 

Industry: The Technical 

Feasibility of a Billion-Ton 

Annual Supply, U.S. DOE, USDA, 

2005. 

Describes issues associated with reaching the goal of 1 

billion tons of annual biomass production (see especially pp. 

34–37).

www.osti.gov/bridge

Biomass Energy Data Book, U.S. 

DOE, September 2006.

Provides a compilation of biomass-related statistical data. http://cta.ornl.gov/bedb/index.

shtml

Biomass Feedstock Composition 

and Property Database, U.S. DOE.

Provides results on chemical composition and physical 

properties from analyses of more than 150 samples of 

potential bioenergy feedstocks, including corn stover; wheat 

straw, bagasse, switchgrass, and other grasses; and poplars 

and other fast-growing trees.

www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/

feedstock_databases.html

A Geographic Perspective on 

the Current Biomass Resource 

Availability in the United States, 

Milbrandt, A., 2005. 

Describes the availability of the various types of biomass on a 

county-by-county basis.

www.nrel.gov/docs/

fy06osti/39181.pdf

Kent and Riegel’s Handbook 

of Industrial Chemistry and 

Biotechnology, Kent, 2007.

Detailed, comprehensive, fairly technical explanation of the 

range of biomass conversion technologies.

Biopower/Bioheat

Biomass Combined Heat and 

Power Catalog of Technologies, 

U.S. EPA, September 2007.

Detailed technology characterization of biomass CHP 

systems, including technical and economic characterization 

of biomass resources, biomass preparation, energy 

conversion technologies, power production systems, and 

complete integrated systems. Includes extensive discussion 

of biomass feedstocks. 

www.epa.gov/chp/documents/

biomass_chp_catalog.pdf

Combined Heat and Power 

Market Potential for Opportunity 

Fuels, U.S. DOE, Resource 

Dynamics Corporation, August 

2004.

Determines the best “opportunity fuels” for distributed 

energy sources and CHP applications.

www.eere.energy.gov/de/pdfs/

chp_opportunityfuels.pdf

 Chapter Two | State Bioenergy Primer 21
Resource Description URL

Biofuels/Bioproducts

Bioenergy Conversion 

Technology Characteristics, 

Western Governors’ Association, 

September 2008.

Investigates the biofuel conversion technologies that are 

currently available, as well as technologies currently under 

development that are developed enough to be potentially 

available on a commercial basis circa 2015.

www.westgov.org/wga/initiatives/

transfuels/Task%202.pdf

A National Laboratory Market 

and Technology Assessment of 

the 30x30 Scenario, NREL, March 

2007.

Draft assessment of the market drivers and technology needs 

to achieve the goal of supplying 30 percent of 2004 motor 

gasoline fuel demand with biofuels by 2030.

From Biomass to BioFuels: NREL

Leads the Way, NREL, August 

2006.

Provides an overview of the world of biofuels, including the 

maturity levels of various biofuels, how they are produced, 

and the U.S. potential for biofuels.

www.nrel.gov/biomass/

pdfs/39436.pdf

Research Advances Cellulosic 

Ethanol: NREL Leads the Way, 

NREL, March 2007.

Highlights some of NREL’s most recent advances in cellulosic 

ethanol production.

www.nrel.gov/biomass/

pdfs/40742.pdf

2.4 Resources for Detailed Information (cont.)

22 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Two

2.5 References

■A.D. Little, Inc., 2001. Aggressive Use of Bioderived 

Products and Materials in the U.S. by 2010. U.S. DOE. 

Washington, DC, 2001. devafdc.nrel.gov/pdfs/6282.pdf.

■Antares Group, Inc., 2003. Assessment of Power Production at Rural Utilities Using Forest Thinnings and 

Commercially Available Biomass Power Technologies. 

Prepared for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. 

DOE, and NREL. As cited in U.S. EPA, 2007.

■Beck, 2003, Beck, R. W. City Of Honolulu Review of 

Plasma Arc Gasification and Vitrification Technology 

for Waste Disposal. Honolulu, 2003. www.opala.org/

pdfs/solid_waste/arc/PlasmaArc.pdf.

■Biomass Energy Resource Center, 2007. Wood Pellet 

Heating: A Reference on Wood Pellet Fuels & Technology for Small Commercial & Institutional Systems. 

Montpelier, VT, June, 2007. www.biomasscenter.org/

pdfs/DOER_Pellet_Guidebook.pdf.

■Biomass Research and Development Board, 2008. National Biofuels Action Plan. Washington, DC, October 

2008. www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/pdfs/nbap.pdf.

■Biomass Research and Development Initiative, 2008. 

Increasing Feedstock Production for Biofuels: Economic Drivers, Environmental Implications, and the Role 

of Research. Washington, DC, 2008. www1.eere.energy.

gov/biomass/pdfs/brdi_feedstock_wg2008.pdf.

■City and County of San Francisco, 2007. Mayor 

Newsom Launches SFGreasecycle - The Nation’s First 

Citywide Program That Collects Waste Grease to Create Biofuel for Municipal Fleet. San Francisco, CA, 

November, 20, 2007. www.sfgov.org/site/mayor_index.

asp?id=71394.

■Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 2008. Advanced 

Biofuels Task Force Report. Boston, 2008. www.mass.

gov/Eoeea/docs/eea/biofuels/biofuels_complete.pdf.

■Cornell University, 2009. Biochar Soil Management. 

Ithaca, NY. www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/lehmann/

research/biochar/biocharmain.html.

■Dynamotive, 2005. Successful Conversion of Dynamotive’s Bio Oil to Synthetic Gas Demonstrates Potential 

for Production of Synthetic Diesel and other Advanced 

Fuels. Press Release, September 22, 2005. www.thefreelibrary.com/Successful+Conversion+of+DynaMoti

ve’s+BioOil+to+Synthetic+Gas...-a0136505108.
■Easterly, 2002. Easterly, J. Assessment of Bio-Oil as 

a Replacement for Heating Oil. Northeast Regional 

Biomass Program. Washington, DC, November, 

2002. www.mtholyoke.edu/courses/tmillett/course/

geog_304B/pub34.pdf.

■EERE (Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy), 2008. Biofuels. U.S. DOE, Washington, DC, 

2008. www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/.

■EIA (Energy Information Administration), 2008a. 

Renewable Energy Trends in Consumption and 

Electricity 2006. EIA, Washington, DC, July, 2008. 

www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/page/trends/

table1_5b.xls. 

■EIA, 2008b. Table 6. Biomass Energy Consumption 

by Energy Source and Energy Use Sector 2001–2005. 

Washington, DC, April 2008. www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/

solar.renewables/page/rea_data/table6.html.

■EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute) and 

U.S. DOE, 1997. Renewable Energy Technology 

Characterizations. EPRI TR-109496. Washington, DC, 

1997. www1.eere.energy.gov/ba/pba/tech_characterizations.html.

■Holmgren, 2005. Holmgren, J., R. Marinangeli, T. 

Markera, M. McCall, J. Petri, S. Czernik, D. Elliott, D. 

Shonnard. Opportunities for Biorenewables in Petroleum Refineries. UOP, December 2005. www.pyne.

co.uk/Resources/user/PYNE%20Newsletters/001338_

Pyne%20p4-7.pdf. 

■Kent, 2007. Kent, James A., ed. Kent and Riegel’s 

Handbook of Industrial Chemistry and Biotechnology. 

11th ed., pp. 1499–1548. New York: Springer, 2007. 

■Mayfield, 2008. Algal Model Systems. The Scripps 

Research Institute. Presented at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory—Air Force Office of Scientific 

Research Workshop on Algal Oil for Jet Fuel Production. NREL, Golden, CO, February 2008. www.nrel.

gov/biomass/algal_oil_workshop.html.

■Milbrandt, A., 2005. Geographic Perspective on the 

Current Biomass Resource Availability in the United 

States. NREL/TP-560-39181. NREL, Golden, CO, December 2005. www.nrel.gov/docs/fy06osti/39181.pdf.

■National Biodiesel Board, n.d. Biodiesel Production. 

National Biodiesel Board, Washington, DC, n.d. www.

biodiesel.org/pdf_files/fuelfactsheets/Production.pdf.

 Chapter Two | State Bioenergy Primer 23

■NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory), 

2006. From Biomass to Biofuels: NREL Leads the 

Way. August 2006. NREL/BR-510-39436. NREL, 

Golden, CO, August 2006. www.nrel.gov/biomass/

pdfs/39436.pdf.

■NREL, 2007. Research Advances—Cellulosic Ethanol: 

NREL Leads the Way. NREL/BR-510-40742. NREL, 

Golden, CO, March 2007. www.nrel.gov/biomass/

pdfs/40742.pdf.

■NREL, 2008. Research Review 2007. NREL/MP-840-

42386. NREL, Golden, CO, August 2008. www.nrel.

gov/research_review/pdfs/2007/42386.pdf.

■NREL, Unpublished. Assessment of Biomass Pelletization Options for Greensburg, Kansas. Draft Technical 

Report. NREL, Golden, CO. 

■RFA (Renewable Fuels Association), 2008. Ethanol 

Biorefinery Locations. Renewable Fuels Association, 

Washington, DC, 2008. www.ethanolrfa.org/

industry/locations. 

■RFA, 2009. Historic U.S. Fuel Ethanol Production. 

Renewable Fuels Association, Washington, DC, 2009. 

www.ethanolrfa.org/industry/statistics/#A.

■Southern States Energy Board, 2006. American Energy Security: Building a Bridge to Energy Independence 

and to a Sustainable Energy Future. Southern States 

Energy Board. Norcross, Georgia, 2006. americanenergysecurity.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/

aes-report.pdf. 

■Ugarte et al., 2006. Ugarte, D., B. English, K. Jensen, C. 

Hellwinckel, J. Menard, B. Wilson, 2006. Economic and 

Agricultural Impacts of Ethanol and Biodiesel Expansion. The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, 2006. 

beag.ag.utk.edu/pp/Ethanolagimpacts.pdf.

■U.S. DOE (Department of Energy), 2003. Industrial 

Bioproducts: Today and Tomorrow. U.S. DOE, Washington, DC, July 2003.

■U.S. DOE, 2004. Combined Heat and Power Market 

Potential for Opportunity Fuels. Resource Dynamics 

Corporation, Washington, DC, August 2004. 

■U.S. DOE, 2005. Biomass as Feedstock for a Bioenergy 

and Bioproducts Industry: The Technical Feasibility of 

a Billion-Ton Annual Supply. U.S. DOE, Washington, 

DC, April 2005. DOE/DO-102995-2135. feedstockreview.ornl.gov/pdf/billion_ton_vision.pdf.
■U.S. DOE, 2007. ABCs of Biopower. U.S. DOE, Washington, DC, March 15, 2007. www1.eere.energy.gov/

biomass/abcs_biopower.html. 

■U.S. DOE, 2008. Biodiesel Production. U.S. DOE, 

Washington, DC, 2008. www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/

fuels/biodiesel_production.html.

■U.S. DOE, n.d. The U.S. Dry-Mill Ethanol Industry. 

U.S. DOE, Washington, DC, n.d. www.brdisolutions.

com/pdfs/drymill_ethanol_industry.pdf.

■U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), 2002. 

Managing Manure With Biogas Recovery Systems: 

Improved Performance at Competitive Costs. U.S. EPA, 

Washington, DC, 2002. www.epa.gov/agstar/pdf/manage.pdf.

■U.S. EPA, 2007a. Biomass Combined Heat and Power 

Catalog of Technologies. U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, 

2007. www.epa.gov/chp/documents/biomass_chp_catalog.pdf.

■U.S. EPA, 2007b. Utility-Ethanol Partnerships: 

Emerging trend in district energy/CHP. U.S. EPA, 

Washington, DC, 2007. www.epa.gov/chp/documents/

district_energy_article.pdf.

■U.S. EPA, 2008a. Landfill Methane Outreach Program 

(LMOP). U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, 2008. www.epa.

gov/lmop/overview.htm.

■U.S. EPA, 2008b. Combustion. U.S. EPA, Washington, 

DC, July 2008. www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/municipal/

combustion.htm.

■U.S. EPA, 2008c. Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) in the 

United States. U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, 2008. www.

epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/municipal/msw99.htm.

■U.S. EPA, 2008d, Ethanol Production Facilities Database. Combined Heat and Power Partnership. U.S. 

EPA, Washington, DC, July 2008. 

■U.S. EPA, 2008e. Biodiesel. U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, 

2008. www.epa.gov/smartway/growandgo/documents/

factsheet-biodiesel.htm.

■U.S. EPA, 2009a. Renewable Fuel Standard Program. 

U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, March 12, 2009. www.epa.

gov/OMS/renewablefuels/

■U.S. EPA, 2009b. Guide to Anaerobic Digesters. U.S. 

EPA, Washington, DC, 2009. www.epa.gov/agstar/

operational.html.

■U.S. EPA, 2009c. Energy Projects and Candidate Landfills. U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, 2009. www.epa.gov/

lmop/proj/index.htm.

■Western Governors’ Association, 2008. Strategic 

Assessment of Bioenergy Development in the West, Bioenergy Conversion Technology Characteristics. Antares 

Group, Inc. 2008. www.westgov.org/wga/initiatives/

transfuels/Task%202.pdf.

24 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Two
Chapter Three

Benefits, Challenges, 

and Considerations 

of Bioenergy

Biomass is a low-cost, domestic 

source of renewable energy with 

potential for large-scale production. 

U.S. DOE estimates that, with 

aggressive action, bioenergy could 

displace one-third of the current 

demand for petroleum fuels 

nationwide by the mid-21st century 

(U.S. DOE, 2005). 

 Chapter Three | State Bioenergy Primer 25

Chapter Three Contents

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.6

3.7

Energy Security Benefits

Economic Benefits 

Environmental Benefits, Challenges, and 

Considerations

Feedstock Supply Challenges

Infrastructure Challenges

Resources for Detailed Information

References

Doc

u

m

ent 

M

a

p

Chapter One 

Introduction

Chapter Two 

What Is Bioenergy?

Chapter Three 

Benefits and Challenges

Chapter Four 

Identifying Bioenergy Opportunities

Chapter Five 

Options for Advancing Bioenergy

According to the American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE), biopower projects could see a 10-fold 

increase—to 100 gigawatts (GW)—by 2025 with coordinated federal and state policies to expand renewable 

energy markets, promote and deploy new technology, 

and provide opportunities to encourage renewable 

energy use in multiple market sectors and applications 

(ACORE, 2007). 

With the potential for increased production and use of 

biomass and bioenergy comes the potential for states 

to take advantage of benefits associated with bioenergy, 

but also the need to guard against pitfalls. Some benefits and challenges will be of greater interest to states 

in particular regions (e.g., arid vs. wet, nonattainment 

vs. in attainment) or with particular characteristics 

(e.g., urban vs. rural). States will want to weigh the 

challenges and benefits when deciding whether and 

how to pursue bioenergy development. 
A brief overview of benefits and challenges is provided 

below, followed by a more detailed discussion. 

Benefits

Policy makers are looking to production and use of 

biomass for power, heat, fuels, and products as an effective means of advancing energy security, economic, 

and environmental goals. 

For example, an analysis of the primary drivers cited 

in legislation for state renewable fuel standards (RFSs) 

found that state goals included (Brown et al., 2007): 

■ Energy Security: Increasing use of domestic fuels 

to reduce dependence on foreign oil and its potential 

disruptions, while keeping money for energy in 

local communities.

■ Economic: Improving the rural economy by generating jobs, income, and taxes through demand for local 

biomass resources and construction of biomass conversion facilities.

■ Environmental: Achieving air quality goals and improving public health by using bioenergy that reduces 

GHGs and other air pollutants and by turning waste 

products into bioenergy.

In addition, compared with some energy alternatives, 

bioenergy may be one of the easier options to adopt in 

the near term (e.g., coal-fired power plants can cofire 

biomass and vehicle engines can use biofuels with few 

if any modifications). 

Challenges

At the same time, there are potential challenges associated with deployment of any bioenergy project. 

While the benefits of using biomass instead of other 

fuel sources to meet state energy needs are numerous, 

states should be aware of several potential issues when 

exploring bioenergy. These include:

■ Environment: Potentially adverse environmental 

impacts could result if increased production is not 

handled sustainably, including air and water pollution, negative impacts of direct and indirect land use 

changes, and increased water consumption. 

■ Feedstock Supply: For a variety of reasons, securing 

a suitable and reliable feedstock supply—particularly 

one that will be available over the long term at a 

reasonable cost—does not always prove easy. Many 

26 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Three

feedstocks are seasonal and may only be harvested 

once a year. In order to cover their fuel needs for 

energy production over the course of a year, bioenergy 

producers may need to utilize flexible conversion processes capable of using a variety of feedstocks available 

in different seasons.

■ Infrastructure: The location and nature of feedstock 

inputs or bioenergy outputs produced at bioenergy 

plants can make their delivery difficult. Additionally, 

current infrastructure levels may not support market 

demand or can be constrained by other economic factors despite demand.

These benefits and challenges are described in the following sections. Note that not all are relevant to every 

type of bioenergy production or use. 

3.1 Energy Security Benefits

3.1.1 Increased Energy Independence

through Biofuels

The United States currently imports 65 percent of the 

petroleum it consumes—the majority for transportation fuels (U.S. Energy Information Agency, 2008). 

Relying on foreign energy sources leaves the nation 

vulnerable to price increases and supply limits that 

foreign nations could impose. Reliance on foreign 

petroleum also contributes significantly to the U.S. 

trade deficit. Increasing the domestic energy supply by 

expanding biofuels production could help reduce U.S. 

dependence on foreign oil, thus increasing the nation’s 

energy security. 

3.1.2 Decreased Infrastructure

Vulnerability through Biopower

The vulnerability of our energy infrastructure to attacks is also an energy security concern. Increased use 

of domestic bioenergy can help reduce this vulnerability because bioenergy involves a domestic, dispersed 

energy infrastructure that may be less prone to attack. 

When a reliable feedstock supply is available, biopower 

can be a baseload renewable resource, compared to 

other renewable resources such as wind and solar, 

which may be available on an intermittent basis, and 

compared to fossil fuels, supplies of which may become 

increasingly limited and more expensive. 
Ethanol’s Net Energy Balance 

Net energy balance is the total amount of energy used over the 

full life cycle of a fuel, from feedstock production to end use. 

Technical debate is ongoing about the implications of some 

forms of bioenergy, most notably ethanol as a transportation 

fuel. In the 1980s, the net fossil fuel energy balance for corn 

to ethanol was negative, meaning the fossil energy input to 

create the ethanol was greater than the fossil energy displaced. 

Technology improvements have changed this such that most 

recent studies find that corn-based ethanol reduces petroleum 

usage. However, some studies find a negative net fossil energy 

balance for corn ethanol when all fossil energy sources (e.g., 

coal-fired electricity used to power the production plant) are 

taken into account (U.S. DOE, 2006). 

Study results vary due to differing assumptions about energy 

sources, by-products, and system boundaries. For example, 

ethanol plants that take full advantage of CHP opportunities 

would have greater energy efficiency and a better energy 

balance. Use of biomass or biogas as the production facility’s 

fuel for power and heat also reduces fossil energy use (E3 

Biofuels, 2007; U.S. DOE, 2006).

U.S. EPA studied the effect of CHP on energy use in the dry mill 

conversion process used to produce ethanol from corn. The 

Agency analyzed the impact of this technology on total energy 

consumption (including power fuel use at the plant for ethanol 

production and subsequent reductions in central station power 

fuel use) for plants using natural gas, coal, or biomass as fuel. 

In all cases where plants utilized CHP technology, total net fuel 

consumption was reduced as electricity generated by the CHP 

systems displaced less efficient central station power. Energy 

use reductions of approximately 8 percent were modeled for 

the plants utilizing biomass-fueled CHP (U.S. EPA, 2007a).

In contrast to the varying net fossil energy balance results 

for corn-based ethanol, cellulose-based ethanol is found to 

provide both lower petroleum usage and a positive net fossil 

energy balance because less fossil fuel is required to acquire 

cellulosic feedstocks (e.g., grasses, wood waste, etc.) than corn 

(U.S. DOE, 2006). 

U.S. DOE’s Biomass Energy Databook (2006) provides 

detailed comparisons of energy inputs and GHG emissions 

for various ethanol scenarios compared to gasoline. For more 

information, see http://cta.ornl.gov/bedb/pdf/Biomass_

Energy_Data_Book.pdf. 

3.1.3 Reliable Baseload Power Source

Biomass power is a reliable, cost-effective source of 

baseload power. Unlike wind or solar, biomass feedstocks can be stored and used to generate power 24 

hours a day, seven days a week. The ability to store 

feedstocks is beneficial for utilities because it enables 

them to consistently know when they will be available, 

in what quantities, and at what cost.

3.2 Economic Benefits

3.2.1 Price Stability from Biopower

A key economic benefit of bioenergy is its potential 

to provide price stability in volatile energy markets. 

For example, opportunity fuels—waste materials from 

agricultural or industrial processes—can generally be 

obtained for no or very low cost, as is the case with 

biogas collection and use at wastewater treatment 

plants or animal feeding operations. In addition to 

displacing purchased fossil fuels, using opportunity 

fuels for biopower may also free up landfill space and 

reduce tipping fees associated with waste disposal. 

As bioenergy technologies continue to improve, the 

potential for bioenergy to be a cost-competitive energy 

choice increases.

Even when the cost of bioenergy is greater than fossil 

fuels, in some cases bioenergy can help stabilize energy 

prices by providing more diverse sources of energy 

for the fuel supply. For example, biomass-fueled CHP 

can provide a hedge against unstable energy prices 

by allowing the end user to supply its own power 

when prices for electricity are very high. In addition, 

a CHP system can be configured to accept a variety of 

feedstocks (e.g., biomass, biogas, natural gas) for fuel; 

therefore, a facility could build in fuel-switching capabilities to hedge against high fuel prices. 

Using a diversity of renewable resources can also 

provide economic benefits. Two studies in the United 

Kingdom compared electric systems that rely on wind 

alone with systems that combine wind and biomass 

on the same grid. In both cases, the need for ancillary 

services and transmission line upgrades, and thus the 

overall costs of the system, were significantly reduced 

when wind was complemented with biomass generating capacity (IEA, 2005).

Example

 Chapter Three | State Bioenergy Primer 27

Essex Junction Wastewater Treatment Facility 

Essex Junction, Vermont

Essex Junction’s wastewater treatment facility uses two 30 

kilowatt (kW) microturbines to generate electricity and thermal 

energy from the methane gas produced by its digester. Before 

CHP was installed, the plant used only half of the methane it 

produced. Now the plant uses 100 percent of the methane 

produced to heat the anaerobic digester, saving 412,000 kWh 

and $37,000 each year. These energy savings represent 36 

percent of the facility’s electricity demand. The project has an 

estimated payback of seven years.

Source: U.S. EPA, 2007f
3.2.1 Economic Development from

Feedstock Production and Bioenergy

A major driver for many states in considering bioenergy expansion is the potential for economic development benefits. It is prudent to keep in mind, however, 

that the specifics of policy/program design and implementation, combined with the particular market forces 

at work in a state, will impact the extent to which a 

state will realize these benefits. 

Nonetheless, the bioenergy supply chain has the 

potential to create jobs, income, and taxes associated 

with growing and harvesting or collecting the resource, 

facility construction, operation and maintenance, transportation, and feedstock processing. The funds retained 

in communities from local feedstock production and 

conversion create jobs and strengthen the local property 

and income tax base. Because biomass resources are primarily agricultural or forestry-based, rural communities 

have tended to benefit most from increased demand for 

feedstocks; however, if urban communities begin to further develop their use of waste/ opportunity fuels, they 

may also see localized benefits (U.S. DOE/SSEB, 2005).

Other potential economic benefits that can accrue from 

use of biomass for power, fuels, or products include 

(U.S. DOE/SSEB, 2005):

■ Creating new uses and markets for traditional commodity crops.

■ Creating opportunities to diversify rural income by 

growing new crops for biomass markets.

■ Mitigating land-clearing costs for development or 

reforestation purposes.

■ Providing markets and partially defraying costs for 

removal of undergrowth for forest health initiatives.

■ Eliminating, mitigating, or transforming the need for 

agricultural and forestry-related subsidies.

Increased bioenergy can create or expand domestic 

industries nationally and regionally. The United States 

is already experiencing economic benefits from biofuels, according to a study by RFA. In 2006, the ethanol 

industry created more than 160,000 direct and indirect 

jobs; generated nearly $5 billion in federal, state, and 

local tax revenues; and reduced the federal trade 

deficit by more than $11 billion (Urbanchuk, 2007). 

Biomass power is a vital component of America’s green 

economy. This $1 billion-a-year industry provides 

14,000–18,000 jobs nationwide and contributes millions of dollars to local tax revenues yearly (Cleaves, 

Personal Communication, 2009).

Despite the potential economic benefits of biomass cultivation and bioenergy production, farmers may be reluctant to devote land to producing biomass feedstocks 

due to uncertainty in demand for these crops and 

up-front investment costs. To help communities and 

domestic industries take advantage of the economic 

benefits of biomass cultivation and bioenergy production, the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 

established the Biomass Crop Assistance Program to 

provide financial incentives to farmers to grow biomass 

feedstocks and connect with bioenergy producers (see 

text box).

Producer Payments:

Biomass Crop Assistance Program 

As part of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, 

the Biomass Crop Assistance Program (BCAP) was created to 

financially support the establishment and production of crops 

for conversion to bioenergy and to assist with collection, 

harvest, storage, and transportation of eligible material for use 

in a biomass conversion facility. BCAP provides payments to 

farmers while they establish and grow biomass crops in areas 

around biomass facilities. To qualify for payments, potential 

biomass crop producers must participate in and be approved 

as part of a “BCAP project area” that is physically located within 

an economically viable distance from a biomass conversion 

facility. Contracts run for five years for annual and perennial 

crops and 15 years for woody biomass. The program provides 

three types of payments to producers: direct, annual and costshare (sometimes called delivery) payments. 

Source: USDA, 2008; NASDA, 2008

Economic Development Benefits From Bioenergy 

Facilities

In 2005, RFA estimated that a typical ■ ethanol plant producing 

40 million gallons per year would provide a one-time boost of 

$142 million to the local economy during construction, expand 

the local economic base by $110.2 million each year through 

direct spending of $56 million, create 41 full-time jobs at the 

plant and a total of 694 jobs throughout the entire economy, 

and boost state and local sales tax receipts by $1.2 million for 

every $209,000 invested (U.S. DOE/SSEB, 2005).

A 2002 study conducted in South Dakota estimated that ■

a 24-million-gallon-per-year biodiesel facility under 

consideration would create 29 new jobs at the facility and 

another 748 jobs in the community. The facility would have 

a $22-million annual payroll and would generate $4.6 million 

in state and local tax revenues and $6.4 million in federal tax 

revenues (Leatherman and Nelson, 2002).

For each megawatt of ■ biopower produced from forest residue, 

U.S. DOE estimates that at least four jobs are created to procure 

and harvest the residue. Additional jobs would be created to 

transport the residue and construct, operate, and maintain the 

biopower facility (U.S. DOE, 2005).

28 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Three
3.3 Environmental Benefits, 

Challenges, and Considerations

This section describes the potential environmental 

benefits and challenges of bioenergy in terms of air 

quality, land resources, waste, water resources, and 

food supply. The environmental effects of bioenergy 

can vary substantially because of the diversity in feedstock production, chemical content, and conversion 

processes. As with many multifaceted issues, bioenergy 

presents a complex set of environmental considerations 

and potential tradeoffs, some of which require active 

and attentive policy/program design and implementation to ensure the benefits outweigh the potential for 

negative consequences of missteps. 

In such a complex area, policy makers can turn to 

detailed state or locally specific evaluations of potential 

environmental effects to ensure they are making informed decisions. A life-cycle assessment (LCA) can be 

used to quantify these effects. 

LCA is a technique to assess the environmental aspects 

and potential impacts associated with a product, process, or service by (U.S. EPA, 2008a):

■ Compiling an inventory of relevant energy and material inputs and environmental releases.

■ Evaluating the potential environmental impacts associated with identified inputs and releases.

■ Interpreting the results to help with more informed 

decision making.

A number of LCAs have been completed on bioenergy 

technologies and systems (see 3.6—Resources for Detailed Information).

3.3.1 Air Quality Benefits and

Challenges

Bioenergy can help improve air quality by reducing 

GHG emissions as well as emissions of several key air 

pollutants, depending on which biomass feedstocks 

and bioenergy conversion technologies are used (see 

Chapter 2 for descriptions of feedstocks and conversion technologies). These emission reductions can 

provide economic and environmental benefits by lowering emission-related operating costs, such as allowance/ permit costs and emissions-control equipment 

expenses (Hanson, 2005). At the same time (again 

depending on feedstocks and technologies), bioenergy 

can also increase certain air emissions relative to fossil 

fuels. These issues are described below. 

Decreased GHG Emissions from Bioenergy

Biomass is generally considered to contribute nearly 

zero net GHG emissions (U.S. EPA, 2007b; IPCC, 

2006). The reason for this accounting is because conversion of biomass feedstocks (whether in the form of 

biopower or biofuels) returns approximately the same 

amount of CO2

 to the atmosphere as was absorbed during growth of the biomass, resulting in little to no additional CO2

 released to the air. In contrast, when fossil 

fuels are burned, they release CO2 into the atmosphere 

that was captured by photosynthesis and “stored” millions of years ago, thereby increasing the total amount 

of carbon in the atmosphere today. Fuel sources such as 

landfill gas and manure digester biogas actually reduce 

GHG emissions while producing energy.

Some recent studies dispute whether land use changes 

associated with biofuels (not biopower) production 

and international agricultural commodity markets 

counteract this benefit and actually increase GHG 

emissions (Searchinger et al., 2008; Delucchi et al., 

2008; Wang and Haq, 2008). U.S. EPA is responsible for 

studying this issue carefully as part of the rulemaking 

process for the Federal Renewable Fuel Standard and 

ultimately enforcing new GHG reduction standards 

for renewable fuels as required by the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007. 

Biofuels. The Argonne National Laboratory has estimated (excluding indirect land use) that when corn ethanol 

displaces an energy-equivalent amount of gasoline, 

GHG emissions are reduced by 18–29 percent; cellulosic 

ethanol yields an 85–86 percent reduction (Wang, 2005). 

Reducing GHG Emissions with Waste-to-Energy

An example of GHG savings from bioenergy can be illustrated 

by the diversion of MSW from landfills to incinerators. MSW as 

a biomass feedstock reduces landfill methane emissions and 

substitutes for fossil-based power sources. EPA’s life-cycle 

models (WARM and MSW Decision Support Tool) estimate that 

0.55 to 1.0 tons of GHG emissions can be saved per ton of MSW

combusted when incineration with energy recovery is selected 

over landfilling. MSW includes a large biogenic component (50 

to 66 percent), and this fraction of the total can be considered 

carbon neutral from an energy generation perspective. Overall, 

a significant net GHG emissions savings could be realized from 

MSW combustion with energy recovery.

Source: U.S. EPA, 2008c

 Chapter Three | State Bioenergy Primer 29
Biodiesel is regarded as having significant GHG reduction capabilities, depending on the source of the feedstock. USDA and U.S. DOE performed a comparative 

life-cycle analysis (excluding indirect land use) of soybased biodiesel and petroleum diesel used in city buses 

and estimated that B20 (a blend of 20 percent biodiesel 

and 80 percent petroleum diesel) and B100 (100 percent 

biodiesel) can reduce CO2

 emissions by approximately 

15 percent and 78 percent, respectively (NREL, 1998). 

Biopower. A 2004 NREL study found that overall, 

compared to coal-generated electricity, producing electricity with biomass feedstocks will substantially reduce 

GHG emissions (20 to 200+ percent) and the fossil energy consumption per kilowatt-hour of electricity generated (Spath and Mann, 2004). In addition, emissions 

of methane, a potent GHG, can be reduced by utilizing 

biomass residues that would otherwise decompose in 

landfills (e.g., urban and industrial residues). Biopower 

generated from biogas captured from landfills, wastewater treatment facilities, or animal feeding operations 

can also reduce methane emissions. On a national 

scale, if all wastewater treatment facilities that operate 

anaerobic digesters and have sufficient influent flow 

rates (greater than 5 million gallons per day) were to 

install CHP, approximately 340 MW of clean electricity 

could be generated, offsetting 2.3 million metric tons of 

CO2 emissions annually (U.S. EPA, 2007c).

Air Emissions Considerations with Feedstock 

Production 

The application of fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides 

associated with agricultural feedstocks (e.g., corn, soybeans, crop residues) can result in air pollutant emissions, including emissions of particulate matter (PM), 

nitrogen and sulfur compounds, heavy metals, and 

volatile organic compounds (VOCs) (U.S. DOE, 2003). 

In general, crops grown for bioenergy require fewer 

pesticides and fertilizers than crops grown for food; 

nevertheless, mitigation of air pollutants from agriculture is important for all crop production, whether the 

crop is used for food, feed, or bioenergy. Practices that 

reduce the need for agricultural chemicals and fertilizers while retaining crop yields and quality contribute 

to sustainability and increase the viability of biomass as 

a feedstock resource (U.S. DOE, 2003).

Air Emission Considerations with Biopower 

Air emissions associated with biopower vary by feedstock, technology, and the extent to which emission 

controls are used.

SO2 and NOX. Using certain biomass feedstocks—such 

as wood, wood waste, or crop residues—to produce biopower can reduce SO2

 and NOX emissions because the 

sulfur and nitrogen content is much lower than in coal. 

■ Power plants reduce SO2

 and NOX emissions when 

they cofire these biomass feedstocks with coal, compared to using coal alone (U.S. DOE, 2004; Mann and 

Spath, 2001). 

■ Biopower facilities using biomass feedstocks in certain 

types of direct combustion technologies (e.g., fluidized bed boilers) and gasification technologies (e.g., 

integrated gasification combined cycle, or IGCC) have 

reduced SO2

 and NOX emissions, compared to coalonly electricity production (U.S. DOE, 2004a; Mann 

and Spath, 2001). 

Use of Biopower for Offsets

Entities (corporations, facilities, governments) interested in 

reducing their CO2 emissions are advised to first strive for 

cost-effective GHG reductions through internal projects, such 

as energy efficiency and on-site renewable energy projects. As 

cost-effective direct options are exhausted, entities may also 

consider supporting GHG reduction projects that occur outside 

their organizational boundary—known as “offsets.” 

Offsets represent GHG reductions that are quantified and 

verified at one location, but whose emission reductions are 

“credited” to another location or entity. Under all internationally 

recognized GHG protocols, biopower projects (including 

converting LFG to energy, capture and use of anaerobic digester 

gas, and solid fuel biomass feedstocks) can qualify for offset 

credits under certain circumstances due to their GHG benefits. 

EPA’s Climate Leaders program, for example, offers protocols 

for measuring the GHG benefits from biogas and biomass 

power projects that meet four key accounting principles:

Real ■ . The quantified GHG reductions must represent actual 

emission reductions that have already occurred.

Additional ■ . The GHG reductions must be surplus to regulation 

and beyond what would have happened in the absence of 

the project or in a business-as-usual scenario based on a 

performance standard methodology.

■ Permanent. The GHG reductions must be permanent or have 

guarantees to ensure that any losses are replaced in the future.

■ Verifiable. The GHG reductions must result from projects 

whose performance can be readily and accurately quantified, 

monitored, and verified.

For more information on offsets and other environmental 

revenue streams for which biomass might qualify, see www.

epa.gov/chp/documents/ers_program_details.pdf.

Source: U.S. EPA, 2009; U.S. EPA, 2007d

30 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Three
■ Controlled burning of crop residues for power generation also can reduce SO2

 and NOX emissions by up to 

98 percent, compared to emissions from uncontrolled 

open burning, which many farmers use to burn their 

crop residues as waste (U.S. DOE, 2004).

Mercury. Mercury emissions from biopower facilities 

are significantly less—near zero—than those from 

coal-burning power plants (NREL, 2003). 

Particulate matter. Biopower—and in particular, 

bioheat—can contribute to PM2.5 emissions. Industrial- and utility-scale biomass combustion facilities 

must comply with federal and state permits for air 

pollutants, which require controls for PM. As noted in 

the text box on this page, permitting requirements for 

small, non-residential boilers will also be in place in 

2009. 

However, the burning of wood and wood waste in 

traditional, residential wood stoves is a significant contributor to PM2.5 concentrations in some areas of the 

country. Since 1988, all wood stoves manufactured in 

the United States must be EPA-certified, which means 

they use one-third less wood than older stoves to produce the same heat and emit 50–70 percent less PM; 

however, only 20–30 percent of the 10 million wood 

stoves in use are the newer, certified type. 

For more information, see www.epa.gov/woodstoves/

changeout.html. 

Air Emission Considerations with Biofuels 

Analyses by EPA and others have found that the effects 

of biofuels on air pollutant emissions depend strongly 

on the type of renewable fuel, the engine type and performance, and the vehicle emissions control system performance. In addition, biodiesel impacts on emissions 

can vary depending on the type of biodiesel (soybean, 

rapeseed, or animal fats) and type of conventional diesel 

to which the biodiesel was added (U.S. EPA, 2002).

Ethanol

CO. Because ethanol contains oxygen, adding ethanol 

to gasoline allows engines to burn fuel more completely, reducing emissions of unburned hydrocarbons; 

CO emissions can be reduced by 20–30 percent. States 

with CO nonattainment areas require that fuel contain 

oxygen and ethanol is blended into gasoline for this 

reason (U.S. DOE, 2008). 

NOX. Past tests have shown that ethanol-gasoline 

blended fuels, such as E10 (a blend of 10 percent ethanol and 90 percent petroleum), increase NOX emissions 

slightly. However, results on the use of E85 (a blend 

of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent petroleum; used 

in flexible fuel vehicles [FFVs]) have shown that NOX

emissions do not increase (U.S. DOE, 2008). 

Relevant Federal Air Quality Standards

States must comply with federal air quality standards, including 

the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) established 

under the Clean Air Act for “criteria” pollutants, which include 

CO, lead, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter (PM2.5, PM10), 

ground-level ozone, and sulfur dioxide (SO2).

Most power generation facilities (both fossil fuel-based and 

bioenergy), as well as burning of transportation fuels (both 

gasoline and biofuels) in vehicles, emit some of these criteria 

pollutants. States that do not meet one or more of the NAAQS 

standards are considered “nonattainment” areas and are 

required to develop and submit State Implementation Plans 

(SIPs) that indicate how they will meet these standards.

To help meet federal NAAQS requirements for criteria 

pollutants, EPA provides guidance to states for developing SIPs 

that quantify and include emission reductions achieved from 

energy efficiency and renewable energy measures, including 

bioenergy. For more information, see www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/

t1/memoranda/ereseerem_gd.pdf.

Bioenergy (as well as most fossil fuel-based) facilities may 

also be subject to additional federal standards for combustion 

sources and air-permitting requirements for new sources, 

including New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and 

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

(NESHAP) for boilers, gas turbines, and internal combustion 

engines. Existing combustion sources must obtain NESHAP 

permits; new combustion sources must install maximum 

available control technologies (MACT) and meet additional 

requirements to qualify for both NSPS and NESHAP permits. 

Meeting these permitting requirements can take significant 

effort by project developers.

In 2009, EPA will be publishing a proposed area source rule 

that will apply new emission requirements to all non-residential 

small boilers. All bioenergy boilers—typically used to produce 

heat or steam—installed after that date will be subject to 

emission regulations for new boilers. All bioenergy boilers in 

place prior to that date will eventually be required to comply 

with regulations for existing boilers. For more information, see 

www.epa.gov/woodheaters/resources.htm. 

States may also have their own permitting requirements 

in addition to, or that are more stringent than, federal 

requirements.

VOCs. Certain VOCs that are present in gasoline, such 

as benzene (a carcinogen), are not present in ethanol; 

thus, adding ethanol to gasoline reduces emissions 

of these and other exhaust-related VOCs (U.S. DOE, 

2008). However, other air toxics (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and 1,3-butadiene) are present in ethanol and 

 Chapter Three | State Bioenergy Primer 31
blending ethanol with petroleum can increase nonexhaust VOCs (U.E. EPA, 2007e).

Biodiesel

CO, PM, SO2

. B20, a blend of 20 percent biodiesel and 

80 percent petroleum diesel, helps reduce emissions of 

PM, CO, and hydrocarbons, compared to conventional 

diesel. These air emissions from biodiesel-diesel fuel 

blends generally decrease as the concentration of 

biodiesel increases. Biodiesel does not produce SO2

emissions (U.S. EPA, 2002). 

NOX. The effect of biodiesel on NOx

 can vary with 

engine design, calibration, and test cycle. At this time, 

the data are insufficient to conclude anything about the 

average effect of B20 on NOx; some studies indicate 

emissions slightly increase while others indicate a 

slight decrease or neutral response (U.S. EPA, 2002; 

NREL, 2009). 

Biodiesel vs. Conventional Diesel Emissions in 

Heavy-Duty Engines

One of the most common blends of biodiesel, B20, contains 20 

percent biodiesel and 80 percent petroleum diesel by volume. 

When soy-based biodiesel at this concentration is burned 

in heavy-duty highway engines, the emissions, relative to 

conventional diesel, contain approximately:

■ 11 percent less CO

■ 10 percent less PM

■ 21 percent less unburned hydrocarbons

■ 2 percent more NOX

Source: U.S. EPA, 2002

Decreased Air Emissions from Bioproducts 

Manufacturing

Compared to manufacturing that relies solely on 

fossil fuels, manufacturing of bioproducts can help 

reduce certain pollutant emissions, including VOCs 

and GHGs. This is because many biomass feedstocks 

used to manufacture bioproducts can also be used to 

generate power and heat for these same manufacturing 

processes, thus decreasing or eliminating the need for 

fossil fuels and associated emissions. Also, bioproducts 

are often manufactured using lower temperatures and 

pressures than fossil fuel-based manufacturing; therefore, less combustion may be needed, which may result 

in fewer air emissions (U.S. DOE, 2003).

Natural Disasters Can Generate a Substantial 

Volume of Debris

U.S. EPA’s Planning Guide for Disaster Debris highlights the 

need for communities to plan for the cleanup of debris after 

a major natural disaster. Based on lessons learned from 

communities that have experienced such disasters, this guide 

contains information to help communities prepare for and 

recover more quickly from the increased solid waste generated 

by a natural disaster. Major categories of disaster debris include 

damaged buildings, sediments, green waste, personal property, 

ash and charred wood—much of which can be productively 

utilized if plans are in place (e.g., through recycling, as fuel for 

biopower production).

For more information, see www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/rrr/imr/

cdm/debris.htm. 

32 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Three

3.3.2 Waste Reduction Benefits

Reduced Solid Waste from Biopower 

The use of biomass residues can reduce the amount 

of waste that must be disposed of in landfills. MSW is 

sometimes used in bioenergy production, which diverts the MSW from the waste stream. Burning MSW 

in boilers for heat or power can reduce the amount of 

waste that would otherwise be disposed of in landfills 

by up to 90 percent in volume and 75 percent in weight 

(U.S. DOE, 2004a). With a range of 137 to 266 million 

tons of MSW currently landfilled on an annual basis, 

the potential for volume reduction is significant (U.S. 

EPA, 2008c). Waste reduction not only saves increasingly limited landfill space, but also helps protect the 

environment (e.g., water quality in rivers and oceans).

In addition, using agricultural and forest residues for 

bioenergy production allows for these wastes to be disposed of through controlled combustion, rather than 

burned in open-air slash piles, which helps control and 

reduce potentially harmful emissions. Such pollution 

reduction also provides public health benefits (e.g., 

maintaining or improving drinking water supplies and 

reducing illnesses associated with air pollution) (U.S. 

DOE, 2004a). 

Reduced Hazardous and Toxic Wastes from 

Bioproducts Manufacturing 

Many bioproduct manufacturing processes use natural 

catalysts (e.g., enzymes) and solvents (e.g., water) and 

produce few or no toxic or hazardous by-products. (In 

contrast, manufacturing of fossil fuel-based products 

uses large amounts of aromatic solvents or strong inorganic acids and bases.) In most cases, solid wastes and 

liquid effluents from biological processes used to make 

bioproducts are biodegradable or can be recycled or 
disposed of without extensive treatment. Even in cases 

where bioproduct manufacturing does release wastes of 

concern (e.g., production of cellophane produces VOC 

emissions and high-acid wastewater), the pollution 

generated is often less than that of similar fossil-based 

products (e.g., cellophane produces two to three times 

less pollution than polyurethane). In addition, some 

chemicals used to make bioproducts could be replaced 

with more environmentally friendly bio-based chemicals (U.S. DOE, 2003). 

3.3.3 Land Resource Considerations

Soil Impacts. Naturally, using biomass to produce energy can have an impact on land resources. These impacts vary with feedstock and can be positive or negative. Biomass grown for feedstock purposes (in contrast 

to waste/opportunity fuels) requires large areas of land 

and can deplete the soil over time. For example, there 

are long-term economic and environmental concerns 

associated with removal of large quantities of residues 

from cropland. Removing residue on some soils could 

reduce soil quality, promote erosion, and lead to a loss 

of soil carbon, which in turn lowers crop productivity 

and profitability (U.S. DOE, 2005).

Ecosystem Impacts. When natural areas or otherwise 

undeveloped land is converted to agricultural uses 

to produce biofuel feedstocks, the potential exists for 

damage to local ecosystems and displacement of species. To minimize land use impacts, fuel crops must be 

managed so they stabilize the soil, reduce erosion, and 

protect wildlife habitat. 

Forest Health. Significant opportunities may exist to 

link forest health and bioenergy production. In many 

forests throughout the western United States, natural 

ecosystems have been significantly altered by fire suppression and logging practices, creating a high risk of 

intense wildfire. The surplus biomass from thinning 

unnaturally overgrown forest areas represents a potentially large renewable energy resource. Forest thinning 

can be done in a sustainable manner to minimize soil 

erosion and preserve wildlife habitat (Oregon Department of Energy, 2007). Development of forest biomass 

harvesting guidelines (see box below) can help ensure 

that thinning or residue removal is performed in line 

with the many aspects of forest health.

Land Area. Biomass power plants, much like fossil fuel 

power plants, require large areas of land for equipment 

and fuel storage. For example, a small biopower facility 

that processes 100 tons/day of woody biomass would 

require approximately 12,500 square feet exclusively for 

storing a 30-day supply of biomass (assuming average 

storage height of 12 feet and average density of 40lb/

cubic foot). For a larger biopower facility that processes 

680 tons/day of feedstock, more than 93,700 square feet 

of storage space could be needed, which is equivalent 

to more than two football fields (U.S. EPA, 2007d). 

However, if biomass plants burn a waste source such 

as construction wood waste or agricultural waste, 

they can provide a benefit by freeing areas of land that 

might otherwise have been used for landfills or waste 

piles (U.S. EPA, 2008b). EPA’s Future Midwestern Landscapes Study

The rapid growth of the biofuels industry, which uses crops 

and other biomass to make liquid fuel, is causing changes in 

agricultural practices and land uses across the United States, 

and most strikingly in the Midwest. EPA has initiated the Future 

Midwestern Landscapes Study to examine projected changes 

in landscapes and ecosystem services in the Midwest. Given its 

immediate influence, biofuel production will be studied as a 

primary driver of landscape change. 

By conducting this study, U.S. EPA aims to: 

Understand how current and projected land uses affect the ■

ecosystem services provided by Midwestern landscapes. 

■ Provide spatially explicit information that will enable EPA

to articulate sustainable approaches to environmental 

management. 

Develop web-based tools depicting alternative futures so users ■

can evaluate trade-offs affecting ecosystem services.

For more information, see www.epa.gov/ord/esrp/quick-finder/

mid-west.htm.

States Develop Forest Biomass Harvesting Guidelines

Biomass harvesting guidelines are designed to fill gaps where 

existing best management practices may not be sufficient 

to protect forest resources under new biomass harvesting 

regimes. States that have developed biomass harvesting 

guidelines or standards that cover biomass removals include: 

Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. 

Existing guidelines cover topics such as dead wood, wildlife and 

biodiversity, water quality and riparian zones, soli productivity, 

silviculture, and disturbance. A Forest Guild (2009) report 

provides an assessment of existing guidelines and provides 

recommendations for future forestry guidelines focused on 

woody biomass removal. 

For more information, see www.forestguild.org/publications/

research/2009/biomass_guidelines.pdf.

 Chapter Three | State Bioenergy Primer 33
Environmentally Sustainable Practices for Biomass

Feedstock Production

Bioenergy production has the potential to be a low-input, 

sustainable energy system. Practices that allow bioenergy to be 

developed in an environmentally sustainable manner include 

the following:

Improvements in crop production are increasing crop yields per ■

acre, thus requiring less land and fewer chemical inputs such 

as fertilizers and pesticides. Minimizing the use of fertilizers and 

pesticides for energy crops and crop residues can help protect 

water quality, air quality, wildlife, and public health. 

Degraded lands and abandoned and underutilized farmland can ■

be used to grow biomass feedstocks rather than using existing 

farmland. 

Agricultural and forest land on which biomass feedstocks are ■

grown can create new wildlife habitats and protect existing 

ones (e.g., crop harvesting can be prohibited during bird 

nesting seasons), while providing open spaces that enhance the 

quality of life in communities. 

Continued adoption of reduced- and no-till field practices for ■

harvesting crop residues (e.g., corn stover, wheat straw) for 

cellulosic biofuel production can maintain enough residues in 

fields to control soil erosion and sustain soil quality. 

Development and use of water-efficient crops will help ■

conserve the amount of water needed for both agricultural and 

energy crops.

Transitioning from corn-based ethanol production to cellulosic ■

biofuels will contribute to the environmental benefits of 

bioenergy because using waste/opportunity feedstocks means 

less water and chemical use, along with ancillary benefits from 

using waste productively.

Production of microalgae can be accomplished in tanks or on ■

degraded lands using brackish or saline water.

3.3.4 Water Resource Challenges

Water Quality Considerations from Feedstock 

Production

Chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides associated with agricultural feedstocks pose a risk to water 

quality if they enter surface waters. These chemicals 

can contaminate surface water, groundwater, and 

drinking water supplies.

Fertilizer Runoff. The influx of fertilizer nutrients into 

water supplies can lead to eutrophic conditions where 

algae growth becomes excessive. As this increased 

plant matter dies, oxygen is consumed in the decomposition process, which can lead to hypoxia—the state of 

extremely low dissolved oxygen that is deadly for many 

aquatic species. In the Gulf of Mexico this problem 

is particularly acute due to the high concentration of 

farms in the Mississippi River watershed. Agricultural 

runoff enters the Gulf of Mexico via the Mississippi 

River and creates a hypoxic zone every summer that 

damages many valuable fisheries. 

For more information, see www.epa.gov/owow/msbasin/hypoxia101.htm. 

Practices that reduce the need for these chemicals while 

retaining crop yields and quality contribute to the sustainability and viability of bioenergy production (U.S. 

DOE, 2003). One of the proposed solutions to the nutrient runoff problem has been to increase the acres of perennial crops (e.g., switchgrass) relative to annual crops 

(e.g., corn). Perennial crops require fewer applications 

of pesticides and fertilizers. When strategically placed, 

they can absorb the runoff from annual crop plantings. 

Other benefits of perennial crops include less erosion 

and less soil compaction due to less soil disturbance 

(U.S. DOE, 2005). 

Another potential solution to the nutrient runoff problem is to preserve or plant riparian buffers (vegetated 

regions adjacent to streams and wetlands). Based on 

recent studies, riparian buffers of various types (grass, 

forest, wetland, and combinations thereof) can be effective at reducing nitrogen in riparian zones, especially 

nitrogen flowing in the subsurface, in areas where soil 

type, hydrology, and biogeochemistry are conducive to 

microbial denitrification and plant uptake. While some 

narrow buffers (1 to 15 meters) may remove nitrogen, 

wider buffers (>50 meters) more consistently remove 

significant portions of nitrogen (U.S. EPA, 2005). 

In contrast to potential adverse water quality impacts 

from diverting previously uncultivated lands to energy 

crops, redirecting large quantities of animal manure to 

bioenergy uses can lessen nutrient runoff and reduce 

contamination of surface water and groundwater resources (U.S. DOE, 2005).

Herbicides and Pesticides. Bioenergy crops such as 

tree crops and switchgrass require herbicide application 

prior to establishment and during the first year to minimize competition from weeds until the crops are well 

established. However, tree crops and switchgrass need 

only one-tenth the amounts of herbicides and pesticides 

required on average by agricultural crops. Studies are 

showing that herbicide migration into groundwater is 

less likely to occur with application to biomass crops 

(ORNL, 2005). 

Temperature and Chemical Pollution. Water pollution 

is also a potential concern with biomass power plants. As 

is the case with fossil fuel power plants, pollutants can 

34 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Three
build up in the water used in the biomass power plant’s 

boiler and cooling system. In addition, the water used for 

cooling is much warmer when it is returned to the lake 

or river than when it was removed. Pollutants and higher 

water temperatures can harm fish and plants in the lake 

or river where the power plant water is discharged. This 

discharge usually requires a permit and is monitored. 

Water Use Changes from Feedstock Production 

and Biofuels

Water use is another concern associated with feedstock 

production and biomass processing. Most current agricultural feedstocks have irrigation requirements, and 

biofuels plants currently use several gallons of water for 

every gallon of fuel produced. Because these plants are 

usually built close to where the feedstocks are grown to 

minimize transportation costs, local water supplies are 

drawn upon to serve both irrigation and production 

needs. Water use is a particular concern in arid regions 

and where water resources are already being depleted 

(Oregon Environmental Council, 2007).

3.3.5 Food Supply Challenges

One concern regarding the expansion of bioenergy 

is that crops grown for food, particularly corn, could 

be diverted from the global food chain to the biofuels 

supply chain. In the case of corn, only a small amount 

of U.S. corn is currently exported to undernourished 

populations. The 24 countries where at least one-third 

of the population is undernourished import less than 

0.1 percent of U.S. corn (Muller et al., 2007). 

A more pressing concern may be the conversion of land 

from agricultural crop production to biomass feedstock production in developing countries where food 

shortages exist. The demand for biofuels from wealthy 

countries could exacerbate this problem in developing 

countries. International and national policies may be 

needed to protect local food supplies. The issue of bioenergy’s relationship to agriculture also needs additional 

analysis, along with further investigation of the many 

other issues that affect world food, land use, hunger, and 

poverty (Muller et al., 2007).

3.4 Feedstock Supply Challenges

3.4.1 Locating High-Quality Feedstocks

for Bioenergy

It is critical for bioenergy producers to have access to a 

reliable, high-quality biomass feedstock supply. For both 

biofuels and biopower, feedstocks should ideally 

be available:

■ For a relatively fixed cost over long periods of time (i.e., 

for the life of the bioenergy project). 

■ From a consistent source or sources in close proximity 

to the bioenergy plant. 

■ With high-quality characteristics, such as high heating 

value, low moisture and ash content, and consistent 

particle size. 

Obtaining biomass feedstocks with these qualities can 

be challenging. Factors that can cause uncertainty in the 

availability of a suitable feedstock over time include: 

■ Transportation Constraints. Transportation costs impose limits on the areas over which a biomass feedstock 

can be obtained cost effectively.

■ Competition for Feedstocks. Competition can include:

■ Alternative end uses: If the feedstock has more than 

one end use, a bioenergy producer might need to compete with other markets for the use of the resource.

■ Competing land uses: Biomass producers may shift 

production to other resources if they become more 

profitable to grow than the original feedstock.

Storage Challenges

Once feedstocks are identified and transported to biorefineries, 

they are accumulated in piles, pretreated and/or processed, and 

then placed in buffer storage containers prior to use. Challenges 

associated with storing feedstocks include:

Volume. Biomass feedstocks can have low bulk densities, and as 

a result, prep-yards and storage facilities must be large enough 

to accommodate the large volumes necessary for bioenergy 

production. For example, a 30-day supply of woody biomass 

(average density 40 pounds per cubic foot) for a biorefinery with 

a 680 tons per day conversion system would cover an area larger 

than two football fields, if piled to an average height of 12 feet.

Pile management. As feedstocks arrive at biorefineries they are 

piled in prep-yards prior to treatment and processing, using 

either front end loaders or a radial stacker (depending on the 

volume required). Piles must be carefully managed to maintain 

the quality of the feedstock, which may require a range of 

precautions from dust control to combustion prevention.

Shelf life. Because biomass feedstocks consist of organic 

material, they are susceptible to degradation and decomposition 

over time. Feedstocks have a “shelf life” that is dependent on 

their moisture content and the climate in which they are stored. 

To ensure that feedstocks remain stable prior to use, storage 

facilities may need to install environmental control technologies, 

which can be costly.

Source: U.S. EPA, 2007d; U.S. DOE, 2004b

 Chapter Three | State Bioenergy Primer 35
■ Competition among bioenergy producers: Bioenergy 

producers may have to compete with one another for 

a scarce feedstock supply as an increasing number of 

bioenergy projects are deployed. 

■ Natural causes. Weather, agricultural pests, and plant 

disease can decrease the quantity and quality of the 

desired supply available from a given agricultural or 

energy crop source.

■ Seasonality of feedstocks. Some feedstocks are seasonal and may have limited availability depending on the 

time of year. Bioenergy producers may need to engage 

with multiple suppliers and/or employ flexible conversion processes capable of using a variety of feedstocks 

to ensure a steady supply of feedstock and consistent 

levels of energy output throughout the year. Working 

with multiple landowners to obtain feedstocks may 

prove challenging since landowners may have competing objectives related to forest stewardship, forest management plans, financial concerns, and other priorities. 

These factors contribute to uncertainty and/or 

volatility in feedstock prices. The first two factors—

transportation and competition—are critical, and can 

be influenced by policy or program design. 

Transportation

The cost of a biomass resource is influenced in large 

part by transportation costs—the expenditure required 

to bring the feedstock to the bioenergy plant. Because 

biomass provides less energy per unit of weight or 

volume than do fossil fuels, more feedstock is required 

to generate a given output. Therefore, the resource 

cannot be profitably transported as far as coal or oil, so 

bioenergy facilities must be located within an area of 

concentrated feedstock.

Example

Biomass Commodity Exchange

Wisconsin is developing the Biomass Commodity Exchange 

(BCEX) to help organize the way new businesses and 

landowners connect to provide biomass for bioenergy 

applications. The BCEX project has been charged with creating 

an implementation plan for a commodity exchange as a means 

to increase the efficiency of the supply chain providing biomass 

to the existing biofuels industries and the emerging concept 

of the forest biorefinery. The implementation plan will also 

examines the future trade of closed-loop energy crops, such 

as willow, poplar and switchgrass and as an approach to offset 

CO2 emissions through synergies created with other regulated 

exchanges such as the Chicago Climate Exchange.

For more information, 

see www.biomasscommodityexchange.com.

36 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Three

The distance that biomass can be transported profitably 

depends on numerous factors, including the cost of 

transportation fuel and quality of the biomass, which 

are subject to considerable variability by feedstock and 

location. DOE estimates feedstock transportation costs 

as usually in the range of $0.20 to $0.60 per dry ton per 

mile (U.S. DOE, 2005). All transportation costs will 

vary with local conditions, but one of the primary factors influencing transportation costs is the cost of diesel 

fuel. Also, using barges and rail to transport feedstocks 

is less expensive than trucking per unit of feedstock. 

Competition for Feedstocks

In some situations, biomass producers might be reluctant to agree to long-term supply contracts, which can 

also contribute to cost uncertainties. For example, biomass producers want the freedom to sell to whichever 

market or end user is willing to pay the most, and may 

therefore be hesitant to agree to long-term contracts if 

the feedstock has multiple end uses. Biomass producers 

may also be reluctant to enter into long-term contracts 

when the potential exists for commodities other than 

the feedstock to become more profitable during the 

life of the contract (e.g., from soybeans to corn). As 

producers shift production away from the original 

feedstock to other resources, the cost of obtaining a 

given quantity of the feedstock will increase. 

For example, as shown in Figure 3-1, the price of 

corn has increased significantly in recent years and is 

projected to remain high by historical standards for the 

foreseeable future. Some studies have attributed these 

trends to increased corn-based ethanol production, 

although debate exists as to how much of this price increase can be attributed to other factors such as rising 

energy prices. Nonetheless, if corn prices are predicted 

to increase, farmers will be even more reluctant to enter into long-term contracts because they would often 

prefer to hedge in hopes of higher prices later. 

Feedstock availability and price will ultimately determine the feasibility of a proposed bioenergy plant. 

Potential bioenergy investors will extend the capital 

needed to finance proposed projects only if the projects 

will generate an attractive return. Typically, investors 

look to recover their initial capital outlays in just a 

few years. Any variability in the availability or cost of 

suitable biomass feedstocks could significantly reduce 

the return on their investment. Therefore, investors are 

unlikely to help finance a project unless both long-term 

feedstock supply plans and purchase agreements for 

the energy produced are in place. 
Figure 3-1. U.S. Corn Prices, 2000 to 2018

Source: USDA Agricultural Projections to 2018, February 2008

 Chapter Three | State Bioenergy Primer 37

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

2000/01

2001/02

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

2009/10

2010/11

2011/12

2012/13

2013/14

2014/15

2015/16

2016/17

2017/18

CROP YEAR

Corn Prices are Projected to Peak in 2009/10

2008 USDA Projections

$/BUSHEL

Some states have enacted policies and other measures 

to reduce the risk of investing in bioenergy. To learn 

more about the actions that states can take to make the 

investments more attractive, see Chapter 5, How Can 

States Facilitate Financing of Bioenergy Projects?

3.5 Infrastructure Challenges

3.5.1 Product Delivery Challenges

for Ethanol

Pipeline Limitations 

All motor fuels must be transported from refineries to 

refueling stations as efficiently and cost effectively as 

possible. When the fuel must be transported a great 

distance, as is often the case, pipelines are typically the 

least-cost option. 

Unlike conventional refined motor fuels (e.g., gasoline, 

diesel), which are routinely shipped via pipeline, the 

distribution of ethanol through the nation’s pipeline 

network poses challenges largely due to several properties of the biofuel: 

■ Ethanol will easily absorb water that has accumulated in 

pipelines, potentially rendering it useless as a motor fuel. 

■ Because it readily absorbs water, ethanol cannot be 

separated from other products in a petroleum pipeline 

by the typical method of sending water between 

batches of different petroleum products. 

■ Ethanol is an effective solvent/cleansing agent and 

therefore may be contaminated by residues of other 

materials that have been shipped through the pipeline.

■ Ethanol is corrosive and can damage pipeline parts and 

storage tanks.

In addition, the current U.S. petroleum pipeline network 

is not optimally sited for ethanol distribution, production of which is heavily concentrated in the Midwest. 

E

Ethanol Pipeline in Central Florida

xample

In September 2008, Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P. 

successfully performed test shipments of batches of denatured 

ethanol in its 16-inch Central Florida Pipeline—otherwise 

used to transport gasoline between Tampa and Orlando. 

Approximately $10 million in modifications were made to 

the line in preparation for the ethanol shipments, including 

chemically cleaning the pipeline, replacing equipment that was 

incompatible with ethanol, and expanding storage capacity 

at the Orlando terminal. As a direct result of the tests, Kinder 

Morgan announced in December 2008 that the pipeline would 

become the first in the United States to carry commercial 

batches of ethanol. Kinder Morgan has also proposed creating 

a dedicated 8-inch “inter-terminal” ethanol pipeline to supply 

its Hooker’s Point terminal in Tampa.

Source: Kinder Morgan, 2008a and 2008b 
As a result of these factors, ethanol is typically not 

transported in large quantities by pipeline, but instead 

by barge, rail, or truck, which are all more costly and 

less efficient than shipping via pipelines. In 2005, rail 

was the primary transportation mode for ethanol, 

shipping 60 percent of ethanol production, or approximately 2.9 billion gallons. Trucks shipped 30 percent 

and barges 10 percent (USDA, 2007). It typically costs 

roughly $0.17 to $0.20 per gallon to transport ethanol 

by rail, whereas it would cost approximately $0.05 per 

gallon to transport by pipeline (RFA, 2008). This added 

expense hurts the competitiveness of ethanol relative to 

conventional refined fuels. 

Although it is possible to convert some existing 

pipelines for ethanol shipment, the cost of doing so is 

usually prohibitive and difficult to justify. Developing 

a new, dedicated ethanol distribution infrastructure 

would help to address many of these challenges; however, the high construction and capital costs and the 

challenge of obtaining new rights-of-way make building a new pipeline distribution system unlikely unless 

the need arises to ship very large quantities of ethanol. 

The U. S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and 

Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) 

is researching a variety of technologies that could make 

large-quantity distribution of ethanol by pipeline more 

feasible in the future. 

For more information, see http://primis.phmsa.dot.

gov/comm/Ethanol.htm?nocache=406.

Example

Developing Infrastructure: Tennessee’s Biofuel 

Green Island Corridor Network

In 2006, the state of Tennessee established a grant program 

to facilitate development of the Biofuel Green Island Corridor 

Network along Tennessee’s interstate system and major 

highways. The goal of this program is to help establish readily 

available “green island” refueling stations for B20 and E85 no 

more than 100 miles apart along heavily traveled transportation 

corridors. Ultimately, the state hopes to have at least one 

B20 and one E85 station in 30 priority counties, and three of 

each station type within all major urban areas. The state has 

allocated $1.5 million in state funds and $480,000 in funds from 

the federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement 

(CMAQ) program to pay for up to 80 percent of fuel station 

installation costs, offering grantees a maximum of $45,000 per 

pump or $90,000 per location. The program has also focused 

on installing visible and easily recognizable signage along the 

corridors to indicate where B20 and E85 stations are located 

and encourage their use. As of October 2008, there were 22 

E85 stations and about 27 B20 stations in Tennessee.

Source: Tennessee Department of Transportation, 2009

Fueling System Limitations

A second major infrastructure challenge to increased 

ethanol use is to ensure there are sufficient fueling 

stations offering access to E-85 blends of ethanol to 

support the increasing volumes of renewable fuels as 

set forth in EISA. 

As of 2008, there were more than 1,600 stations offering E85 in the United States. However, due to the distribution issues discussed above, most of these stations 

are located in the Midwest, where most ethanol production currently occurs. The highest concentrations of 

E85 stations are found in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin; although E85 is commercially 

available in more than 40 states across the country. 

TransAtlas Interactive Alternative Fuel Map

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) have developed a comprehensive 

mapping tool to help industry and government planners 

implement alternative fuels and advanced vehicles. The new 

TransAtlas tool combines different types of geographic data to 

identify areas with potential for developing advanced transportation projects. NREL employed user-friendly Google Maps to 

display the locations of existing and planned alternative fueling 

stations, concentrations of different vehicle types, alternative 

fuel production facilities, roads, and political boundaries.

For more information, see www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/data/

geographic.html. 

38 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Three

DOE estimates that 6.8 million light-duty FFVs are on 

U.S. roadways, and this number is likely to grow. FFVs 

are designed with specific modifications that allow 

them to run on either traditional gasoline (which may 

contain as much as 10 percent ethanol, depending on 

state regulations) or E85.3 Unfortunately, many owners 

of FFVs do not realize their vehicles can run on E85 

and/or don’t know where to find E85 stations. Many 

more fueling stations offering E85 are needed, as is 

greater market visibility, if states want to capitalize on 

the existing potential market of FFV owners. 

To locate E85 fueling stations, see www.afdc.energy.

gov/afdc/ethanol/ethanol_locations.html.

3 Vehicles that are not designated as E85-compatible should not use E85 fuel 

because the high content of ethanol can damage the engine and fueling system. 

http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/e85toolkit/eth_vehicles.html
3.6 Resources for Detailed Information

Resource Description URL

Bioenergy

Economic Impacts of Bioenergy 

Production and Use, U.S. DOE, 

SSEB Southeast Biomass State and 

Regional Partnership, October 

2005.

Summarizes the benefits of bioenergy production in the U.S., 

including job creation, reduced demand for fossil fuels, and 

expanded tax bases.

www.vienergy.org/Economics.pdf

State Energy Alternatives 

Web Site, U.S. DOE, National 

Conference of State Legislatures.

Provides information on state-specific biomass resources, 

policies, and status as well as current biofuels and biopower 

technology information.

http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/

states/

An Assessment of Biomass 

Harvesting Guidelines, Evans and 

Perschel, Forest Guild, 2009.

Presents an assessment of existing biomass harvesting 

guidelines and provides recommendations for the 

development of future guidelines. 

www.forestguild.org/

publications/research/2009/

biomass_guidelines.pdf

Planning for Disaster Debris, U.S. 

EPA, 2008.

Provides information and examples for developing a disaster 

debris plan that will help a community identify options for 

collecting, recycling, and disposing of debris in the event of a 

natural disaster. 

www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/rrr/

imr/cdm/pubs/disaster.htm

Biopower/Bioheat

Biomass Power and 

Conventional Fossil Systems with 

and without CO2 Sequestration—

Comparing the Energy Balance, 

Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and 

Economics, NREL, January 2004.

Provides a comparative analysis of a number of different 

biopower, natural gas, and coal technologies.

www.nrel.gov/docs/

fy04osti/32575.pdf

Economic Impacts Resulting 

from Co-Firing Biomass 

Feedstocks in Southeastern 

U.S. Coal-Fired Power Plants, 

Presentation by Burton English et 

al., University of Tennessee.

Summarizes the economic impacts in eight southeastern 

states from using biomass to co-fire power plants that 

traditionally have only used coal for fuel.

www.farmfoundation.org/

projects/documents/englishcofire.pptprojects/documents/

english-cofire.ppt 

Green Power Equivalency 

Calculator, U.S. EPA.

Allows any bioenergy user to communicate to internal and 

external audiences the environmental impact of purchasing 

or directly using green power in place of fossil fuel derived 

energy by calculating the avoided carbon dioxide (CO2) 

emissions. Results can be converted into an equivalent 

number of passenger cars, gallons of gasoline, barrels of oil, 

or American households’ electricity use.

www.epa.gov/grnpower/pubs/

calculator.htm

Job Jolt: The Economic Impacts 

of Repowering the Midwest: 

The Clean Energy Development 

Plan for the Heartland, Regional 

Economics Applications 

Laboratory, November 2002.

Analyzes the economic and job creation benefits of 

implementing a clean energy plan in the 10-state Midwest 

region. 

www.michigan.gov/

documents/nwlb/Job_Jolt_

RepoweringMidwest_235553_7.

pdf

 Chapter Three | State Bioenergy Primer 39
3.6 Resources for Detailed Information (cont.)

Resource Description URL

Biofuels/Bioproducts

Alternative Fueling Station 

Locator, U.S. DOE.

Allows users to find alternative fuels stations near a specific 

location on a route, obtain counts of alternative fuels stations 

by state, view U.S. maps, and more. The following alternative 

fuels are included in the mapping application: compressed 

natural gas, E85, propane/liquefied petroleum gas, biodiesel, 

electricity, hydrogen, and liquefied natural gas.

www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/data/

geographic.html

Biomass Energy Data Book, 

ORNL, September 2008.

Describes a meta-analysis of energy balance analyses for 

ethanol, revealing the sources of differences among the 

different studies.

http://cta.ornl.gov/bedb/pdf/

Biomass_Energy_Data_Book.pdf

Changing the Climate: Ethanol 

Industry Outlook 2008, Renewable 

Fuels Association (RFA), 2008.

Forecasts that 4 billion gallons of ethanol production capacity 

will come on line from 68 biorefineries being constructed in 

2008 and beyond, increasing the 2007 figure by nearly 50%. 

www.ethanolrfa.org/objects/pdf/

outlook/RFA_Outlook_2008.pdf

Contribution of the Ethanol 

Industry to the Economy of the 

United States, RFA, 2007.

Finds that the industry spent $12.5 billion on raw materials, 

other inputs, and goods and services to produce about 6.5 

billion gallons of ethanol in 2007. An additional $1.6 billion 

was spent to transport grain and other inputs to production 

facilities; ethanol from the plant to terminals where it is 

blended with gasoline; and co-products to end-users. 

www.ethanolrfa.org/objects/

documents/576/economic_

contribution_2006.pdf

Economic and Agricultural 

Impacts of Ethanol and Biodiesel 

Expansion, University of 

Tennessee, 2006.

Finds that producing 60 billion gallons of ethanol and 1.6 

billion gallons of biodiesel from renewable resources by 2030 

would likely result in development of a new industrial complex 

with nearly 35 million acres planted dedicated to energy crops. 

http://beag.ag.utk.edu/pp/

Ethanolagimpacts.pdf

Ethanol and the Local 

Community, RFA, 2002.

Summarizes possible effects of ethanol production on local 

economic development. 

www.ethanolrfa.org/objects/

documents/120/ethanol_local_

community.pdf

Greener Fuels, Greener Vehicles: 

A State Resource Guide, National 

Governors’ Association, 2008.

Discusses alternative transportation fuels and vehicle 

technologies.

www.nga.org/Files/

pdf/0802GREENERFUELS.PDF

Greenhouse Gas Impacts of 

Expanded Renewable and 

Alternative Fuels Use, U.S. EPA, 

April 2007.

Provides a summary of GHG emissions from a variety of 

advanced fuel options. 

www.epa.gov/oms/

renewablefuels/420f07035.htm

New Analysis Shows Oil-Savings 

Potential of Ethanol Biofuels, 

National Resources Defense 

Council (NRDC), 2006.

Describes NRDC’s meta-analysis of energy balance papers 

and its standardized methods. 

www.nrdc.org/media/

pressreleases/060209a.asp

A Rebuttal to “Ethanol Fuels: 

Energy, Economics and 

Environmental Impacts,” National 

Corn Growers Association, 2002.

Refutes the contention in a previous article that more energy 

goes into producing ethanol than ethanol itself can actually 

provide, creating a negative energy balance. 

www.ethanolrfa.org/

objects/documents/84/

ethanolffuelsrebuttal.pdf

Renewable Fuel Standard 

Program, U.S. EPA. 

Describes efforts undertaken by U.S. EPA toward a National 

Renewable Fuels Standard under requirements of the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005. While these requirements are superseded 

by more recent legislation, links from this page provide 

useful background. In particular, the discussion of estimated 

costs summarizes the expected incremental costs of policies 

advancing ethanol. 

www.epa.gov/oms/

renewablefuels/

40 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Three
Resource Description URL

Regulatory Impact Analysis: 

Renewable Fuel Standard 

Program, U.S. EPA, 2007.

Examines proposed standards that would implement a 

renewable fuel program as required by the Energy Policy Act 

of 2005. It notes, however, that renewable fuel use is forecast 

to exceed the standards due to market forces anyway. 

www.epa.gov/OMS/

renewablefuels/420r07004-

sections.htm

SmartWay Grow & Go Factsheet 

on Biodiesel, U.S. EPA, October 

2006.

Describes how biodiesel is made, its benefits versus 

vegetable oil, performance, availability, affordability, and 

other characteristics.

www.epa.gov/smartway/

growandgo/documents/

factsheet-biodiesel.htm

SmartWay Grow & Go Factsheet 

on E85 and Flex Fuel Vehicles, 

U.S. EPA, October 2006.

Describes E85-fuel and flex-fuel vehicles, including their 

affordability and benefits.

www.epa.gov/smartway/

growandgo/documents/

factsheet-e85.htm

State-Level Workshops on 

Ethanol for Transportation: Final 

Report. 

Summarizes a series of DOE-sponsored, state-level 

workshops exploring and encouraging construction of 

ethanol plants.

www.nrel.gov/docs/

fy04osti/35212.pdf

TransAtlas Interactive 

Alternative Fuel Map, U.S. DOE.

Provides user-friendly Google Maps to display the locations 

of existing and planned alternative fueling stations, 

concentrations of different vehicle types, alternative fuel 

production facilities, roads, and political boundaries. 

www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/data/

geographic.html

Analysis of Potential Causes of 

Consumer Food Price Inflation, 

RFA, 2007. 

Asserts that the “marketing bill,” not increased ethanol 

production, is responsible for rising food prices.

www.ethanolrfa.org/resource/

facts/food/documents/Informa_

Renew_Fuels_Study_Dec_2007.

pdf

Ethanol Juggernaut Diverts 

Corn from Food to Fuel, Raloff, 

Janet, Science News, 2007.

Makes the case that ethanol is driving up food prices. www.sciencenews.org/view/

generic/id/8179/title/Food_for_

Thought__Ethanol_Juggernaut_

Diverts_Corn_from_Food_to_

Fuel

Food versus Fuel in the United 

States, Institute for Agriculture 

and Trade Policy, 2007.

Finds that biofuel production is not diverting food from 

tables in the U.S. or abroad. 

www.iatp.org/iatp/publications.

cfm?accountID=258&refID= 

100001

U.S. Corn Growers: Producing 

Food and Fuel, National Corn 

Growers Association, 2006. 

Provides the corn growers’ perspective that producing food 

and fuel from corn is working out well, without undue impact 

on food prices. 

www.ncga.com/files/pdf/

FoodandFuelPaper10-08.pdf

Aggressive Use of Bioderived 

Products and Materials in the 

U.S. by 2010, A.D. Little, Inc., 2001.

The presentation and report summarize near-term 

opportunities to dramatically increase the use of biomass to 

make nonfuel products. 

www.p2pays.org/ref/40/39031.

pdf

Industrial Bioproducts: Today 

and Tomorrow, U.S. DOE, July 

2003.

The report finds that a bioindustry could harness the energy 

and molecular building blocks of biomass (crops, trees, 

grasses, crop residues, forest residues, animal waste, and 

municipal solid waste) to create products now manufactured 

from petroleum, making us far less dependent on fossil fuels. 

www.brdisolutions.com/pdfs/

BioProductsOpportunitiesReportFinal.

pdf

Preliminary Screening Technical 

and Economic Assessment 

of Synthesis Gas to Fuels and 

Chemicals with Emphasis on the 

Potential for Biomass-Derived 

Syngas, NREL, 2003.

Summarizes opportunities for biomass to be used to 

manufacture a variety of products beyond fuels alone. 

www.nrel.gov/docs/

fy04osti/34929.pdf

3.6 Resources for Detailed Information (cont.)

 Chapter Three | State Bioenergy Primer 41
Resource Description URL

Environmental Life Cycle 

Implications of Fuel Oxygenate 

Production from California 

Biomass – Technical Report, 

NREL, 1999.

Looks at the costs and benefits of biomass-derived ethanol, 

ETBE, and E10 as fuel oxygenates across their life cycles. 

www-erd.llnl.gov/

FuelsoftheFuture/pdf_files/

lifecyclecalif.pdf

Quantifying Cradle-to-Farm 

Gate Life-Cycle Impacts 

Associated with Fertilizer used 

for Corn, Soybean, and Stover 

Production, NREL, May 2005.

Documents the costs, such as eutrophication, and benefits of 

nitrate and phosphate fertilizers used in production of three 

crops. 

www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/

pdfs/37500.pdf

Life Cycle Analysis of Ethanol 

from Corn Stover, NREL, 2002.

This comprehensive accounting of ethanol’s flows to and 

from the environment focuses on ethanol produced from 

corn stover

www.nrel.gov/docs/gen/

fy02/31792.pdf

Life Cycle Inventory of Biodiesel 

and Petroleum Diesel for Use 

in an Urban Bus: Final Report, 

NREL, 1998.

Examines the relative costs and benefits of using biodiesel 

versus petroleum diesel in an urban bus.

www.nrel.gov/docs/legosti/

fy98/24089.pdf

Life Cycle Assessment of 

Biodiesel versus Petroleum 

Diesel Fuel, Institute of Electrical 

and Electronics Engineers, 1996. 

The proceedings of the 31st Intersociety Energy Conversion 

Engineering Conference, held August 11–16, 1996, in 

Washington, DC. 

Accessible by subscription only

Life Cycle Assessment of 

Biomass-Derived Refinery 

Feedstocks for Reducing CO2, 

NREL, 1997.

Discusses the two processes for producing 1,4-butanediol. 

The first process is the conventional hydrocarbon feedstockbased approach, utilizing methane to produce formaldehyde, 

and acetylene with synthesis under conditions of heat and 

pressure. The second is a biomass-based feedstock approach 

where glucose derived from corn is fermented. 

Not available online

Life Cycle Assessment of 

Biomass Cofiring in a Coal-Fired 

Power Plant, NREL, 2001. 

Reports on a cradle-to-grave analysis of all processes 

necessary for the operation of a coal-fired power plant that 

co-fires wood residue, including raw material extraction, feed 

preparation, transportation, and waste disposal and recycling. 

Accessible by subscription only

Understanding Land Use 

Change and U.S. Ethanol 

Expansion, RFA, November 2008.

Discusses historical agricultural land use and crop utilization 

trends, explores the role of increased productivity, looks at 

the contributions of ethanol feed co-products, and examines 

global agricultural land use projections obtained from 

Informa Economics.

www.ethanolrfa.org/objects/

documents/2041/final_land_

use_1110_w_execsumm.pdf

National Biofuels Action 

Plan, Biomass Research and 

Development Board, October 

2008.

Outlines areas where cooperation between federal agencies 

will help to evolve bio-based fuel production technologies 

into competitive solutions for meeting U.S. fuel demands. 

Seven key areas for action are identified: feedstock 

production; feedstock logistics; conversion of feedstock to 

fuel; distribution; end Use; sustainability; and Environment, 

Health, and Safety.

www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/

pdfs/nbap.pdf

Tools for Evaluating Benefits

AirCRED, Argonne National 

Laboratory, August 2007.

This tool is used to support local air emission reductions 

claims associated with alternative-fuel vehicles within the 

State Implementation Planning process. 

www.transportation.anl.gov/

modeling_simulation/AirCred/

index.html

3.6 Resources for Detailed Information (cont.))

42 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Three
Resource Description URL

Biomass Technology Analysis 

Models and Tools.

Web sites of models and tools that demonstrate biomass 

technologies and uses, and can be used in life-cycle 

assessments. Most tools can be applied on a global, regional, 

local, or project basis.

www.nrel.gov/analysis/analysis_

tools_tech_bio.html

Biomass Feedstock Composition 

and Property Database.

Provides data results from analysis of more than 150 samples 

of potential biofuels feedstocks, including corn stover, wheat 

straw, bagasse, switchgrass and other grasses, and poplars 

and other fast-growing trees.

www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/

feedstock_databases.html

CHP Emissions Calculator, U.S. 

EPA.

Enables a quick and easy analysis of the criteria air pollutant 

and GHG emission reductions from incorporating CHP 

designs into plants and production facilities. It also translates 

these reductions into “cars” and “trees” to convey their value 

to a nontechnical audience.

www.epa.gov/chp/basic/

calculator.html

Clean Air Climate Protection 

Software, ICLEI and NACAA.

Helps local governments create greenhouse gas inventories, 

quantify the benefits of reduction measures, and formulate 

local climate action plans.

www.cacpsoftware.org/

Emissions & Generation 

Resource Integrated Database 

(EGRID), U.S. EPA.

Provides a comprehensive database of electric-sector 

emissions at the plant, state, and regional levels. These 

can be compared to emissions from biopower to estimate 

emissions’ effects. 

www.epa.gov/cleanrgy/egrid/

index.htm

Greenhouse Gases, Regulated 

Emissions, and Energy Use in 

Transportation (GREET) Model, 

Argonne National Laboratory, 

August 2007.

Includes full fuel-cycle and vehicle-cycle emissions and 

energy estimation capability. While not a full life-cycle 

assessment tool, it allows estimation of upstream emissions 

and energy effects. For some state policy questions, it may 

provide sufficient analytic detail on its own. For decisions 

with greater financial implications, it may be most appropriate 

to use for initial screening to support development of a more 

detailed study. States may wish to use GREET directly or to 

consider analyses that have been done using this tool. 

www.transportation.anl.gov/

modeling_simulation/GREET/

Job and Economic Development 

Impact (JEDI) Models.

Easy-to-use, spreadsheet-based tools that analyze the 

economic impacts of constructing and operating power 

generation and biofuel plants at the local and state levels.

www.nrel.gov/analysis/jedi

Power Profiler, U.S. EPA. Provides a quick estimate of electricity emissions rates 

by location, which could be compared to emissions from 

biopower to estimate emissions effects. 

www.epa.gov/grnpower/buygp/

powerprofiler.htm

Standard Biomass Analytical 

Procedures.

Provides tested and accepted methods for performing 

analyses commonly used in biofuels research.

www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/

analytical_procedures.html

Theoretical Ethanol Yield 

Calculator.

Calculates the theoretical ethanol yield of a particular 

biomass feedstock based on its sugar content.

www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/

ethanol_yield_calculator.html

Thermodynamic Data for 

Biomass Conversion and Waste 

Incineration, NREL, National 

Bureau of Standards. 

Provides heat of combustion and other useful data for 

biopower and biofuels research on a wide range of biomass 

and non-biomass materials.

www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/

pdfs/2839.pdf

3.6 Resources for Detailed Information (cont.))

 Chapter Three | State Bioenergy Primer 43
3.7 References

■ACORE (American Council on Renewable Energy), 

2007. The Outlook on Renewable Energy in America 

Volume II: Joint Summary Report. American Council 

on Renewable Energy, Washington, DC, 2007. www.

acore.org/files/RECAP/docs/JointOutlookReport2007.

pdf.

■Brown et al., 2007. Brown, E., K. Kory, D. Arent. 

Understanding and Informing the Policy Environment: 

State-Level Renewable Fuel Standards. NREL/TP-640-

41075. http://dnr.louisiana.gov/sec/execdiv/techasmt/

energy_sources/renewable/UnderstandingandInformingPolicy-StateRFS.pdf. 

■Cleaves, 2007. Cleaves, R.. Executive Director of US 

Biopower Association. Personal Communication. June 

15, 2009.

■Delucchi, et al., 2008. Letter to Mary Nichols, Chairman, California Air Resources Board. University of 

California, July 3, 2008. http://rael.berkeley.edu/files/

LUC-biofuels-Nichols_6-30-08.pdf.

■E3 Biofuels, 2007. Closed Loop vs. Conventional Ethanol. E3 Biofuels, 2007. www.e3biofuels.com/technology/ethanol-methods.php. 

■EIA (Energy Information Administration), 2008. 

Annual Energy Review 2007. Table 5.4. Petroleum 

Imports by Country of Origin, 1960-2007; Table 5.11, 

Petroleum Products Supplied by Type; Tables 5.13a-d. 

Estimated Petroleum Consumption (by Residential and 

Commercial, Industrial, Transportation, and Electric 

Power sectors), EIA, Washington, DC, posted June 23, 

2008. www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/petro.html.

■ IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 

Change), 2006. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National 

Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Intergovernmental Panel 

on Climate Change, 2006. www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/

public/2006gl/index.html.

■ IEA (International Energy Agency), 2005. Variability 

of Wind Power and Other Renewables: Management 

Options and Strategies. International Energy Agency, 

Paris, 2005. www.uwig.org/IEA_Report_on_variability.pdf.

■Hanson, 2005. Hanson, C. The Business Case for Using 

Renewable Energy, Corporate Guide to Green Power 

Markets, Installment 7. World Resources Institute, 

Washington, DC, 2005. www.thegreenpowergroup.org/

pdf/Installment7.pdf.

■Kinder Morgan, 2008a. Florida Farm to Fuel Summit. 

Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P., Houston, TX, , 

July 31, 2008. www.floridafarmtofuel.com/ppt/2008/

lelio.ppt.

■Kinder Morgan, 2008b. KMP Begins Commercial 

Operations of Ethanol Transportation on Central 

Florida Pipeline System. Kinder Morgan Energy 

Partners, L.P., Houston, TX, December 2, 2008. http://

phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=119776&p=irolnewsArticle&ID=1231520&highlight=.

■Lacey, 2007. Lacey, S. The Economic Impact of Renewable Energy. “Renewable Energy World.com.” April 

20, 2007. www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/

story?id=48201. 

■Leatherman and Nelson, 2002. Leatherman, J. and R. 

Nelson. “South Dakota Soybean-Based Biodiesel Macroeconomic Analysis: Estimating the Economic Impact 

of a Soybean Processing Facility and Biodiesel Production Plant in Brown, Minnehaha and Turner Counties, 

South Dakota” Economic Impacts of Bioenergy Production and Use Factsheet, DOE/SSEB Southeast Biomass 

State and Regional Partnership, June 2006. www.

vienergy.org/Economics.pdf. 

■Mann and Spath, 2001. Mann, M.K. and P.L. Spath. 

Life Cycle Assessment of Biomass Cofiring in a CoalFired Power Plant: Clean Products and Processes.

NREL Report No. 29457. Vol. 3, pp. 81-91. National 

Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, 2001. 

doi:10.1007/s100980100109.

■Muller et al., 2007. Muller, M., T. Yelden, H. 

Schoonover. Food Versus Fuel in the United States. 

Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, Minneapolis, MN, 2007. www.iatp.org/iatp/publications.

cfm?accountID=258&refID=100001.

■NASDA (National Association of State Departments of Agriculture), 2008. Biomass Crop Assistance Program (Bcap) Established. NASDA, 

Washington, DC, June 2008. www.nasda.org/

cms/7197/9060/16588/16614.aspx. 

■NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory), 

1998. An Overview of Biodiesel and Petroleum Diesel 

Life Cycles. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 

Golden, CO. www.nrel.gov/docs/legosti/fy98/24772.

pdf.

44 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Three
■NREL, 2003. Biopower Technical Assessment: State 

of the Industry and Technology. National Renewable 

Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO. www.nrel.gov/docs/

fy03osti/33123.pdf.

■NREL, 2009. Biodiesel Handling and Use Guide (4th

ed.). National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, 

CO. www.nrel.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/43672.pdf.

■Oregon Department of Energy, 2007. Biomass Energy 

and the Environment. Oregon Department of Energy, 

Salem, OR, 2007. www.oregon.gov/ENERGY/RENEW/

Biomass/Environment.shtml. 

■Oregon Environmental Council, 2007. Fueling Oregon with Sustainable Biofuels. Oregon Environmental 

Council, Portland, OR, October 2007. www.oeconline.org/resources/publications/reportsandstudies/

sustainablebiofuels.

■ORNL (Oak Ridge National Laboratory), 2005. 

Bioenergy Information Network: Biomass Frequently 

Asked Questions. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 

2008. http://bioenergy.ornl.gov/faqs/index.html.

■RFA (Renewable Fuels Association), 2008. Robert 

White, Renewable Fuels Association. EPA Region 4 

Biofuels Conference, November 18, 2008. 

■Searchinger et al., 2008. Searchinger, T., R. Heimlich, 

R.A. Houghton, F. Dong, A. Elobeid, J. Fabiosa, S. 

Tokgoz, D. Hayes, T.H. Yu. Use of U.S. Croplands for 

Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases through Emissions from Land-Use Change. Science, Vol. 319 No. 

5867, pp. 1238–1240. www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/

abstract/1151861.

■Spath and Mann, 2004. Spath, P. and M. Mann. Biomass Power and Conventional Fossil Systems with and 

without CO2

 Sequestration—Comparing the Energy 

Balance, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Economics. 

NREL Report No. TP-510-32575. NREL, Golden, CO, 

2004. www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/32575.pdf.

■Tamarak Energy, 2007. “National Biomass Expert 

Confirms Watertown Renewable Power Jobs Forecast.” 

Tamarack Energy, Inc., Essex, CT, November 23, 2007. 

■Tennessee Department of Transportation. 2009. “Biofuel Green Island Corridor Grant Project.” Tennessee, 

2009. www.tdot.state.tn.us/biofuel/application.htm. 

■Ugarte et al., 2006. Ugarte, D., B. English, K. Jensen, 

C. Hellwinckel, J. Menard, B. Wilson, 2006. Economic 

and Agricultural Impacts of Ethanol and Biodiesel 

Expansion. The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 

TN, 2006. http://beag.ag.utk.edu/pp/Ethanolagimpacts.pdf.

■Urbanchuk, 2007. Urbanchuk, J.M. Contribution of the 

Ethanol Industry to the Economy of the United States. 

Prepared for the Renewable Fuels Association by 

LECG Corporation, 2007. www.ethanolrfa.org/objects/

documents/576/economic_contribution_2006.pdf. 

■USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture), 2007. Ethanol Transportation Backgrounder: Expansion of U.S. 

Corn-based Ethanol from the Agricultural Transportation Perspective. USDA, Washington, DC, September 

2007. www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/getfile?dDocName

=STELPRDC5063605&acct=atpub. 

■USDA, 2008. Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 

2008. USDA, Washington, DC, June 2008. www.fsa.

usda.gov/Internet/FSA_File/2008fbbcapsummary.pdf.

■U.S. DOE (Department of Energy), 2003. Industrial 

Bioproducts: Today and Tomorrow. U.S. DOE, Washington, DC, July 2003. www.brdisolutions.com/pdfs/

BioProductsOpportunitiesReportFinal.pdf.

■U.S. DOE, 2004a. Combined Heat and Power Market 

Potential for Opportunity Fuels. Prepared by Resource 

Dynamics Corporation. Vienna, VA, August 2004. 

www.eere.energy.gov/de/pdfs/chp_opportunityfuels.pdf.

■U.S. DOE, 2004b. Biomass Bulk Processing and Storage. U.S. DOE, Washington, DC, September, 2004. 

www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/fy04/bulk_processing_storage.pdf.

■U.S. DOE, 2005. Biomass as Feedstock for a Bioenergy 

and Bioproducts Industry: The Technical Feasibility of 

a Billion-Ton Annual Supply. DOE/DO-102995-2135. 

U.S. DOE, Washington, DC, April 2005. http://feedstockreview.ornl.gov/pdf/billion_ton_vision.pdf.

■U.S. DOE, 2006. Biomass Energy Data Book: Edition 

1. ORNL/TM-2006/571. U.S. DOE, Washington, DC, 

September 2006. http://cta.ornl.gov/bedb/pdf/Biomass_Energy_Data_Book.pdf. 

■U.S. DOE, 2008. Flexible Fuel Vehicle Emissions; E10 

Emissions. U.S. DOE, Washington, DC, 2008. http://

afdc.energy.gov/afdc/vehicles/flexible_fuel_emissions.

html; www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/vehicles/emissions_

e10.html.

■U.S. DOE/SSEB, 2005. Economic Impacts of Bioenergy 

Production and Use. Draft Fact Sheet. U.S. DOE/SSEB 

 Chapter Three | State Bioenergy Primer 45
Southeast State and Regional Biomass Partnership, 

October 26, 2005. www.vienergy.org/Economics.pdf. 

■U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), 2002. 

A Comprehensive Analysis of Biodiesel Impacts on Exhaust Emissions. EPA420-P-02-001. U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, 2002. www.epa.gov/otaq/models/analysis/

biodsl/p02001.pdf. 

■U.S. EPA, 2005. Riparian Buffer Width, Vegetative Cover, and Nitrogen Removal Effectiveness: A 

Review of Current Science and Regulations. U.S. 

EPA, Washington, DC, 2005. www.epa.gov/nrmrl/

pubs/600R05118/600R05118.pdf.

■U.S. EPA. 2007a. Impact of Combined Heat and 

Power on Energy Use and Carbon Emissions in the 

Dry Mill Ethanol Process. U.S. EPA, Washington, 

DC, November 2007. www.epa.gov/chp/documents/

ethanol_energy_balance.pdf.

■U.S. EPA. 2007b. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas 

Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2005. EPA 430-R-07-002. 

U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, 2007. www.epa.gov/

climatechange/emissions/downloads06/07CR.pdf.

■U.S. EPA. 2007c. Wastewater Fact Sheet. U.S. EPA, 

Washington, DC, September 25, 2007. www.epa.gov/

chp/markets/wastewater_fs.html.

■U.S. EPA, 2007d. Biomass Combined Heat and Power 

Catalog of Technologies, Appendix A. U.S. EPA, 

Washington, DC, September 2007. www.epa.gov/chp/

documents/biomass_chp_catalog_part8.pdf. 

■U.S. EPA, 2007e. Regulatory Impact Analysis: Renewable Fuel Standard Program. EPA420-R-07-004. U.S. 

EPA, Washington, DC, April 2007. www.epa.gov/otaq/

renewablefuels/420r07004.pdf.

■U.S. EPA, 2007f. Municipalities Fact Sheet. U.S. EPA, 

Washington, DC, October, 11, 2007. www.epa.gov/chp/

markets/municipalities_fs.html.

■U.S. EPA, 2008a, Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA). National Risk Management Research Laboratory Web site. 

U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, last updated October 17, 

2008. www.epa.gov/nrmrl/lcaccess/. 

■U.S. EPA, 2008b. Land Resource Use. Clean Energy 

Program Web site. U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, last 

updated October 20, 2008. www.epa.gov/cleanrgy/

energy-and-you/affect/land-resource.html.

■U.S. EPA, 2008c. Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) in the 

United States. U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, 2008. www.

epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/municipal/msw99.htm.

■U.S. EPA, 2009. Climate Leaders Greenhouse 

Gas Inventory Protocol Optional Module Guidance. 

U.S. EPA. Washington, DC, January 2009. www.

epa.gov/climateleaders/documents/resources/

OffsetProgramOverview.pdf.

■Wang, 2005. Wang, M. Updated Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Results of Fuel Ethanol. 15th

International Symposium on Alcohol Fuels, San Diego, 

CA, September 26–28, 2005. www.transportation.anl.

gov/pdfs/TA/354.pdf.

■Wang and Haq, 2008. Wang, M. and Z. Haq. “Ethanol’s Effects on Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” E-letter 

to Science, August 12, 2008. www.sciencemag.org/cgi/

eletters/319/5867/1238.

46 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Three
Chapter Four

How Can States Identify 

Bioenergy Opportunities?

After learning about the benefits and 

challenges of bioenergy (Chapter 3), 

state decision makers can consider 

whether they want to use bioenergy 

to meet state energy, environmental, 

and economic goals. 

If states decide they want to promote bioenergy, they 

should consider the three steps shown below. Following these steps will help ensure that states (1) fully understand the most appropriate bioenergy activities for 

them, and (2) design policies and programs tailored to 

the market conditions and resource availability unique 

to each state. 

Chapter Four | State Bioenergy Primer 47

Chapter Four Contents

4.1 Step 1: Determine Availability of Biomass Feedstocks

4.2 Step 2: Assess Potential Markets for Identified 

Biomass Feedstocks and Bioenergy

4.3 Step 3: Identify Opportunities for Action

4.4 Resources for Detailed Information

4.5 References

D

ocu

m

ent

Map

Chapter One 

Introduction

Chapter Two

What Is Bioenergy?

Chapter Three

Benefits and Challenges

Chapter Four 

Identifying Bioenergy Opportunities

Chapter Five 

Options for Advancing Bioenergy

Step 1

Determine Availability of 

Biomass Feedstocks 

Step 2

Assess Potential Markets for 

Identified Biomass Feedstocks

Step 3

Identify Opportunities 

for Action

Note: The order in which Steps 1 and 2 are completed is 

not critical as both steps are equally important to develop a 

rational approach.
Example

Florida’s Farm to Fuel Initiative

In September 2005, inspired by the “25x’25” initiative—a group 

of stakeholders promoting expansion of biomass from farms, 

forests, and ranches to provide 25 percent of the total energy 

consumed in the United States by 2025—the state of Florida 

looked closely at its energy profile and resource base to 

determine how more biomass could be used sustainably in 

the state. 

Through an assessment of market conditions Florida 

determined that the state was one of the nation’s largest 

consumers of both petroleum gasoline and nonrenewable 

electricity in the United States. Florida also identified more 

than a dozen types of produce for which it is ranked first or 

second in production and sales value in the United States (i.e., 

determined potential feedstocks and markets). The Florida 

Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services held its first 

stakeholder meeting in January 2006 to develop a proposal to 

match the state’s needs with available resources, and identified 

opportunities for action.

As a result, the Farm to Fuel Initiative was enacted in June 

2006 as a comprehensive strategy for promoting renewable 

energy within the state. The main objective of the program 

is to enhance the market for and promote production and 

distribution of renewable energy from Florida-grown crops, 

agricultural wastes and residues, and other biomass to enhance 

the value of agricultural products and expand agribusiness in 

the state. The program offers competitive renewable energy 

matching grants for research and development, demonstration, 

and commercialization projects relating to bioenergy based on 

Florida-specific criteria. The program awarded $25 million to 12 

projects across the state in 2008. 

For more information, see: www.floridafarmtofuel.com/.

Source: Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 

2008 and 2007

4.1 Step 1: Determine Availability 

of Biomass Feedstocks

A complete inventory of its biomass feedstocks will 

allow a state to fully assess the range of options for 

bioenergy development. Biomass feedstocks are available across the United States, especially in the Midwest 

and Southeast (see Figure 4-1). However, each state 

possesses its own unique blend of bioenergy feedstocks. State-specific information is necessary to ensure 

pursuit of the most technically and economically viable 

bioenergy activities for a state. 

When assessing the availability of potential biomass 

feedstocks, it is important for decision makers to consider all types, including waste/opportunity fuels and 

energy crops, as discussed in Chapter 2. States should 

pay particular attention to obtaining accurate estimates 

of biomass feedstock availability because miscalculations can greatly impact the economic viability and 

successful operation of bioenergy projects. 

The key question each state must answer while assessing its available feedstocks and completing Step 1 is: 

What is the total fuel potential of all biomass feedstocks, by location, in the state? 

To develop an assessment of biomass resource availability, states should first see whether they can use existing 

data sources (see Section 4.1.1). If existing sources 

prove insufficient, states may want to consider conducting a biomass assessment (see Section 4.1.2). Nothing 

takes the place of a detailed, on-the-ground biomass 

resource assessment when considering a project.

Regional Biomass Feedstock Availability 

Locations in all regions of the country have opportunities to 

take advantage of waste and opportunity fuels for biopower 

and bioheat generation. With respect to advanced biofuels 

production, regionally, cellulosic ethanol production from corn 

and wheat residues would probably occur most in the Midwest; 

dedicated crop production would most likely occur in the 

South/Southeast; and cellulosic ethanol production from wood 

and forest residues would occur in the West, Southeast, and 

Northeast (assuming relatively short transportation distances 

from feedstock to production facility) (Ugarte et al., 2006). 

48 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Four

4.1.1 Use Existing Resources to 

Determine Biomass Feedstock 

Availability

Numerous existing resources provide data on potential 

biomass feedstocks by state and information on how 

to conduct a biomass assessment (as discussed later 

in this chapter). For example, key state agencies (e.g., 

the state Department of Agriculture) are often valuable sources of information about potential biomass 

feedstocks. In-state expertise can also be found among 

local USDA rural development representatives (www.

rurdev.usda.gov/recd_map.html), as well as local 

academic and business experts in agriculture, forestry, 

and waste. 

The following resources provide information about 

potential biomass feedstocks and/or data on feedstock 

availability by geographic location. Each specializes in 

particular types of data, as described below:

■ Biomass Resource Assessment Tool. This online 

biomass mapping tool, developed by NREL for the U.S. 
Figure 4-1. Total Biomass Resources Available 

in the United States per Square Kilometer by County

Source: Milbrandt, 2005

Hawaii

This study estimates the technical biomass resources currently available in the United 

States by county. It includes the following feedstock categories:

■ Agricultural residues (crop and animal manure);

■ Wood residues (forest, primary mill, secondary mill, and urban wood);

■ Municipal discards (methane emissions from landfills and domestic water treatment);

■ Dedicated energy crops (on Conservation Reserve Program and Abandoned Mine Lands).

Biomass Resources Available in the united States

Normalized by County Area

Alaska

Tonnes/sq km/Year

Above 250

200-250

150-200

100-150

50-100

Less than 50

Chapter Four | State Bioenergy Primer 49

EPA Blue Skyways program, allows users to select a location on the map, quantify the biomass resources available within a user-defined radius, and then estimate the 

total thermal energy or power that could be generated 

by recovering a portion of that biomass. The tool acts as 

a preliminary source of biomass feedstock information; 

however, it will not take the place of an on-the-ground 

feedstock assessment. The tool also contains numerous 

layers including landfills, waste water treatment plants, 

anaerobic digesters on animal feeding operations, EPA 

brownfields, biopower plants, fossil power plants, ethanol manufacturing facilities, and alternative fuel filling 

stations. The tool can be found at http://rpm.nrel.gov/

biopower/biopower/launch.

■ Biomass Feedstocks. The U.S. DOE Biomass Program 

works with industry, academia, and national laboratory 

partners on a balanced portfolio of research in biomass 

feedstocks and conversion technologies. The Web site 

provides a gateway to a wealth of biomass information, including feedstock availability. In particular, the 

program’s site lists several U.S. DOE reports on the 

potential of different feedstocks, including corn stover, 

woody biomass, and switchgrass, which states across 

the nation may find useful. 

To locate these publications, visit www1.eere.energy.

gov/biomass/publications.html#feed. The U.S. DOE 

Biomass Program homepage can be accessed at www1.

eere.energy.gov/biomass/biomass_feedstocks.html.
■ State Assessment for Biomass Resources. Produced 

by the U.S. DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy (EERE) Alternative Fuels and 

Advanced Vehicles Data Center, this tool provides detailed information on biomass resources and utilization 

throughout the United States. It features state-specific 

information on conventional fuel and biofuel use, 

ethanol and biodiesel stations and production plants, 

and biofuel production capacities. In addition, it offers 

state-by-state snapshots of available feedstocks, data on 

potential production capacities, and projections on the 

future use of biofuels. The site is particularly useful for 

states interested in evaluating biomass resource potential for producing biofuels.

This resource can be found at www.afdc.energy.gov/

afdc/sabre/index.php. 

■ Dynamic Maps, GIS Data, and Analysis Tools. 

This NREL Web site provides county-level biomass 

resource maps, which are useful for states interested 

in their feedstock potential in the following categories: 

crop residues, forest residues, primary mill residues, 

secondary mill residues, urban wood waste, methane 

emissions from landfills, methane emissions from 

manure management, methane emissions from wastewater treatment plants, and dedicated energy crops. 

The maps are derived from data contained in a report, 

Geographic Perspective on the Current Biomass Resource 

Availability in the United States (described below). 

The NREL Biomass Web site is www.nrel.gov/gis/

biomass.html. Note that these maps present technical 

biomass resource data. The economic biomass resource 

availability will most likely be somewhat less than what 

is presented here.

■ Geographic Perspective on the Current Biomass 

Resource Availability in the United States. This NREL 

report provides the basis for the maps and data presented in NREL’s Dynamic Maps, GIS Data, and Analysis Tools Web site described above. The report provides 

a geographic analysis of biomass resource potential at 

the county level, and can give officials a sense of the 

major biomass resources available within their state 

and their technical potential relative to other states. 

The report is available at www.nrel.gov/docs/fy06osti/39181.pdf.

■ USFS Forest Inventory Data Online (FIDO). This 

online tool provides access to the National Forest 

Inventory and Analysis databases. It can be used to 

generate tables and maps of forest statistics (including 

50 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Four

tree biomass) by running standard reports for a specific 

state or county and survey year, or customized reports 

based on criteria selected by the user. 

This tool can be accessed at http://199.128.173.26/fido/

index.html.

■ Market Opportunities for Biogas Recovery Systems. 

This report published by U.S. EPA’s AgStar program 

assesses the market potential for biogas energy projects 

at swine and dairy farms in the United States. For the 

top ten swine and dairy states, the guide characterizes 

the sizes and types of operations where biogas projects 

are technically feasible, along with estimates of potential methane production, electricity generation, and 

greenhouse gas emission reductions.

The report is available at www.epa.gov/agstar/pdf/

biogas%20recovery%20systems_screenres.pdf.

■ U.S. EPA’s Landfill Methane Outreach Program 

(LMOP) Landfill Database. This online database 

provides a nationwide listing of operational and under 

construction LFG energy projects; candidate municipal 

solid waste landfills having LFG energy potential; and 

information on additional landfills that could represent 

LFG energy opportunities. The database can be accessed as a series of downloadable Excel spreadsheets, 

which are updated and posted to the Web site each 

month. The information contained in the LMOP database is compiled from a variety of sources, including 

annual voluntary submissions by LMOP Partners and 

industry publications. 

The database can be accessed at www.epa.gov/lmop/

proj/index.htm.

■ Coordinated Resource Offering Protocol (CROP) 

Evaluations. This U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of 

Land Management Web page provides the results of ten 

CROP evaluations that have been conducted for more 

than 30 million acres of public forestlands potentially 

vulnerable to wildfires. The evaluations contain detailed 

resource-offering maps that illustrate the growing fuel 

load problem within major forest systems and quantify 

the biomass available for removal within five years.

The evaluations can be accessed at www.forestsandrangelands.gov/Woody_Biomass/supply/CROP/

index.shtml.

■ State Assessment for Biomass Resources (SABRE). 

This comprehensive U.S. DOE tool provides detailed 

information on biomass resources and utilization 
throughout the United States. It features state-specific 

information on conventional fuel and biofuel use, 

ethanol and biodiesel stations and production plants, 

and biofuel production capacities. In addition, it offers 

state-by-state snapshots of available feedstocks, data on 

potential production capacities, and projections on the 

future use of biofuels.

This tool can be accessed at www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/

sabre/index.php.

4.1.2 Conduct a Biomass Assessment if

More Information Is Needed

If more information is needed about biomass feedstock 

availability after tapping into the resources discussed 

above, a state can consider conducting its own biomass 

feedstock assessment. The advantages of a state conducting its own assessment include the ability to tailor 

the study to meet specific state goals for bioenergy use 

(i.e., focus on resources that the state knows it wants 

to tap) and determine the level of data specificity (i.e., 

state level, county level, within 50 miles of existing energy and industrial infrastructure, etc.). Disadvantages 

of a state conducting its own assessment are the time 

and cost of doing so. 

Some considerations for determining whether to conduct a state-specific biomass assessment include:

■ Identify priorities. First, consider using existing 

information to decide generally what priorities are of 

greatest interest, for example feedstock types (e.g., forest residues, energy crops), geography (e.g., economic 

development in southeast portion of the state), or 

output (e.g., biopower, biofuels) based on the state’s 

resources and goals. 

■ Look closely to analyze data gaps in existing information. Based on the scope of interest, a state can 

decide whether existing data meet its needs or information gaps need to be addressed by completing its 

own assessment. In addition to general data availability, 

some considerations will include how recent the information is (i.e., to determine whether it is out of date), 

and the degree of data specificity (e.g., an estimate for 

the whole state, or detailed county-level data).

■ Determine resource availability. Once a state knows 

its data needs, it will need to determine whether it has 

the resources to perform any needed assessment itself 

(i.e., using state staff) or whether it needs to hire a 

contractor or tap into the expertise at state universities. 

Chapter Four | State Bioenergy Primer 51

Costs to do so will need to be considered, as they will 

impact the extent of the analysis that can be completed.

Some states have already conducted assessments or related studies of renewable energy (including biomass) 

potential and can provide examples and guidance. 

Examples include:

■ Guide to Estimates of State Renewable Energy 

Potential. This guidebook lists existing studies of renewable energy potential and describes how to conduct 

these studies. 

■ State Biomass Resource Assessments 

■ California: An Assessment of Biomass Resources in 

California, 2007

Provides an updated biomass inventory for the state 

along with an assessment of potential growth in 

biomass resources and power generation that could 

help to satisfy the state renewable portfolio standard (RPS). http://biomass.ucdavis.edu/materials/

reports%20and%20publications/2008/CBC_Biomass_Resources_2007.pdf

■ Georgia: Biomass Wood Resource Assessment on a 

County-by-County Basis for the State of Georgia, 2005

Provides a biomass wood resource assessment at 

the county level for Georgia. www.gfc.state.ga.us/

ForestMarketing/documents/BiomassWRACountybyCountyGA05.pdf

■ Hawaii: Biomass and Bioenergy Resource Assessment: 

State of Hawaii, 2002

Provides an assessment of current and potential biomass and bioenergy resources for Hawaii. Includes 

animal wastes, forest product residues, agricultural 

residues, and urban wastes. www.hawaii.gov/dbedt/

info/energy/publications/biomass-assessment.pdf

■ Mississippi: Mississippi Institute for Forest Inventory 

Dynamic Report Generator 

Provides a continuous, statewide forest resource 

inventory necessary for the sustainable forest-based 

economy. The inventory information is derived from 

sampling estimation techniques with a presumed 

precision of +/- 15 percent sampling error with 95 

percent confidence. www.mifi.ms.gov/

■ South Carolina: Biomass Energy Potential in South 

Carolina: A Conspectus of Relevant Information, 2007 
Summary of Biomass Resources and their Degree 

of Utilization in the State of Hawaii by County

Hawaii’s 2002 Biomass and Bioenergy Resource Assessment was developed through five tasks: 

1. Collecting and reviewing relevant prior studies.

2. Collecting current bioenergy data from public and private sector sources. 

3. Compiling, reducing, and analyzing data and information collected in Task 2.

4. Summarizing economic and other considerations related to development 

and operation of bioenergy facilities.

5. Inventorying public and private sector bioenergy facilities in the state. 

The results of these activities are summarized below; the full report is available at 

www.hawaii.gov/dbedt/info/energy/publications/biomass-assessment.pdf.

tons yr1 Hawaii Maui Kauai Honolulu

Swine Manure dry 410 540 180 1,560

Dairy Manure dry 8,300

Poultry dry 1,5201 4,830

Bagasse Fiber dry 275,000

(275,000)2

74,000

(56,000)2

Molasses as-received 80,000 15,000

Cane Trash dry 137,000 37,000

Pineapple Processing 

Water

dry 7,500

(7500)2

Macademia Nut Shells dry 19,000

(18,000)2

Municipal Solid Waste as-received 110,000 96,000 56,000 668,000

(6000,000)2,3

Food Waste4,5 as-received 24,000 15,000 5,800 90,000

Sewage Sludge5 dry 183 3,352

(3,352)2,3

246 16,576

(891)2,3

Fats/Oil/Grease6 dry 1,850 1,850 800 10,000

1 combined poultry waste estimate for Hawaii, Maui, and Kauai

2 amount currently used

3 tipping fee associated with utilization

4 amount entering landfills

5 included in municipal solid waste value

6 processed grease, contains minimal moisture

52 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Four
Summarizes studies conducted on various actual 

and potential feedstock resources in South Carolina 

and the Southeast, as well as relevant nonregional 

studies and other information. The report describes 

the existing information base, as well as information 

gaps. www.energy.sc.gov/publications/Biomass%20

Conspectus%204-10-07.pdf

■ Oregon: Biomass Energy and Biofuels from Oregon’s 

Forests, 2006

Assesses the statewide potential for production of 

electricity and biofuels from woody biomass, including the available wood supply and the environmental, 

energy, forest health, and economic effects. Reviews 

and summarizes efforts underway to promote electric 

energy and biofuels from woody biomass, and identifies gaps in existing efforts. Assesses constraints and 

challenges to the development of biomass energy and 

biofuels from Oregon forests, including economic, 

environmental, legal, policy, infrastructure, and other 

barriers and develops recommendations on how to 

overcome these barriers. www.oregonforests.org/assets/uploads//Biomass_Full_Report.pdf

■ Regional Biomass Resource Assessments

■ Northeastern states (CT, DE, ME, MD, MA, NH, NJ, 

NY, PA, RI, VT): Securing a Place for Biomass in the 

Northeast United States: A Review of Renewable Energy 

and Related Policies, 2003

Provides a biomass feedstock assessment for northeastern states. www.nrbp.org/pdfs/nrbp_final_report.pdf

■ Western states (AK, AZ, CA, CO, HI, ID, KS, MT, 

NE, NV, NM, ND, OR, SD, TX, UT, WA, WY): Biomass Task Force Report, 2006

Focuses on use of biomass resources for production of electricity as part of an overall effort of the 

Western Governors’ Association (WGA) to increase 

the contribution of clean and renewable energy in 

the region. www.westgov.org/wga/initiatives/cdeac/

Biomass-full.pdf

■ Western states (WA, OR, ID, MT, WY, CO, NM, AZ, 

UT, NV, CA, TX, OK, ND, SD, NE, KS, AK and HI): 

Western Bioenergy Assessment, 2008

Includes a series of technical reports produced for the 

Western Governors’ Association. These reports extensively evaluate biomass resources in the western states, 

biofuel conversion technologies, spatial analysis and 

supply curve development, and deployment scenarios 

and potential policy interactions. www.westgov.org/

wga/initiatives/transfuels/index.html

■ Western states (WA, OR, ID, MT, WY, CO, NM, AZ, 

UT, NV, CA, TX, OK, ND, SD, NE, KS, AK and HI): 

Transportation Fuels for the Future Initiative Working 

Group Reports and Final Report, 2008

Analyzes the potential for the development of 

alternative fuels and vehicle fuel efficiency member 

states of the Western Governors’ Association. www.

westgov.org/wga/initiatives/transfuels/index.html

E

Western Renewable Energy Zones

xample

WGA and U.S. DOE launched the Western Renewable 

Energy Zones Project (WREZ) in May 2008. The central goal 

of the WREZ project is to utilize areas of the West with vast 

renewable resources to expedite development and delivery of 

clean and renewable energy, including wind, solar, and biomass 

resources. The project will generate: 

Reliable information for use by decision makers that supports 

cost-effective and environmentally sensitive development of 

renewable energy in specified zones.

Conceptual transmission plans for delivering that energy to 

load centers within the Western Interconnection.

The project also will evaluate all feasible renewable resource 

technologies that are likely to contribute to the realization 

of WGA’s goal for development of 30,000 MW of clean and 

diversified energy by 2015. For the latest information and 

geographic information system (GIS) maps of the proposed 

WREZ, see www.westgov.org/wga/initiatives/wrez/index.htm.

Source: Western Governors’ Association and U.S. DOE, 2009

Chapter Four | State Bioenergy Primer 53

4.2 Step 2: Assess Potential 

Markets for Identified Biomass

Feedstocks and Bioenergy

Once a state understands the availability of potential 

biomass feedstocks, the next step is to evaluate how 

the feedstocks can be employed by the market. In this 

step, analysis is conducted to determine the viability 

of using a state’s feedstocks, as identified in Step 1, to 

produce bioenergy. To develop an evaluation that can 

withstand the scrutiny required to justify state policy, 

it is important to examine potential markets quantitatively and under a number of scenarios given different 

economic or market activities. The following sets of 

questions can be useful in assessing potential markets 

for biomass feedstocks:
1. At what cost can the feedstocks reasonably be used? 

■ Are crop and waste feedstocks available at competitive prices? 

■ What is the relative proximity of feedstocks, processing facilities, and markets?

■ How cost-competitive is the bioenergy with fossilbased resources?

■ What are the economics of using bioenergy?

2. Who might use biomass feedstocks? 

■ What industries can use the available feedstocks?

■ What is the current and potential competition for 

feedstocks in the region?

■ Does the state have policies in place that could create 

a market for bioenergy?

3. What does the state’s energy and environmental 

profile look like? 

■ What are the state’s anticipated energy demands?

■ What environmental issues should be considered?

4.2.1 At What Cost Can the Feedstocks 

Reasonably Be Used?

Are Crop and Waste Feedstocks Available at 

Competitive Prices? 

The economics of bioenergy production are highly 

dependent on feedstock prices, and it is important that 

state officials considering actions to promote bioenergy 

explore whether a sufficient supply of competitively 

priced feedstocks exists to support a profitable bioenergy industry. This undertaking is typically challenging, in part because the prices of biomass feedstocks 

are subject to considerable uncertainty. 

Many of the factors that influence the availability of 

feedstocks over time, such as weather, plant disease, 

feedstock demand, and transportation costs, will also 

affect feedstock prices (see Chapter 3, Benefits and 

Challenges of Bioenergy, for a more in-depth discussion of these factors). Other factors, such as fossil 

fuel prices, can also significantly impact the price of 

feedstocks if their harvest requires the use of fertilizer 

and other chemicals (the prices of which are highly 

dependent on the cost of fossil fuels), if they need to be 

transported any significant distance, and if higher fossil 

fuel prices are passed through and impact the biofuels 

supply chain. Financial speculation by commodities 

54 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Four

traders will also affect the price of energy crop 

feedstocks. 

When evaluating the cost-effectiveness of a given feedstock supply, it is important to consider how changes 

in these factors could affect feedstock prices; volatility, 

uncertainty, and or/changes in any of these factors will 

be reflected in the price of feedstocks. With all these 

factors in mind, some of the questions that should be 

considered when evaluating the cost effectiveness of 

a given biomass feedstock supply over the long term 

include:

■ Will bioenergy producers likely have to compete with 

other industries for access to the resource?

■ What are projected fossil fuel prices?

■ How might financial speculators influence prices, if 

at all?

■ Could a feedstock supply that is currently ample become easily exhausted?

■ How much will feedstock prices change as the bioenergy industry grows?

What Is the Proximity of Feedstocks, 

Processing Facilities, and Markets?

In addition to understanding the industries or potential industries that can utilize a state’s biomass 

feedstocks, it is important to know the limitations that 

might impede cost-effective bioenergy use. Foremost 

among these is whether biomass feedstocks, processing 

facilities, and markets exist in close enough proximity 

to deliver a competitive product. Proximity considerations are discussed below.

How far can each biomass feedstock be transported 

cost effectively? One critical factor that affects the 

financial viability of using a biomass feedstock is the 

proximity of the feedstock to where it would be used. 

The most cost-effective bioenergy applications often 

site the conversion facility as close as possible to the 

feedstock source (and to the end user). For wood 

feedstocks, a general rule of thumb is that 50 to 100 

miles is the maximum distance that feedstocks can be 

transported at competitive cost; however, this depends 

on the cost of competing sources (e.g., of power/heat) 

and on the specific type of bioenergy feedstock. EIA 

(2006) uses the following assumptions in its National 

Energy Modeling System (NEMS): 
■ Urban wood waste and mill residues transportation 

cost: $0.24/ton-mile, maximum supply distance 100-

mile radius.

■ Forest residues, agricultural residues, energy crops 

transportation cost: $10 to $12/ton-mile, within a 

maximum supply distance of 50 miles.

Another question that needs to be answered is who, 

specifically, will collect and transport the biomass to 

the end-use facility? There are different answers to this 

question depending upon whether one is using urban 

wood waste, forest residues, or crop residues. What 

contractual requirements for feedstock delivery need 

to be developed? What is the quality and quantity of 

feedstock to be supplied?

Are sufficient biomass resources available within 

the distance identified to support a processing facility? Sufficient feedstocks must be close enough to the 

potential processing facility to support its long-term 

operation. For example, it would not make financial 

sense to invest substantial capital for a plant that relies 

on feedstock that will be exhausted within a few years. 

Proposed projects may need long-term contracts for 

feedstock supplies. Because bioenergy costs are frequently highly dependent on feedstock transportation 

costs, detailed scenario building and certainty analyses 

will be needed to answer this question with confidence. 

As an example, one analysis of biomass-fueled boiler 

power generation systems and CHP configurations 

showed that 100 tons/day of dry biomass fuel (assuming 8,500 Btu of energy per pound) could be used to 

generate 500 kW to 4 MW of electricity depending on 

the conversion technology used, plus thermal energy 

for process steam. (A 100 tons/day system would require about four to five standard semi-trailer trucks for 

feedstock delivery each day.) A system receiving 900 

tons/day of dry biomass fuel could produce roughly 8 

MW to 24 MW of electricity depending on the conversion technology and how much thermal energy was 

desired (U.S. EPA, 2007d – Chapter 7). 

Are markets for fuel, heat, and/or power readily 

accessible? Available markets require critical infrastructure to be in place and may require contractual arrangements. For example, biofuels require access to populations of consumers who need fuel. Bioenergy for heat 

and power, especially if not used primarily or exclusively 

for on-site demand, may require long-term contracts 

with the electric utility (as discussed with interconnection standards in Section 4.3.2). Markets for renewable 

energy, such as green power or renewable energy credits 

(RECs), may or may not be open to biopower. 

How Cost-Competitive Is Bioenergy with 

Fossil-Based Resources?

The most promising markets for bioenergy will typically share several characteristics. Perhaps most importantly, the cost of bioenergy will be competitive (in 

some cases without government support; in other cases 

with direct or indirect support) with energy that is generated from other sources, including fossil fuels. High 

or volatile energy prices will generally help to improve 

the cost effectiveness of bioenergy. 

The increase in gasoline prices over the last several 

years, for example, has helped to make ethanol a more 

attractive alternative motor fuel economically. Similarly, volatility in electricity prices over this same period 

has generally increased the appeal of biomass power 

as facilities look for ways to stabilize energy prices or 

hedge fuel costs. It is important, therefore, that any 

assessment of the market for bioenergy take prevailing 

and forecasted energy prices into account. 

Data on gasoline and electricity prices are available 

on EIA’s Web site at www.eia.doe.gov.

For information on prevailing energy prices by state, 

see http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/state/SEP_MorePrices.cfm. 

Forecasts of projected energy prices through 2030 are 

available in EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook reports. 

The 2008 version of the report is accessible on the 

Web site at www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/index.html.

Energy prices and forecasts are also important to consider in later evaluations if a state decides to develop 

incentives or policy measures to support bioenergy. 

A state will want to understand the level of support 

necessary to achieve its objectives given prevailing and 

projected cost effectiveness—to decrease the likelihood 

that states offer too many or too few incentives for 

Price Volatility

Noteworthy, of course, is that petroleum prices spiked and 

crashed in 2008—from a high of more than $100/barrel 

to a low of less than $40/barrel—making biofuels in many 

parts of the country uneconomical after a period of cost 

competitiveness. This extreme type of volatility is difficult to 

predict; having flexible policies that are robust to different price 

trajectories can buffer the effects of volatile prices. 

Chapter Four | State Bioenergy Primer 55
bioenergy development and are therefore inefficient or 

ineffective in the long run. 

Using biomass to produce heat is currently one of the 

most cost effective applications for biomass energy. 

This is especially true if one is replacing propane or 

fuel oil, which are typically more expensive than biomass on a $/Million Btu basis. Depending on the price, 

it may also be possible to compete with natural gas.

Example

Cost-Competitive Wood Chip Boiler 

In the winter of 2009, the National Renewable Energy 

Laboratory (NREL) installed a central, wood chip fired boiler to 

provide thermal energy for its main campus. NREL estimates 

that wood can be obtained for less than $3/million Btu, 

compared to natural gas costs of $6-$10/million Btu. The 

system is expected to meet up to 80% of NREL’s heating load 

with biomass energy.

Source: NREL, 2008

What are the Economics of Using Bioenergy?

Once information on availability, proximity, and cost 

competitiveness of feedstocks and other considerations 

has been gathered, it is important to conduct an economic analysis of the various options for sourcing and 

using biomass to produce bioenergy. At the minimum, 

a 20-year pro-forma analysis should be developed to 

evaluate various options. Bioenergy options should 

be compared with other options such as fossil fuels 

(e.g., if looking at using biomass to offset natural gas 

in a school, what are the life-cycle costs of the biomass 

technology vs. the natural gas technology?)

4.2.2 Who Might Use Biomass Feedstocks?

What Industries Can Use the Available 

Feedstocks?

An understanding of the key market factors that will 

allow potential feedstocks to become actual bioenergy 

projects is essential. Foremost among these factors is 

knowing what drives demand for biomass resources in 

the state, that is, which industries can use the available 

feedstocks.

Industries in a state can make greater use of bioenergy 

in several ways:

■ Existing industries can expand their facilities or construct new facilities.

■ Industries can use their waste streams as biomass 

feedstock.

■ Existing energy production facilities can initiate or 

increase their use of biomass.

■ New industries that use biomass feedstocks can be 

encouraged to locate in the state. 

Understanding the relationships between feedstocks, 

conversion technologies, products, and markets, and 

their implications for industry, commerce, and end users within a state’s borders, is essential. 

Figure 2-2 in Chapter 2 illustrates the conversion 

pathways of different biomass feedstocks into various 

final forms of bioenergy. As the diagram shows, states 

with abundant waste or opportunity fuels may have an 

advantage if they focus support toward industries that 

can generate on-site heat or power or utilities that can 

provide heat and power. However, states with abundant 

energy crops are in a better position to support biofuel 

development using current technologies.

Although a wide variety of industrial, commercial, and 

institutional facilities could potentially benefit from the 

use of biomass as an energy source, there are several 

types of facilities for which biomass could be a particularly attractive and economical source of energy. Some 

examples of these facilities include (DOE, 2004):

■ Schools, prisons, hospitals, and municipal WWTPs. 

Facilities with large, fairly constant electricity and 

heating requirements are good candidates for on-site 

biopower/bioheat production. In 2008, four prisons 

and one high school in the United States were using 

biomass CHP systems to produce energy (ICF, 2008). 

For facilities with potentially sensitive populations 

(i.e., schools and hospitals) it is especially important 

to utilize best available pollution control technologies to reduce the risk of exposure to air emissions. 

Fuels for Schools

The Fuels for Schools program is an innovative venture between 

public schools and state and regional foresters of the northern 

and intermountain regions of the U.S. Forest Service. This 

program helps public schools retrofit their current fuel or gas 

heating systems to biomass-based systems through knowledge 

sharing, information dissemination, identifying potential 

financing opportunities, supply assessment, and overall support 

and assistance as needed. As of 2008, Fuels for Schools had 

initiated projects in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, and North Dakota.

For more information on Fuels for Schools, see: www.

fuelsforschools.info/.

56 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Four
There are dozens of schools in the United States that 

are heating their buildings with automated wood chip 

boilers. These facilities may also be capable of generating anaerobic digester gas for use as a fuel by treating 

wastewater in on-site treatment plants (DOE, 2004).

■ Landfills. Landfills can capture the gas that is produced as a byproduct of the decomposition of solid 

waste for use as an energy source. This LFG can be 

used to generate electricity and/or heat for the landfill 

itself or other nearby facilities.

For more information, tools, and links to landfill and 

LFG databases, visit EPA’s LMOP Web site, www.epa.

gov/lmop.

■ Lumber yards and pulp and paper mills. Both the 

lumber processing and pulp and paper industries 

produce wood residues and black liquor that can be 

used as a source of energy to generate electricity and/

or heat, typically for on-site use. Pulp and paper mills 

also produce large quantities of wastewater that can be 

treated with anaerobic digesters to create biogas.

■ Food and beverage processing facilities. Food and 

beverage processing facilities can use the food processing waste (FPW) they generate as a fuel source. A 2004 

study found that even though FPW could significantly 

reduce fuel costs for these facilities, its use as a fuel is 

minimal. The facilities are also good candidates for 

anaerobic digestion of wastewater to produce biogas 

for on-site use (DOE, 2004).

■ Petroleum refineries. There are opportunities to integrate biomass feedstocks into existing fossil fuels industries. For example, petroleum refineries can take bio-oil 

and process it within existing refineries, blending the 

renewable diesel product into petroleum diesel and using existing pipeline infrastructure for distribution. 

This alternative to biodiesel (sometimes called “green 

diesel”) overcomes the distribution infrastructure challenge described in Chapter 3. The same approach can 

apply to bio-produced gasoline—“green gasoline.” 

■ Power plants and other large energy users. Power 

plants, typically coal fired, can substitute biomass for a 

portion of the fossil fuel used in the combustion process, in most cases with only minor equipment modifications. As of 2006, 52 coal-burning power plants in the 

United States were utilizing cofiring technology (EIA 

2008). Other large energy users, such as cement plants, 

may also be good candidates for biomass cofiring.

One source of information to help states identify 

industries that are in a position to initiate or increase 

their use of biomass is the U.S. Bureau of Economic 

Analysis. The bureau provides information on stateby-state output (gross domestic product) of industries, such as those described above, that might be 

poised to incorporate bioenergy feedstocks into their 

operations. This information is accessible online at 

www.bea.gov/regional/gdpmap/.

The presence of related industries, including oil and gas 

refining, blending, terminals, transportation corridors, 

and distribution networks, can create more demand for 

bioenergy. Transportation infrastructure limitations 

(discussed below) may place constraints on building 

centralized conversion facilities while creating opportunities for distributed ones.

E

Brewery Bioenergy Production 

xample

Anheuser-Busch, a member of EPA’s Climate Leaders 

partnership program, utilizes Bio-Energy Recovery Systems 

(BERS) at nine of its 12 breweries. These systems feature 

anaerobic digesters that break down nutrients in the 

wastewater from the brewing process, creating biogas. The 

biogas is captured and used by CHP systems to fuel boilers that 

provide heat and power for the breweries. Where they are in 

use, BERS meet 15 percent of Anheuser-Busch facilities’ on-site 

fuel needs. In 2007, the nine systems generated enough energy 

to heat more than 25,000 homes. 

For more information, see: www.abenvironment.com/

Environment/BioEnergyRecovery.html and www.epa.gov/

stateply/partners/partners/anheuserbuschcompaniesinc.html.

Chapter Four | State Bioenergy Primer 57

What is the current and potential competition 

for feedstocks in the region?

When doing a market assessment, it is very important 

to consider whether there are any current users of 

biomass and what the future competition for feedstocks 

will be in the region. For example, a 50 MW biomass 

power plant or ethanol plant could be sourcing feedstocks from within a 100-mile radius. Other plants 

located within this radius will likely compete with it for 

feedstocks, and competition will increase as the distance 

between plants decreases. So when planning new bioenergy facilities, it is crucial to examine how siting plants 

will create and/or affect competition. Additionally, 

there are other competitors for feedstocks that need to 

be taken into consideration, such as composters, wood 

recyclers, and landscape mulch companies. All current 

and potential users of biomass need to be assessed.
Does the State Have Policies that 

Could Create a Market for Bioenergy?

States with promising markets for bioenergy may also 

have enacted policies and incentives to encourage and/

or require use of renewable energy, including biomass. 

Renewable portfolio standards (RPS), RFS, production 

and tax incentives, low-interest loans, rebates, environmental revenue streams, grants, and standardized utility 

interconnection standards are examples of the measures 

states have enacted to improve bioenergy markets. 

In addition, policies that are not specifically intended 

to promote renewable energy can also enable a market for industrial or commercial entities that might 

become users of bioenergy, such as rural economic 

development policies, designations of industrial development zones with environmental restrictions, waste 

reduction or processing requirements, etc. Chapter 5 

provides information about evaluating state policies 

and incentives.

4.2.3 What Is the State’s Energy and

Environmental Profile?

What Are the State’s Anticipated 

Energy Demands?

Besides evaluating existing markets in a state that can 

utilize available biomass feedstocks, state officials can 

assess anticipated rates of increase in electricity demand, renewable electricity demand, and biofuels demand. Rapid increases in these demands could create a 

promising market environment for biomass feedstocks 

and bioenergy. EIA, the state public utilities commission, state energy plan, or regional economic modeling 

results are likely sources of energy demand forecasts. 

Voluntary markets for renewable electricity and green 

power can also spur demand. 

For more information about green power, states can 

refer to the Green Power Network at www.eere.energy.

gov/greenpower/. This online resource created by U.S. 

DOE provides information about utility green pricing, 

green power marketing, and renewable energy credits. 

Interested states can also join U.S. EPA’s Green Power 

Partnership, a voluntary program that supports organizational procurement of green power by offering expert 

advice, technical support, tools, and resources. 

For more information about the Green Power 

Partnership, see www.epa.gov/greenpower/. 

Green Power Marketing

The Green Power Network publishes a report series, Green 

Power Marketing in the United States: A Status Report, which 

identifies market trends. The report covering 2007 notes that 

in that year, total retail sales of renewable energy in voluntary 

purchase markets exceeded 18 billion kWh, a capacity 

equivalent of 5,100 MW of renewable energy, including 4,300 

MW from new renewable energy sources. Biomass energy 

sources (including LFG) provided 28 percent of total green 

power sales. 

For more information, see 

www.nrel.gov/docs/fy09osti/44094.pdf.

58 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Four

What Environmental Issues 

Should Be Considered?

Due to the complexity of the interaction between bioenergy and the environment, some types of bioenergy 

production can be more beneficial to the environment 

than others. In addition, some types of biomass are 

more appropriate for certain climates or areas with 

particular resources. For example, ethanol production 

typically requires access to significant and reliable 

water resources and is therefore less likely to have positive environmental effects in a drought-prone area. In 

contrast, some evidence suggests that biomass CHP 

requires less water than traditional natural gas-fired 

electricity generation, making it a regionally appropriate bioenergy option in a drier climate. 

It is important for decision makers to understand the 

net environmental effects of growing, collecting, and 

processing biomass feedstocks into bioenergy in the 

context of their state’s environmental features and 

challenges. 

Examples of some environmental considerations that 

could be important to a state when considering bioenergy opportunities include: 

■ Lower GHG emissions from biofuels and biopower 

compared to fossil fuels can contribute to achieving 

goals of state and local climate action plans.

■ Reduced air emissions (e.g., lower SO2

, NOx, and 

PM emissions) from cofiring biomass with coal can 

make bioenergy more attractive to regulated facilities 

in a nonattainment area by lowering emissionsrelated operating costs. However, if gas or oil fueled 

operations are converted to woody biomass, PM 

emissions will increase.

■ When large areas of undeveloped land are converted to 

agricultural uses to produce biofuel feedstocks, the po-
tential exists for damage to local ecosystems (e.g., from 

pesticide and fertilizer use) and displacement of species.

■ Unregulated biomass boilers and furnaces can increase 

PM emissions, contributing to air quality problems.

As discussed in Chapter 3, Benefits and Challenges of 

Bioenergy, LCAs can help identify strategies to maximize the environmental benefits of biomass because 

they reveal the environmental effects of alternative 

approaches to biomass production, transportation, 

and conversion. Because of the level of detail involved, 

LCAs are not often tailored to specific geographic regions; however, state-specific analysis of policy options 

can draw on LCA results. This type of analysis can support major state decisions about policies and incentives.

Section 4.4.2 — Bioenergy and State Planning, describes the inclusion of bioenergy in comprehensive 

state environmental planning. Additional resources for 

evaluating environmental effects of bioenergy, including LCAs, are presented in Chapter 3.

4.3 Step 3: Identify 

Opportunities for Action

Working through Steps 1 and 2 should provide a state 

with a solid foundation for understanding the basics 

about biomass feedstock availability and potential 

markets for expanded bioenergy production. Before 

identifying specific actions to promote bioenergy, a 

state should have also considered the economic and 

environmental benefits and challenges outlined in 

Chapter 3. Once these considerations are weighed, a 

state can decide whether to move ahead with policies 

and initiatives that will promote bioenergy. 

One final step before developing a bioenergy promotion plan is to identify some key opportunities for 

action. States have found success by examining their 

policy and regulatory situations for typical barriers (see 

Section 4.3.1); considering including bioenergy issues 

in the content of state planning processes to enable 

cohesive approaches with all stakeholders (see Section 

4.3.2); and reviewing policy, regulatory, and financial 

opportunities for further action. 

4.3.1 Typical Barriers to Bioenergy 

Development

After developing an understanding of the processes, 

products, and markets that are relevant to a state, 

the next step is to assess current policies that present 

barriers to bioenergy development and those that can 

remove barriers.

Because states have primary jurisdiction over many 

areas related to bioenergy, including electricity generation, agricultural development, and land use, state 

policies are particularly important in advancing or 

impeding bioenergy. The key to successful advancement is a policy environment that is flexible enough to 

support diverse and changing utilization of different 

biomass resources and conversion technologies, and 

that can adapt as the industry grows, markets change, 

and technology advances.

Policy areas that can impact the use of bioenergy 

include regulatory requirements and market-based incentives. Policies that remove barriers to bioenergy development can include favorable utility rate structures, 

interconnection standards, state RPS, public benefits 

funds, and financial incentives. 

Policy Barriers to Biopower/Bioheat

Some policies create barriers to biopower development, such as unfavorable utility rate structures, lack 

of interconnection standards, and difficulties securing 

environmental permits. Listed below are some key 

policy barriers to biopower development and ways that 

states have overcome them to enable a healthy market 

for biopower:

■ Utility Rate Structures. Unfavorable utility rate structures have perennially been a barrier to increased deployment of renewable energy technologies, including 

those that use bioenergy. Unless carefully monitored to 

encourage development of distributed generation (DG) 

bioenergy resources, rate structures can increase the 

cost of DG (with biomass or other fuels) or completely 

disallow connection to the electrical grid. 

■ Decoupling or Lost Revenue Adjustment Mechanisms. Traditional electric and gas utility ratemaking mechanisms unintentionally include financial 

disincentives for utilities to support energy efficiency and DG. This misalignment can be remedied 

through “lost revenue” adjustment mechanisms 

(LRAMs) or mechanisms that “decouple” utility 

revenues from sales. 

LRAMs allow a utility to directly recoup the lost revenue associated with not selling additional units of 

energy because of the success of energy efficiency or 

DG programs in reducing electricity consumption. 

Chapter Four | State Bioenergy Primer 59
The amount of lost revenue is typically estimated by 

multiplying the fixed portion of the utility’s prices by 

the energy savings from energy efficiency programs 

or the energy generated from DG. The lost revenue is 

then directly returned to the utility.

■ Revised Standby Rate Structures. Facilities that use 

bioenergy usually need to contract with the utility for 

standby power when the biopower system is unavailable due to equipment failure, during maintenance, 

or in other planned outages. Electric utilities often 

assess standby charges on on-site generation to cover 

the additional costs they incur as they continue to 

provide adequate generating, transmission, or distribution capacity (depending on the structure of the 

utility) to supply on-site generators when requested 

(sometimes on short notice). The utility’s concern is 

that the facility will require power when electricity is 

scarce or at a premium cost, and that it must be prepared to serve load during such extreme conditions. 

The probability that any one generator will require 

standby service at the exact peak demand period 

is low, and the probability that all interconnected 

small-scale DG will need it at the same time is even 

lower. Consequently, some states are exploring alternatives to standby rates that may more accurately 

reflect these conditions. These states are looking 

for ways to account for the normal diversity within 

a load class and consider the probability that the 

demand for standby service will coincide with peak 

(high-cost) hours versus the benefits that renewables 

provide to the system.

■ Exit Fee Exemptions. When facilities reduce or end 

their use of electricity from the grid, they reduce the 

utility’s revenues that cover fixed costs on the system. 

The remaining customers may eventually bear these 

costs. This can be a problem if a large customer 

leaves a small electric system. Exit (or stranded asset 

recovery) fees are typically used only in states that 

have restructured their electric utilities. 

To avoid potential rate increases due to load loss, 

utilities sometimes assess exit fees on departing load 

to keep the utility whole without shifting the responsibility for those costs to the remaining customers. 

States can exempt renewable projects from these exit 

fees to recognize the economic value of the projects, 

including their grid congestion relief and reliability 

enhancement benefits.

■ Lack of Interconnection Standards for Clean Distributed Generation. The absence of standard interconnection rules, or uniform procedures and technical 

requirements for connecting DG systems to the electric 

utility’s grid, can make it difficult, if not impossible, 

for DG systems to connect to the grid. This barrier can 

hinder biomass CHP in particular. 

■ Standardized Interconnection Rules and Net Metering. A lack of interconnection standards can make it 

difficult, if not impossible, for renewable energy DG 

systems, including those using biopower, to connect 

to the electric grid. Once established, however, these 

statewide standards reduce uncertainty and delays 

that bioenergy systems can encounter when connecting to the grid. 

Standard interconnection rules establish uniform processes and technical requirements that apply to utilities within a state; in some states, municipally owned 

systems or electric cooperatives may be exempt from 

rules approved by state regulators. Standard interconnection rules typically address the application process 

and technical interconnection requirements for small 

DG projects of a specified type and size. 

Net metering provisions are a subset of interconnection standards for small-scale projects. When DG 

output exceeds the site’s electrical needs, the utility 

can pay the customer for excess power supplied to 

the grid or have the net surplus carry over to the next 

month’s bill. Some states allow the surplus account 

to be reset periodically, meaning that customers 

might provide some generation to the utility for free. 

Net metering provisions streamline interconnection 

standards but are often limited to specified sizes and 

types of technologies, as well as fuel types.

Several groups are actively working to provide 

information about and/or follow and facilitate 

development of improved net metering standards. 

These include:

■ Database of State Incentives for Renewable Energy, 

which includes a summary table and summary database on interconnection standards. www.dsireusa.org/ (click on Summary Tables, and then Rules, 

Regulations, and Policies [Renewable Energy]).

■ The Interstate Renewable Energy Council, which 

publishes a newsletter, “Connecting to the Grid.” 

www.irecusa.org/index.php

■ EPA’s Clean Energy-Environment Guide to Action

provides information about interconnection and 

60 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Four
net metering benefits, design elements, interaction 

with state and federal programs, implementation 

and evaluation, and case studies. www.epa.gov/

cleanenergy/energy-programs/state-and-local/

state-best-practices.html

■ Environmental Permitting. Major new industrial facilities that produce and/or use bioenergy must obtain 

a number of different permits from state agencies including construction permits from state environmental 

officials to ensure that plans meet environmental 

standards; operating permits for air emissions during 

operation; and stormwater and/or wastewater discharge permits. New bioenergy facilities and projects 

are subject to federal and state emission standards for 

combustion sources and to air permitting requirements 

for new sources. 

The federal standards that could apply to biomass combustion units are the New Source Performance Standards and National Emission Standards for Hazardous 

Air Pollutants for boilers, gas turbines, and internal 

combustion engines. The process of obtaining multiple 

permits from different entities within state agencies—

particularly for newer technologies/processes—can add 

significant uncertainty to construction timing and the 

cost of emission controls that will be required.

4.3.2 Bioenergy and State Planning

One way to facilitate creation of a policy environment 

conducive to bioenergy is to include bioenergy considerations during comprehensive state energy, environmental, or climate change planning. 

Energy Plans

Energy planning involves a strategic effort to develop 

energy-related goals and objectives and formulate 

related policies and programs. As the nexus for a 

variety of state concerns, energy planning can serve as 

an umbrella mechanism for simultaneously addressing 

energy, environmental, economic, and other issues. 

Energy planning can be undertaken at both state and 

regional levels. 

Many states have used their energy plans to support 

development and use of cost-effective clean energy, 

including bioenergy, and to help address multiple 

challenges, including energy supply and reliability 

(e.g., concerns with availability, independence, and 

security), energy prices, air quality and public health, 

and job development. States can also develop strategies 

completely devoted to bioenergy. For example, in 2006 

California released the Bioenergy Action Plan for California, which provides specific actions and timelines to 

advance bioenergy in the state (Bioenergy Interagency 

Working Group, 2006).

Environmental Plans

Opportunities also exist to consider biomass in environmental planning. States facing nonattainment under NAAQS are required to develop and submit SIPs. 

EPA provides guidance to state and local governments 

on quantifying and including emission reductions 

from energy efficiency and renewable energy measures 

in SIPs. (A guidance document is available at www.epa.

gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/memoranda/ereseerem_gd.pdf.)

Climate Change Plans

In addition, many states have completed climate action 

plans to encourage clean energy as a way to decrease 

carbon emissions. Given that biomass is “carbonneutral,” it does and can play an important role in state 

climate plans. 

E

Biomass and the Massachusetts

xample

Climate Protection Plan

In 2004, Massachusetts published the Massachusetts Climate 

Protection Plan as an initial step in a coordinated effort to reduce 

GHG emissions and improve energy efficiency throughout the 

state. The plan entails a set of near-term actions, including 

development of a comprehensive state biomass policy to ensure: 

Biomass material is grown and harvested in an environmentally ■

sound manner.

Strong air quality standards are maintained. ■

Low emissions and advanced biomass conversion technologies, ■

as defined by the Massachusetts RPS, are utilized for both heat 

and electricity.

State agencies provide incentives and work together to ■

implement pilot biomass projects in various sectors (public and 

private applications) in rural regions.

For more information, see masstech.org/renewableenergy/public_

policy/DG/resources/2004_MA_Climate_Protection_Plan.pdf.

Chapter Four | State Bioenergy Primer 61

4.3.3 Review Policy Options

Whether a state explores bioenergy through a comprehensive energy strategy, a SIP, or a climate change 

action plan, several policies should be developed 

simultaneously to enhance the likelihood that biomass 

usage increases, as discussed in Chapter 5. 
4.4 Resources for Detailed Information

Resource Description URL

Bioenergy

Biomass Resource Assessment 

Tool, U.S. EPA and NREL.

Online mapping tool that takes various biomass resource 

datasets and maps them, allowing user queries and 

analysis. For example, users can select a point on the map 

and determine the quantity of feedstock within a certain 

radius, and the quantity of energy that could potentially be 

produced from that biomass.

http://rpm.nrel.gov/biopower/

biopower/launch

Coordinated Resource Offering 

Protocol (CROP) Evaluations, 

U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of 

Land Management.

Provides the results of ten CROP evaluations that have been 

conducted for over 30 million acres of public forestlands 

potentially vulnerable to wildfires. The evaluations contain 

detailed resource-offering maps that illustrate the growing 

fuel load problem within major forest systems and quantify 

the biomass available for removal within five years.

www.forestsandrangelands.gov/

Woody_Biomass/supply/CROP/

index.shtml

USFS Forest Inventory Data 

Online (FIDO). 

Provides access to the National Forest Inventory and Analysis 

databases. It can be used to generate tables and maps of 

forest statistics (including tree biomass) by running standard 

reports for specific states or counties and survey year, or 

customized reports based on criteria selected by the user. 

http://fiatools.fs.fed.us/fido/index.

html

Biomass Feedstocks, U.S. DOE. U.S. DOE Biomass Program Web site www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/

biomass_feedstocks.html

Dynamic Maps, GIS Data, and 

Analysis Tools, NREL.

Provides county-level biomass resource maps. The feedstock 

categories include crop residues, forest residues, primary 

mill residues, secondary mill residues, urban wood waste, 

methane emissions from landfills, methane emissions from 

manure management, methane emissions from wastewater 

treatment plants, and dedicated energy crops. The maps 

are derived from data contained in a report, Geographic 

Perspective on the Current Biomass Resource Availability in 

the United States (described below). Note that these maps 

present technical biomass resource data. The economic 

biomass resource availability will most likely be somewhat 

less than what is presented in the maps. 

www.nrel.gov/gis/biomass.html

Geographic Perspective on 

the Current Biomass Resource 

Availability in the United States, 

NREL, 2006. 

Provides the basis for the maps and data presented in 

NREL’s Dynamic Maps, GIS Data, and Analysis Tools Web site 

described above. The report provides a geographic analysis 

of biomass resource potential at the county level, and can 

give state officials a sense of the major biomass resources 

available within their state and their technical potential 

relative to other states.

www.nrel.gov/docs/

fy06osti/39181.pdf

State Assessment for Biomass 

Resources (SABRE), U.S. DOE. 

Provides detailed information on biomass resources and 

utilization throughout the United States. It features statespecific information on conventional fuel and biofuel use, 

ethanol and biodiesel stations and production plants, 

and biofuel production capacities. In addition, it offers 

state-by-state snapshots of available feedstocks, data on 

potential production capacities, and projections on the 

future use of biofuels.

www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/sabre/

index.php

62 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Four
4.4 Resources for Detailed Information (cont.)

Resource Description URL

State Woody Biomass 

Utilization Policies, 

University of Minnesota, 

Department of Forest 

Resources, Staff Paper 199. Becker, 

D.R., and C. Lee. 2008. 

Documents information on state policies to facilitate 

comparison of the types of approaches used in certain 

areas, policy structures and incentives employed, program 

administration, and relationships to complementary local and 

federal actions.

www.forestry.umn.edu/

publications/staffpapers/

Staffpaper199.pdf

Biopower/Bioheat

Initial Market Assessment for 

Small-Scale Biomass-Based CHP. 

National Renewable Energy 

Laboratory, NREL, January 2008.

Examines the energy generation market opportunities 

for biomass CHP applications smaller than 20 MW. Using 

relevant literature and expert opinion, the paper provides 

an overview of the benefits of and challenges for biomass 

CHP in terms of policy and economic drivers, and identifies 

primary characteristics of potential markets.

www.nrel.gov/docs/

fy08osti/42046.pdf

Green Power Marketing in the 

United States: A Status Report, 

NREL.

Documents green power marketing activities and trends in 

voluntary markets in the United States.

http://apps3.eere.energy.

gov/greenpower/resources/

pdfs/38994.pdf

U.S. EPA's Landfill Methane 

Outreach Program (LMOP).

Promotes the use of landfill gas as a renewable, green energy 

source. Its Web site contains general information, tools, and 

links to databases containing specific landfill data. 

www.epa.gov/lmop/

U.S. EPA’s Landfill Methane 

Outreach Program (LMOP) 

Landfill Database. 

Provides a nationwide listing of operational and underconstruction LFG energy projects; candidate municipal solid 

waste landfills having LFG energy potential; and information 

on additional landfills that could represent LFG energy 

opportunities. The database can be accessed as a series 

of downloadable Excel spreadsheets, which are updated 

and posted to the Web site each month. The information 

contained in the LMOP database is compiled from a variety 

of sources, including annual voluntary submissions by LMOP 

partners and industry publications.

www.epa.gov/lmop/proj/index.

htm

Landfill Gas Energy Project 

Development Handbook, U.S. 

EPA Landfill Methane Outreach 

Program. 

Provides landfill gas energy project development guidance, 

with individual chapters on the basics of landfill gas energy, 

gas modeling, technology options, economic analysis and 

financing, contract and permitting considerations, and 

selection of project partners. 

www.epa.gov/lmop/res/

handbook.htm

Market Opportunities for Biogas 

Recovery Systems, U.S. EPA

AgStar.

Assesses the market potential for biogas energy projects at 

swine and dairy farms in the United States. For the top ten 

swine and dairy states, the guide characterizes the sizes and 

types of operations where biogas projects are technically 

feasible, along with estimates of potential methane 

production, electricity generation, and greenhouse gas 

emission reductions. 

www.epa.gov/agstar/pdf/

biogas%20recovery%20systems_

screenres.pdf

U.S. EPA’s Combined Heat and 

Power (CHP) Partnership.

Promotes the use of biomass-fueled CHP and the use of 

biogas at wastewater treatment facilities.

www.epa.gov/chp

Chapter Four | State Bioenergy Primer 63
4.4 Resources for Detailed Information (cont.))

Resource Description URL

Biofuels/Bioproducts

State Assessment for Biomass 

Resources, U.S. DOE.

Provides detailed information on biomass resources and 

utilization throughout the United States. It features statespecific information on conventional fuel and biofuel use, 

ethanol and biodiesel stations and production plants, 

and biofuel production capacities. It offers state-bystate snapshots of available feedstocks, data on potential 

production capacities, and projections on the future use of 

biofuels. The site is particularly useful for states interested in 

evaluating resource potential for producing biofuels.

www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/sabre/

index.php

Environmental Laws Applicable 

to Construction and Operation 

of Ethanol Plants, U.S. EPA.

This compliance assistance manual, issued by EPA Region 7, 

serves as a road map of information on federal environmental 

programs and federal and state agency roles applicable to the 

construction, modification, and operation of ethanol plants.

www.epa.gov/region07/priorities/

agriculture/ethanol_plants_

manual.pdf

Environmental Laws Applicable 

to Construction and Operation 

of Biodiesel Production 

Facilities, U.S. EPA.

This compliance assistance manual, issued by EPA Region 7, 

serves as a road map of information on federal environmental 

programs and federal, state, and local agency roles 

applicable to designing, building, and operating biodiesel 

manufacturing facilities.

www.epa.gov/region07/priorities/

agriculture/biodiesel_manual.pdf

State Examples

California An Assessment of Biomass Resources in California, 2007, 

provides an updated biomass inventory for the state along 

with an assessment of potential growth in biomass resources 

and power generation that could help to satisfy the state 

renewable portfolio standard (RPS).

http://biomass.ucdavis.edu/

materials/reports%20and%20

publications/2008/CBC_Biomass_

Resources_2007.pdf

Georgia Biomass Wood Resource Assessment on a Countyby-County Basis for the State of Georgia provides a 

biomass wood resource assessment on a county-level 

basis for Georgia.

www.gfc.state.ga.us/

ForestMarketing/documents/

BiomassWRACountybyCountyGA05.

pdf

Hawaii Biomass and Bioenergy Resource Assessment: State of 

Hawaii provides an assessment of current and potential 

biomass and bioenergy resources for the state. Includes 

animal wastes, forest products residues, agricultural residues, 

and urban wastes.

www.hawaii.gov/dbedt/info/

energy/publications/biomassassessment.pdf

Mississippi Mississippi Institute for Forest Inventory Dynamic Report 

Generator provides a continuous, statewide forest resource 

inventory necessary for the sustainable forest-based 

economy. The inventory information is derived from 

sampling estimation techniques with a presumed precision of 

+/- 15% sampling error with 95 percent confidence.

www.mifi.ms.gov/

South Carolina Potential for Biomass Energy Development in South Carolina 

quantifies the amount of forestry and agricultural biomass 

available for energy production on a sustainable basis in 

South Carolina. Also includes an analysis of the economic 

impacts of transferring out-of-state costs for coal to in-state 

family forest landowners and biomass processors.

www.scbiomass.org/Publications/

Potential%20Biomass%20

Energy%20in%20SC.pdf

64 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Four
Resource Description URL

Oregon Biomass Energy and Biofuels from Oregon’s Forests assesses 

the statewide potential for production of electricity and 

biofuels from woody biomass, including the available 

wood supply and the environmental, energy, forest health, 

and economic effects. Reviews and summarizes efforts 

underway to promote electric energy and biofuels from 

woody biomass, and identifies gaps in existing efforts. 

Assesses constraints and challenges to the development of 

biomass energy and biofuels from Oregon forests, including 

economic, environmental, legal, policy, infrastructure, and 

other barriers and develops recommendations on how to 

overcome these barriers.

www.oregonforests.org/assets/

uploads/Biomass_Full_Report.pdf

Northeastern states (CT, DE, ME, 

MD, MA, NH, NJ, NY, PA, RI, VT)

Securing a Place for Biomass in the Northeast United States: 

A Review of Renewable Energy and Related Policies provides 

a biomass feedstock assessment for northeastern states. 

www.nrbp.org/pdfs/nrbp_final_

report.pdf

Western states (WA, OR, ID, MT, 

WY, CO, NM, AZ, UT, NV, CA, TX, 

OK, ND, SD, NE, KS, AK, HI)

The Western Bioenergy Assessment includes a series of 

technical reports produced for the Western Governors’ 

Association. These reports extensively evaluate biomass 

resources in the western states, biofuel conversion 

technologies, spatial analysis and supply curve development, 

and deployment scenarios and potential policy interactions.

www.westgov.org/wga/initiatives/

transfuels/index.html

Western states (WA, OR, ID, MT, 

WY, CO, NM, AZ, UT, NV, CA, TX, 

OK, ND, SD, NE, KS, AK, HI)

The Western Governors’ Association Transportation Fuels for 

the Future Initiative provides seven working group reports 

and a final report analyzing the potential for the development 

of alternative fuels and vehicle fuel efficiency in the West.

www.westgov.org/wga/initiatives/

transfuels/index.html

Western states (WA, OR, ID, MT, 

WY, CO, NM, AZ, UT, NV, CA, TX, 

ND, SD, NE, KS, AK, HI)

Biomass Task Force Report focuses on the use of biomass 

resources for the production of electricity as part of an 

overall effort of the Western Governors’ Association to 

increase the contribution of clean and renewable energy in 

the region. 

www.westgov.org/wga/initiatives/

cdeac/Biomass-full.pdf

4.4 Resources for Detailed Information (cont.))

Chapter Four | State Bioenergy Primer 65

4.5 References

■Bioenergy Interagency Working Group, 2006. Bioenergy Action Plan for California CEC-600-2006-010, 

California Energy Commission, Sacramento, CA, 2006. 

www.energy.ca.gov/bioenergy_action_plan/.

■EIA, 2006. Model Documentation: Renewable Fuels 

Module of the National Energy Modeling System. Office 

of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting. DOE/EIAM069. U.S. DOE, Washington, DC, March 2006. http://

tonto.eia.doe.gov/FTPROOT/modeldoc/m069(2006).

pdf.

■EIA, 2008. Net Summer Capacity of Plants Cofiring 

Biomass and Coal. Energy Information Administration, July 2008. www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/page/trends/table9.html.

■Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer 

Services, 2008. Matthew D. Curran, Ph.D. Bureau of 

Petroleum Inspection. EPA Region 4 Biofuels Conference, November 18, 2008. 

■Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer 

Services, 2007. Florida Farm to Fuel. Tallahassee, FL, 

2007. www.floridafarmtofuel.com/.
■Milbrandt, 2005. Milbrandt, A. A Geographic Perspective on the Current Biomass Resource Availability 

in the United States. NREL, Golden, CO, December 

2005. NREL/TP-560-39181. www.nrel.gov/docs/

fy06osti/39181.pdf. 

■NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory), 

2008. Facility Heating with Biomass. Scott Haase. 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory. GovEnergy 

2008, August 5, 2008. www.govenergy.com/2008/pdfs/

renewables/HaaseRenewables4.pdf.

■U.S. DOE (Department of Energy). Biomass Feedstocks. Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, U.S. DOE, Washington, DC. www1.eere.energy.

gov/biomass/biomass_feedstocks.html.

■U.S. DOE, 2004. Combined Heat and Power Market 

Potential for Opportunity Fuels. Prepared by Resource 

Dynamics Corporation for U.S. DOE, Washington, 

DC, August 2004. www.eere.energy.gov/de/pdfs/

chp_opportunityfuels.pdf.

■U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), 2007. 

Opportunities for and Benefits of Combined Heat and 

Power at Wastewater Treatment Facilities. U.S. EPA, 

Washington, DC, April 2007. www.epa.gov/chp/documents/wwtf_opportunities.pdf.

■Western Governor’s Association and U.S. DOE, 2009. 

“Western Renewable Energy Zones project.” Washington, DC, 2009. www.westgov.org/wga/initiatives/wrez/

index.htm.

66 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Four
Chapter FIVE

Options for 

States to Advance 

Bioenergy Goals

States interested in promoting 

bioenergy can take active roles 

in removing financial, policy, 

regulatory, technology, and 

informational barriers hindering 

development of biomass projects. 

As diverse as these approaches 

are, they are all aimed at reducing 

investor risk in order to increase 

the likelihood of bioenergy projects 

moving forward to completion.

Chapter Five | State Bioenergy Primer 67

Chapter Five Contents

5.1 Favorable Policy Development

5.2 Favorable Regulatory Development

5.3 Environmental Revenue Streams

5.4 Direct Investment/Financing and Incentives

5.5 Research, Development, and Demonstration

5.6 Information Sharing

5.7 Resources for Detailed Information

5.8 References Docum

ent 

M

a

p

Chapter One 

Introduction

Chapter Two

What Is Bioenergy?

Chapter Three

Benefits and Challenges

Chapter Four

Identifying Bioenergy Opportunities

Chapter Five 

Options for Advancing Bioenergy

Bioenergy developers often need to raise capital to 

cover significant project expenses, such as construction 

costs, the cost of equipment, installation fees, and any 

costs incurred during the regulatory and permitting 

process. The terms under which investors and lenders 

provide this capital—should they agree to provide any 

at all—can significantly impact the cost of producing 

bioenergy, and therefore its competitiveness with other 

energy sources. All else constant, the greater the investors’ and lenders’ perception of risks related to a particular project, the greater the cost of capital. States can 

help reduce the cost of financing for many bioenergy 

developers by enacting policies and other measures 

that reduce lending and investment risks. 
States can promote bioenergy by facilitating:

■ Favorable policy development 

■ Favorable regulatory development 

■ Environmental revenue streams 

■ Direct investment/financing

■ Incentives 

■ Research, development, and demonstration 

■ Information sharing 

Although not a comprehensive list, these options have 

been implemented in many states and provide numerous lessons.

The following sections provide details on how states 

can implement each of these options to promote investment in bioenergy.

5.1 Favorable Policy 

Development 

Many states have promoted bioenergy by seeking to 

create new or expanded markets for biopower, biofuels, 

or bioproducts. Enacting policies that encourage or require use of bioenergy does not necessarily financially 

support development, but does provide certainty for 

producers that a market will exist for their products, 

which in turn reduces investor risk. 

State policies that require use of renewable energy, such 

as RPS and renewable fuels standards, have proven 

to stimulate growth in renewable energy markets and 

reduce investor risk by ensuring each year that a given 

amount of electricity or motor fuel is supplied from 

renewable sources, including biomass.

Typical state policies that create markets for bioenergy—including detailed information about program 

benefits, design elements, interactions with state and 

federal programs, implementation and evaluation, and 

case studies—are discussed in EPA’s Clean Energy-Environment Guide to Action at www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/

energy-programs/state-and-local/state-best-practices.

html. Best practices in design and implementation have 

a significant impact on policy effectiveness. 

Several policy options that states can implement to 

remove barriers to bioenergy development are presented below. Although not a comprehensive list, these 

options have been implemented in many states and 

provide numerous lessons.

■ State “Lead by Example” Initiatives. State and local 

governments are implementing a range of programs 

and policies that advance clean energy, including bioenergy within their own facilities, fleets, and operations. 

These “lead by example” (LBE) initiatives help state and 

local governments achieve energy cost savings while 

promoting adoption of clean energy technologies by the 

public and private sectors. States are leveraging their 

purchasing power, control of significant energy-using 

resources, and high visibility of their public facilities to 

demonstrate clean energy technologies and approaches 

that lower their energy costs and reduce emissions. 

State LBE initiatives that can support development of 

bioenergy include:

■ Purchasing and using renewable energy and clean 

energy generation in public facilities.

■ Implementing “green fleet” programs that require 

state vehicles to use biomass-based renewable fuels.

■ Implementing procurement rules that require state 

agencies to purchase biomass-based products.

For more information, see EPA’s Clean Energy Lead 

by Example Guide at www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/documents/epa_lbe.pdf.

■ Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). An RPS requires utilities and other retail electricity providers to 

supply a specified minimum percentage (or absolute 

amount) of customer load with eligible sources of 

renewable electricity. These laws create a new market 

for renewable energy and DG projects by outlining 

the specific minimum amount or percentage of clean 

energy that must be produced by a specified date (e.g., 

25 percent of in-state electricity production must come 

from renewable resources by January 1, 2050). As of 

November 2008, 35 states, including the District of Columbia, have adopted RPS laws or goals. All state RPSs 

include bioenergy as an eligible resource. 

■ Fostering Voluntary Green Power Markets. Voluntary 

green power programs are a relatively small but growing market that provides electricity customers the opportunity to make environmental choices about their 

electricity consumption. Green power can be offered in 

both vertically integrated (i.e., regulated) and competitive (i.e., deregulated) retail markets as bundled renewable energy that consumers can purchase voluntarily, 

68 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Five
either through green pricing programs or green power 

marketing. States can play key roles in shaping green 

power markets:

■ For regulated markets, states can play important 

roles in increasing voluntary participation rates in 

green pricing programs by requiring utilities to offer them to consumers as an option and/or conduct 

outreach, education, or marketing campaigns about 

green pricing programs to consumers.

■ Under deregulated markets, states can mandate 

green power marketers’ access to electricity customers, which would otherwise involve high transaction 

costs to the marketers.

In addition to fostering green power programs, states 

can ensure that they complement other policies already 

in place, such as public benefits funds (PBFs) or RPSs.

Green power programs have existed for approximately 

10 years and have contributed to development of 

more than 2,200 megawatts (MW) of new renewable 

capacity. Biomass has been the second most popular 

resource, after wind, to serve renewable demand. 

■ Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). U.S. EPA, under 

EISA, is responsible for revising and implementing 

regulations to ensure that a certain percentage of transportation fuel be renewable. The federal Renewable Fuel 

Standard program will increase the volume of renewable 

fuel required to be blended into gasoline from 9 billion 

gallons in 2008 to 36 billion gallons by 2022.4 States 

may also enact their own RFSs in addition to the federal 

program. As of August 2008, 12 states had an RFS in 

place (Pew Center on Global Climate Change, 2008). 

■ Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS). An LCFS for transportation fuels is a policy to encourage utilization of 

low-carbon fuels (measured on a full life-cycle basis) to 

reduce GHG emissions from the transportation sector. 

In 2007, the Governor of California signed an executive order directing the state’s Secretary of Environmental Protection to coordinate the development of 

an LCFS, which will be the first and only in the United 

States. The California Air Resources Board released a 

draft of the standard in March 2009, which if implemented would start in 2011 and require fuel providers 

to ensure that the mix of fuel they sell into the California market meets, on average, a declining standard for 

GHG emissions (measured in CO2-equivalent grams 

4 The new RFS program regulations are being developed in collaboration 

with refiners, renewable fuel producers, and many other stakeholders (see 

www.epa.gov/oms/renewablefuels/index.htm).

per unit of fuel energy sold). By 2020 the standard 

would reduce the carbon intensity of California’s passenger vehicle fuels by at least 10 percent and reduce 

GHG emissions from the transportation sector by 

about 16 million metric tons (almost 10 percent of the 

total GHG emission reductions needed to achieve the 

State’s mandate of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 

levels by 2020). The proposed standard is designed to 

be compatible with market-based compliance mechanisms (U.S. EPA, 2008b and California Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2009). 

For more information on California’s pending LCFS, 

see www.energy.ca.gov/low_carbon_fuel_standard/.

■ High Tipping Fees. The availability of urban wood 

residues is largely governed by the size of tipping fees. 

Where such fees are high (partly due to the lack of land 

for landfills), recycling is often higher. Also, high tipping fees provide economic incentives to utilize these 

resources (U.S. DOE, 2005).

5.2 Favorable Regulatory 

Development

In some circumstances, bioenergy developers will 

experience time delays as they go through the process 

of obtaining required utility interconnection, environmental compliance, and construction permits. The 

prospect of significant time delays for some projects 

can contribute to investor risk. States can help reduce 

this risk by streamlining and standardizing regulatory 

and permitting processes for bioenergy producers. 

E

Bioenergy One Stop Shops

xample

The Georgia Center for Innovation in Agribusiness is working to 

promote production and use of renewable energy and biofuels 

in Georgia by conducting One Stop Shops that bring together 

prescreened businesses and representatives from more than 

20 state and federal agencies. These working meetings give 

companies the opportunity to present and discuss ideas for 

bioenergy projects and obtain the permitting and contact 

information they need to get their ideas off the ground. The 

center aims to help businesses through the permitting process 

in 90 days while creating networks connecting business, 

industry, research, and government. To date, 14 One Stop Shop 

meetings have been conducted, with 85 companies presenting 

ideas. As a result of these meetings, 23 bioenergy projects have 

been launched or planned for implementation by 2015.

For more information, visit 

http://energy.georgiainnovation.org/services. 

Chapter Five | State Bioenergy Primer 69
EPA’s Environmental Technology Verification program provides emissions verification for various 

technologies, including biomass cofiring and other 

new clean energy technologies. Use of emissions data 

from verification studies can help speed the permitting process for new facilities. 

Visit www.epa.gov/etv/ to see what verification reports are available. 

For biofuels producers and distributors, one step that 

states can take is to adopt ASTM standards for blending. 

There is no federal requirement in this area, so states 

have often had different standards. A more consistent 

market allowing preblended fuels to be sold across 

states could reduce distribution costs (Schultz, 2008). 

Example

State Grant Programs: Pennsylvania Energy 

Development Authority

Several states provide funding and financial incentives, such 

as grants, loans, and loan guarantees, to drive investment in 

renewable energy, including bioenergy. These offerings are not 

only stimulating the nation’s renewable energy markets, but are 

helping to reduce air and water pollution, promote economic 

development and job creation, and improve energy security. 

Pennsylvania is among the states now offering grant funding 

for bioenergy research and production. 

Every year, the Pennsylvania Energy Development Authority 

(PEDA) competitively awards millions of dollars in grants to 

help finance clean, advanced energy projects. Energy projects 

eligible to receive funding include biomass, wind, solar, fuel 

cells, and other energy sources. For-profit businesses, local 

governments, and nonprofit organizations, as well as businesses 

interested in locating their advanced energy operations in 

Pennsylvania, have been invited to apply for funding in the 

past. Applications to receive funding are evaluated based 

on numerous factors, such as a project’s cost-effectiveness, 

technical feasibility, and economic and environmental benefits. 

The extent to which the project promotes use and development 

of the state’s indigenous energy resources, such as biomass, 

and improves energy diversity and security are also considered 

in the evaluation process. 

From 2004 to 2007, Pennsylvania awarded $6 million in grants 

to 13 different bioenergy projects. Among the recipients of 

funding were a school district using biomass to heat school 

buildings, several biodiesel producers, a major university 

conducting applied research, and several LFG energy projects.

To learn more about the grant program, visit PEDA’s Web 

site at www.depweb.state.pa.us/enintech/cwp/view.

asp?a=1415&q=504241.

Source: DSIRE

5.3 Environmental 

Revenue Streams

Bioenergy has a number of potential environmental 

benefits over other forms of energy, which in some 

cases can be monetized (for more information on these 

potential benefits, see Chapter 3, Benefits and Challenges of Bioenergy). States can offer environmental revenue 

streams (ERS), such as renewable energy certificates 

(RECs) or emission allowance guarantees that reward 

biomass technologies for their environmental attributes. 

Some states, for example, allow renewable energy producers to participate in the emissions allowance market 

for NOx. The sale of these allowances can provide bioenergy producers with an additional source of revenue. 

Further, if CO2 is regulated through a cap-and-trade 

system, biopower and other bioenergy sources might 

obtain cash flow through the associated carbon market. 

These additional sources of revenue can significantly 

reduce risk for potential lenders and improve potential 

investment returns. 

For more information on environmental revenue 

streams, see EPA’s CHP Partnership paper Environmental Revenue Streams for Combined Heat and Power at 

www.epa.gov/chp/documents/ers_program_details.pdf.

CO2 Offsets: Environmental Revenue Streams for 

Bioenergy Projects

Separate from CO2 cap-and-trade programs, several states 

regulate CO2 emissions from particular sources. To help 

regulated sources comply cost effectively, these states allow sale 

of CO2 emission offset credits. Projects that reduce CO2 or other 

GHG emissions at one location generate CO2 credits that can 

be sold to offset emissions at another location. In states such as 

Massachusetts, Oregon, and Washington, biomass CHP projects 

can be used to create offsets. 

Source: U.S. EPA, 2008 

70 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Five

5.4 Direct Investment/

Financing and Incentives

States can substantially reduce investor risk by providing 

funding and financial incentives for bioenergy production. These offerings increase the likelihood of a market 

for bioenergy by reducing energy costs—and, therefore, 

the competitiveness of bioenergy with other energy 

sources—and improving returns for potential investors. 
Numerous states offer direct incentives to bioenergy 

project developers in various forms; more incentives 

are available for biopower production than for biofuels 

(see Tables 5-1 and 5-2). Low interest rate loans, bond 

programs, rebates, grants, production incentives, and 

tax incentives (deductions, exemptions, and credits) 

are among the different types of incentives states have 

made available for bioenergy production. The effectiveness of incentive programs varies greatly, as tracked by 

NREL’s State Clean Energy Policies Analysis Project. 

For more information, see www.nrel.gov/applying_technologies/scepa.html.

For municipal projects—including municipal use of 

urban wood waste and methane capture and use at 

municipal landfills and wastewater treatment plants—

municipal bonds, bank loans, and/or lease purchase 

agreements may be available. 

Some common state approaches to providing incentives include: 

■ Public Benefit Funds (PBFs). PBFs, also known as 

system benefits charges (SBC) or clean energy funds, 

are typically created by levying a small fee or surcharge 

on electricity rates paid by customers (e.g., for renewable energy PBFs, this fee is approximately 0.01 to 0.10 

mills per kWh). To date, PBFs have been used primarily to fund energy efficiency and low-income assistance 

programs; more recently they have supported clean 

energy supply (i.e., renewable energy, including bioenergy, and CHP). 

For more information about PBF benefits, design elements, interaction with state and federal programs, 

implementation and evaluation, and case studies, see 

EPA’s Clean Energy-Environment Guide to Action at 

www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-programs/state-andlocal/state-best-practices.html.

■ Financial Incentives. Financial incentives, including 

tax incentives, grants, and loans, can play a key role 

in reducing investor risks and promoting bioenergy 

development.

■ State tax incentives for renewable energy can take 

the form of personal or corporate income tax credits, 

tax reductions or exemptions, and tax deductions 

(e.g., for construction programs). Tax incentives aim 

to spur innovation by the private sector. State tax 

incentives for renewable energy are a fairly common 

policy tool. While state tax incentives tend to be 

E

Incentives for Biomass in Oregon

xample

The state of Oregon has developed a suite of financial 

incentives to promote the use of biomass for bioenergy 

production. Two of these include:

Business Energy Tax Credit. Offers a 50 percent tax credit 

on eligible project costs up to $20 million for a variety of 

projects, including two categories that may apply to biomass 

projects—high efficiency combined heat and power (CHP) and 

renewable energy generation. The credit can be taken as 10 

percent annually over five years, or a project owner can transfer 

the credit to a pass-through partner in return for a lump sum 

payment at the completion of the project. For more information, 

visit: www.oregon.gov/ENERGY/CONS/BUS/BETC.shtml.

Energy Trust of Oregon Grants. Charged by the Oregon Public 

Utility Commission with investing in cost-effective energy 

conservation, renewable energy resources, and energy market 

transformation in Oregon, the Energy Trust offers millions 

of dollars annually in grants for innovative commercial 

applications of renewable energy technology. Incentive 

levels are based on a project’s above-market costs. For more 

information, visit: www.energytrust.org/grants/up/index.html.

E

Biofuel Tax Incentives in Indiana

xample

The state of Indiana has developed a comprehensive set of 

incentives to promote biofuels within its borders. Between 

2005 and 2009, $16 million in tax incentives were used to 

kick-start the ethanol industry—resulting in 10 new ethanol 

production facilities in the state along with several biodiesel 

plants to make soybean-based fuel. These incentives target 

different aspects of biofuel production and distribution, and 

include tax credits for:

■ Ethanol production. Ethanol producers are entitled to a credit 

of $0.125 per gallon of ethanol produced, including cellulosic 

ethanol. The maximum credit that may be claimed by a single 

producer depends on the volume of grain ethanol produced. 

Ethanol retail ■ . E85 retailers are allowed to deduct $0.18 from 

the required state gross retail tax for every gallon of E85 sold 

during reporting periods ending before July 1, 2020. 

■ Biodiesel production. Biodiesel producers are entitled to a 

credit of $1.00 per gallon of biodiesel produced. The total 

amount of credits granted to a single taxpayer may not 

exceed $3 million for all taxable years, but may be increased 

to $5 million with prior approval by the Indiana Economic 

Development Corporation.* 

■ Biodiesel blending. Biodiesel blenders are entitled to a credit 

of $0.02 per gallon of blended biodiesel produced at a facility 

located in Indiana. The total amount of credits granted to a 

single taxpayer may not exceed $3 million for all taxable years.* 

Biodiesel retail ■ . Through December 31, 2010, a taxpayer that 

is a fuel retailer and distributes blended biodiesel for retail 

purposes is entitled to a credit of $0.01 per gallon of blended 

biodiesel distributed.* 

*This tax credit is contingent on funding, which as of July 2009 

was not available.

Source: U.S. DOE, 2009

Chapter Five | State Bioenergy Primer 71
Table 5-1. Summary of State Financial Incentives for Biomass Technologies

INCENTIVE TYPE

NUMBER OF 

INCENTIVES 

AVAILABLE STATES OFFERING INCENTIVES

State Grant Program 25 Alabama, Alaska, Connecticut (x2), Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, 

Maine, Massachusetts (x2), Michigan (x3), New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania (x2), 

Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont, Wisconsin

State Loan Program 28 Alabama, Alaska, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa (x2), Maine, Massachusetts, 

Minnesota (x3), Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York (x2), North 

Carolina, Oklahoma (x2), Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vermont

Property Tax Exemption 21 Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, Montana (x3), Nevada (x3), 

New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Texas, Vermont

Sales Tax Exemption 10 Georgia, Idaho, Kentucky, Maryland, New Mexico, Ohio, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wyoming

Corporate Tax Credit 13 Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, North Carolina, 

North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina, Utah

Production Incentive 9 California, Connecticut, Minnesota, New York, North Carolina, South Carolina, Vermont, Washington 

Personal Tax Credit 8 Iowa, Maryland, Montana (x2), New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Utah

Personal Deduction 4 Alabama, Arizona, Idaho, Massachusetts

State Rebate Program 2 New Jersey, Wisconsin

Industry Recruitment 14 Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts (x2), Michigan (x2), Montana (x2), New 

Mexico, Oregon, Wisconsin (x2)

Corporate Tax Exemption 1 Ohio

Corporate Deduction 1 Massachusetts

Excise Tax Incentive 1 Iowa

State Bond Program 2 Idaho, New Mexico

TOTAL INCENTIVES 139

Source: DSIRE, January 26, 2009

72 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Five

smaller than federal incentives, they are often additive and can become significant considerations when 

making purchase and investment decisions.

■ Grants, buy-downs, and generation incentives

support development of energy efficiency and clean 

generation technologies. For renewable energy, state 

grants cover a broad range of activities and frequently 

address issues beyond system installation costs. 

To stimulate market activity, state grants can cover 

research and development, business and infrastructure development, system demonstration, feasibility 

studies, and system rebates. In contrast to incentives 

that help finance initial capital costs (e.g., rebates 

and state sales tax exemptions), states also provide 

generation incentives on the basis of actual electricity 

generated. In their most straightforward form, generation incentives are paid on a kilowatt-hour basis.

■ State loan programs provide low-interest loans to 

promote development of clean energy. One common 

approach is a revolving loan fund. This type of fund 

is designed to be self-supporting. States create a pool 

of capital when the program is launched. This capital 
Table 5-2. Summary of State Incentives for Alternative Fuels/Alternative-Fuel Vehicles

INCENTIVE TYPE

NUMBER OF 

INCENTIVES 

AVAILABLE STATES OFFERING INCENTIVES

State Grant Program 42 Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut (x2), Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois (x3), 

Indiana (x3), Iowa (x3), Louisiana, Michigan (x2) Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North 

Carolina (x3), Ohio (x3), Pennsylvania (x2), Tennessee (x3), Texas (x4), Utah, Virginia, Washington

State Loan Program 16 California, Iowa (x3), Maine, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma (x2), Oregon, Rhode 

Island, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Washington

Property Tax Exemption 1 Montana

State Bond Program 

Exemption

1 North Carolina

Production Incentive 15 California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Kansas, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri (x2), Montana (x2), 

North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee

Retail Incentive 1 South Carolina

Use Incentive 1 Indiana

Excise Tax Incentive 4 Arkansas, California, Georgia, North Dakota

Rebate 4 Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey (x2)

Tax Credit 60 Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana (x6), Iowa (x4), Kansas (x2), Kentucky (x4), 

Louisiana, Maine (x2), Maryland (x2), Michigan (x2), Missouri, Montana (x3), Nebraska, New Mexico 

(x2), New York (x2), North Carolina (x4), North Dakota (x3), Ohio, Oklahoma (x3), Oregon (x3), 

Pennsylvania, South Carolina (x5), South Dakota, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming

Tax Deduction 2 Idaho, Washington

Tax Exemption 25 Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida (x2), Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois (x2), Indiana, Louisiana, 

Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina (x2), North Dakota, 

Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, Washington (x2), Wisconsin

Tax Reduction 11 Alaska, Arizona, Hawaii, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New York, 

South Dakota

Tax Refund 5 Kentucky, Montana, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Wisconsin

TOTAL INCENTIVES 188

Source: U.S. DOE, 2008

Chapter Five | State Bioenergy Primer 73

then “revolves” over a multiyear period, as payments 

from borrowers are returned to the pool and lent 

anew to other borrowers. Revolving loan funds can 

be created from several sources, including PBFs, utility program funds, state general revenues, or federal 

programs. Loan funds are typically created by state 

legislatures and administered by state energy offices.

■ Biofuels Incentives. Many states have incentives to 

help promote development of biofuels. These incentives can include exemptions from state gasoline excise 

taxes, direct production payments, state RFSs, and 

price supports. A current list of state ethanol incentives 

can be found on the RFA Web site at www.ethanolrfa.

org/policy/actions/state/.
5.5 Research, Development, 

and Demonstration

Lack of confidence in the less common biomass 

conversion technologies, such as gasification, 

generally will discourage lending and investment in 

bioenergy. Research, development, and demonstration 

projects will help not only to advance the capabilities 

of emerging technologies, but will increase investor 

confidence and therefore facilitate bioenergy developers’ access to capital.

Example

Florida’s Renewable Energy and Energy-Efficient 

Technologies Grants Program

Since 2006, Florida’s Renewable Energy and Energy-Efficient 

Technologies Grants Program has provided more than $27 

million in matching grants to support a variety of renewable 

energy projects. Nonprofit organizations, as well as Florida 

municipalities and county governments, state agencies, forprofit businesses, universities and colleges, and utilities, are 

eligible to receive funding. Numerous bioenergy projects have 

benefited from the program in recent years.

One of these projects includes a field demonstration of a 

power, refrigeration, heat, and a fresh water plant that is 

capable of running on a variety of biomass-derived fuels—

including crop and forest wastes, energy crops, and municipal 

wastes, in addition to hydrogen and conventional fuels. 

Located at the University of Florida Energy Research Park, 

the plant uses the university’s patented PoWER technology 

and is designed to provide essentials such as fresh water, 

refrigeration, and electricity even during grid outages that can 

occur due to hurricanes and other emergencies. 

To learn more about the program, as well as the renewable 

energy projects that have received funding under this program, 

visit www.floridaenergy.org/energy/energyact/grants.htm.

Sources: DSIRE

74 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Five

5.6 Information Sharing

Potential lenders and investors will not necessarily be 

aware of the financial incentives offered in each state 

for bioenergy development. States can facilitate financing of bioenergy projects by providing information 

about financing sources. This information will help 

developers, investors, and lenders take advantage of 

revenue streams as well as any federal and municipal 

financing options. 

In addition, states can develop their own outreach programs that educate consumers, potential markets, and 

regulators about the benefits of bioenergy and how it 

will meet state goals. Additional options are described 

in Section 5.7—Resources for Detailed Information. 

Some examples of outreach efforts that can be used by 

states include: 

■ Wood Stove Changeout Campaign. U.S. EPA offers 

resources to assist states and local governments with 

successful implementation of a Wood Stove Changeout Campaign, including how to identify potential 

partners, identify sources of funding, develop a 

project plan, implement the campaign, and measure 

success. States provide information and incentives 

(e.g., rebates or discounts) to encourage residents to 

replace their old, conventional wood stoves with EPAcertified wood-burning appliances that burn more 

cleanly and efficiently. See www.epa.gov/woodstoves/

how-to-guide.html.

■ Southern Forest Research Partnership materials. The 

Southern Forest Research Partnership offers numerous 

publications, presentations, links, images, case studies, 

activities, videos, and other educational tools that can 

be used to share woody biomass information with natural resource management and extension professionals 

as well as community planning and development 

professionals. The Sustainable Forestry for Bioenergy 

and Bio-based Products Training Curriculum Notebook

is a comprehensive training resource, which includes 

a trainer’s introduction, seven modules, fact sheets, a 

glossary, evaluation resources, example activities, and 

a supplemental materials list. See www.forestbioenergy.

net/training-materials. 

■ It All Adds Up To Cleaner Air Resources Toolkit. 

While not explicitly designed for bioenergy, this U.S. 

Department of Transportation step-by-step guide to 

implementing a public outreach program provides 

many tips that would be appropriate for any outreach 

campaign. See http://www.italladdsup.gov/tools/

how_to.asp. 

5.6.1 National Biomass State and 

Regional Partnerships

States can also participate in regional partnerships 

to share best practices. U.S. DOE’s Biomass Program 

works with the National Biomass State and Regional 

Partnerships, listed below. Each organization provides 

leadership in its region with regard to policies and 

technical issues to advance the use of biomass. Contact 

information is provided on the program Web sites. 
Great Lakes Regional Biomass Energy Program

(Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, 

Wisconsin) www.cglg.org/biomass

Northeast Regional Biomass Energy Program 

(Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont) www.nrbp.org/

Pacific Regional Biomass Energy Program 

(Alaska, Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Washington) www.pacificbiomass.org

Southern State Energy Board 

(Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, 

Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, North 

Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, 

Virginia, West Virginia, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands) www.sseb.org/

Southeast Regional Biomass Energy Program 

(Alabama, Arkansas, D.C., Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, 

Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, 

Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virgin Islands, 

Virginia, West Virginia) www.serbep.org/

Western Regional Energy Program 

(Arizona, California, Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, 

Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South 

Dakota, Texas, Utah, Wyoming) www.westgov.org/

wga/initiatives/biomass/

5.7 Resources for Detailed Information

Resource Description URL

Bioenergy

Capturing the Full Potential of 

Bioenergy: A Model for Regional 

Bioenergy Initiatives, GEN 

Publishing, Inc., 2007.

Advances a step-by-step approach for advancing bioenergy. www.liebertonline.com/doi/

abs/10.1089/ind.2007.3.120

Clean Energy-Environment 

Guide to Action: Policies, Best 

Practices, and Action Steps for 

States, U.S. EPA, 2006.

This Web site and guide present 16 policies that states use to 

advance clean energy. 

www.epa.gov/cleanrgy/

stateandlocal/guidetoaction.htm

Clean Energy Lead by Example 

Guide, U.S. EPA, 2009.

Describes proven strategies, resources, and tools to help 

states save money and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 

adopting clean energy practices in their facilities, operations, 

and vehicle fleets.

www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/

documents/epa_lbe.pdf

Database of State Incentives for 

Renewable Energy (DSIRE).

Searchable database of incentives relevant to bioenergy, by 

state. Select a renewable energy search, by technology, for 

biomass, CHP, and/or landfill gas. The database is updated 

routinely.

www.dsireusa.org/

State Policies for Promoting the 

Next Generation of Biomass 

Technologies, Great Plains 

Institute, November 22, 2006.

Summarizes recommendations on state policies to advance 

biomass. 

www.ef.org/documents/BWG_

State_Policy_Menu_Final_v3.pdf

State Incentives and Resources 

Search, U.S. DOE.

This Web page includes state energy information for 

biomass, other renewable energy, and fossil energy.

www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/

about/state_activities/incentive_

search.asp

Chapter Five | State Bioenergy Primer 75
Resource Description URL

Developing State Policies 

Supportive of Bioenergy 

Development, Southern States 

Energy Board, 2002.

Analyzes policy options to advance bioenergy, based on 

regional experiences in the Southeast. 

www.osti.gov/bridge/

servlets/purl/828971-Pbx12e/

native/828971.pdf

Environment and Energy Study 

Institute (EESI).

This Web site includes information on bioenergy and federal 

and state incentives.

www.eesi.org/Sustainable_

Biomass_Energy_Program

It All Adds Up to Cleaner 

Air Resources Toolkit, U.S. 

Department of Transportation. 

While not explicitly designed for bioenergy, this step-by-step 

guide to implementing a public outreach program provides 

many tips that would be appropriate to any outreach 

campaign. 

www.italladdsup.gov/tools/

how_to.asp

Southern Forest Research 

Partnership.

Offers numerous publications, presentations, links, images, 

case studies, activities, videos, and other educational tools 

that can be used to share woody biomass information with 

natural resource management and extension professionals as 

well as community planning and development professionals.

www.forestbioenergy.net/

training-materials

State Woody Biomass Utilization 

Policies, University of Minnesota, 

Department of Forest Resources, 

Staff Paper 199. Becker, D.R., and 

C. Lee. 2008. 

A comprehensive database of woody biomass legislation for 

each state in the United States.

www.forestry.umn.edu/

publications/staffpapers/

Staffpaper199.pdf

Biopower/Bioheat

Green-e Certification Process. A voluntary market for renewable energy certificates exists, 

and some kinds of biopower generation are eligible for 

Green-e certification. Eligible sources must go through the 

certification process to be able to sell certified products.

www.green-e.org/docs/

Appendix_D-Green-e_National_

Standard.pdf

and www.green-e.org/getcert_

re_6steps.shtml#rec

State Energy Program. This collaboration of DOE and the states provides joint 

funding for state formula grant projects and local energy 

efficiency and renewable energy projects.

http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/

state_energy_program/

State Technologies 

Advancement Collaborative 

Program, U.S. DOE, National 

Association of State Energy 

Officials, Association of State 

Energy Research and Technology 

Transfer Institutions.

This collaboration provides funding for state energy 

efficiency and renewable energy projects.

www.stacenergy.org

Biofuels/Bioproducts

Alternative Fuels Data Center: 

All State Incentives and Laws, 

U.S. DOE, NREL.

The data center is a comprehensive clearinghouse of data, 

publications, tools, and information related to advanced 

transportation technologies.

www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/data/

methodology.html

Funding Database – Biomass/

Biogas, U.S. EPA.

This database of financial and regulatory incentives at the 

state level is updated monthly.

www.epa.gov/chp/funding/bio.

html

Understanding and Informing 

the Policy Environment: 

State-Level Renewable Fuels 

Standards, NREL, January 2007.

Summary and analysis of state actions on renewable fuels 

standards. 

www.nrel.gov/docs/

fy07osti/41075.pdf

5.7 Resources for Detailed Information (cont.)

76 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Five
Resource Description URL

Funding Landfill Gas Energy 

Projects: State, Federal, and 

Foundation Resources, U.S. EPA.

This guide from the Landfill Methane Outreach Program 

details potential sources of funding for landfill gas projects.

www.epa.gov/lmop/res/guide/

index.htm

State Examples

Arkansas State-Specific Financing Information http://arkansasenergy.org/solarwind-bioenergy/bioenergy.aspx

Florida State-Specific Financing Information www.floridafarmtofuel.com/

Downloads/FTF%20Grant%20

Agreement%20Contract%20

092507.pdf

Michigan State-Specific Financing Information http://michigan.gov/documents/

cis/CIS_EO_Funding_

Opportunities_192768_7.pdf

Montana State-Specific Financing Information www.deq.state.mt.us/Energy/

bioenergy/Biodiesel_Production_

Educ_Presentations/Combined_

Biodiesel_Ethanol_Govt_

Incentives_Montana_Jan07_

bshh.pdf

Washington State-Specific Financing Information http://agr.wa.gov/Bioenergy/

5.7 Resources for Detailed Information (cont.)

Chapter Five | State Bioenergy Primer 77

5.8 References

■California Environmental Protection Agency, 2009. 

Proposed Regulation to Implement the Low Carbon 

Fuel Standard (Vol. 1). Sacramento, CA, March 5, 

2009. www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/lcfs.htm.

■DSIRE (Database of State Incentives for Renewables 

& Efficiency). North Carolina Solar Center, Raleigh, 

NC. www.dsireusa.org.

■Pew Center on Global Climate Change, 2008. Mandates and Incentives Promoting Biofuels. Pew Center 

on Global Climate Change, Arlington, Virginia, August 

5, 2008. http://pewclimate.org/what_s_being_done/

in_the_states/map_ethanol.cfm. 

■U.S. DOE (Department of Energy), 2008. Alternative Fuels Data Center. Washington, DC, December 

29, 2008. http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/incentives_laws.html. 

■U.S. DOE, 2009. Alternative Fuels and Advanced 

Vehicles Data Center. Washington, DC, 2009. www.

indystar.com/article/20081116/BUSINESS/811160391; 

www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/progs/view_all.php/IN/0; 

www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/progs/ind_state.php/IN/

E85; www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/progs/ind_state.php/

IN/BD.

■U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), 2008a. 

Environmental Revenue Streams for Combined Heat 

and Power. Combined Heat and Power Partnership. 

U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, December 2008. www.epa.

gov/chp/documents/ers_program_details.pdf.

■U.S. EPA, 2008b. State and Regional Climate Policy 

Maps. U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, May, 2008. http://

epa.gov/climatechange/wycd/stateandlocalgov/

state_actionslist.html.
78 State Bioenergy Primer | Chapter Five
Appendix A Contents

■ A.1 Biomass Feedstocks and Conversion 

Technologies

■ A.2 Benefits of Bioenergy (Environmental, 

Economic, Energy) 

■ A.3 Assessing Potential Markets for Biomass

■ A.4 Tools to Help Estimate Economic, Energy, 

and/or Environmental Benefits

■ A.5 Financing Bioenergy Projects

Appendix A

Resources and Tools for States

 Appendix A | State Bioenergy Primer 79

The resources for detailed information that are included at the end of each chapter are also compiled here 

to serve as a comprehensive snapshot of key reports, 

tools, and guidance documents.
A.1 Biomass Feedstocks and Conversion Technologies

Resource Description URL

Bioenergy

Woody Biomass Utilization, U.S. 

Forest Service and Bureau of Land 

Management.

This U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management 

Web site provides links to a variety of resources and reports 

on woody biomass utilization, including tools and references 

specifically targeted at state governments.

www.forestsandrangelands.gov/

Woody_Biomass/index.shtml

BioWeb, Sun Grant Initiative. An online catalog of a broad range of resources on 

bioenergy, including descriptions of biomass resources, 

biofuels, and bioproducts; explanations of conversion 

technologies; and summaries of relevant policies. The 

resources are searchable by both topic and level of detail of 

information provided. The catalog is a product of the Sun 

Grant Initiative, a national network of land-grant universities 

and federally funded laboratories working together to 

further establish a bio-based economy.

http://bioweb.sungrant.org/

Biomass as Feedstock for a 

Bioenergy and Bioproducts 

Industry: The Technical 

Feasibility of a Billion-Ton 

Annual Supply, U.S. DOE, USDA, 

2005. 

Describes issues associated with reaching the goal of 1 

billion tons of annual biomass production (see especially pp. 

34–37).

www.osti.gov/bridge

Biomass Energy Data Book, U.S. 

DOE, September 2006.

Provides a compilation of biomass-related statistical data. http://cta.ornl.gov/bedb/index.

shtml

Biomass Feedstock Composition 

and Property Database, U.S. DOE.

Provides results on chemical composition and physical 

properties from analyses of more than 150 samples of 

potential bioenergy feedstocks, including corn stover; wheat 

straw, bagasse, switchgrass, and other grasses; and poplars 

and other fast-growing trees.

www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/

feedstock_databases.html

A Geographic Perspective on 

the Current Biomass Resource 

Availability in the United States, 

Milbrandt, A., 2005. 

Describes the availability of the various types of biomass on a 

county-by-county basis.

www.nrel.gov/docs/

fy06osti/39181.pdf

Kent and Riegel’s Handbook 

of Industrial Chemistry and 

Biotechnology, Kent, 2007.

Detailed, comprehensive, fairly technical explanation of the 

range of biomass conversion technologies.

Biopower/Bioheat

Biomass Combined Heat and 

Power Catalog of Technologies, 

U.S. EPA, September 2007.

Detailed technology characterization of biomass CHP 

systems, including technical and economic characterization 

of biomass resources, biomass preparation, energy 

conversion technologies, power production systems, and 

complete integrated systems. Includes extensive discussion 

of biomass feedstocks. 

www.epa.gov/chp/documents/

biomass_chp_catalog.pdf

Combined Heat and Power 

Market Potential for Opportunity 

Fuels, U.S. DOE, Resource 

Dynamics Corporation, August 

2004.

Determines the best “opportunity fuels” for distributed 

energy sources and CHP applications.

www.eere.energy.gov/de/pdfs/

chp_opportunityfuels.pdf

80 State Bioenergy Primer | Appendix A
Resource Description URL

Biofuels/Bioproducts

Bioenergy Conversion 

Technology Characteristics, 

Western Governors’ Association, 

September 2008.

Investigates the biofuel conversion technologies that are 

currently available, as well as technologies currently under 

development that are developed enough to be potentially 

available on a commercial basis circa 2015.

www.westgov.org/wga/initiatives/

transfuels/Task%202.pdf

A National Laboratory Market 

and Technology Assessment of 

the 30x30 Scenario, NREL, March 

2007.

Draft assessment of the market drivers and technology needs 

to achieve the goal of supplying 30 percent of 2004 motor 

gasoline fuel demand with biofuels by 2030.

From Biomass to BioFuels: NREL

Leads the Way, NREL, August 

2006.

Provides an overview of the world of biofuels, including the 

maturity levels of various biofuels, how they are produced, 

and the U.S. potential for biofuels.

www.nrel.gov/biomass/

pdfs/39436.pdf

Research Advances Cellulosic 

Ethanol: NREL Leads the Way, 

NREL, March 2007.

Highlights some of NREL’s most recent advances in cellulosic 

ethanol production.

www.nrel.gov/biomass/

pdfs/40742.pdf

A.1 Biomass Feedstocks and Conversion Technologies (cont.)

 Appendix A | State Bioenergy Primer 81
A.2 Benefits of Bioenergy (Environmental, Economic, Energy)

Resource Description URL

Bioenergy

Economic Impacts of Bioenergy 

Production and Use, U.S. DOE, 

SSEB Southeast Biomass State and 

Regional Partnership, October 

2005.

Summarizes the benefits of bioenergy production in the U.S., 

including job creation, reduced demand for fossil fuels, and 

expanded tax bases.

www.vienergy.org/Economics.pdf

State Energy Alternatives 

Web Site, U.S. DOE, National 

Conference of State Legislatures.

Provides information on state-specific biomass resources, 

policies, and status as well as current biofuels and biopower 

technology information.

http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/

states/

An Assessment of Biomass 

Harvesting Guidelines, Evans and 

Perschel, Forest Guild, 2009.

Presents an assessment of existing biomass harvesting 

guidelines and provides recommendations for the 

development of future guidelines. 

www.forestguild.org/

publications/research/2009/

biomass_guidelines.pdf

Planning for Disaster Debris, U.S. 

EPA, 2008.

Provides information and examples for developing a disaster 

debris plan that will help a community identify options for 

collecting, recycling, and disposing of debris in the event of a 

natural disaster. 

www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/rrr/

imr/cdm/pubs/disaster.htm

Biopower/Bioheat

Biomass Power and 

Conventional Fossil Systems 

with and without CO2

Sequestration—Comparing the 

Energy Balance, Greenhouse 

Gas Emissions, and Economics, 

NREL, January 2004.

Provides a comparative analysis of a number of different 

biopower, natural gas, and coal technologies.

www.nrel.gov/docs/

fy04osti/32575.pdf

Economic Impacts Resulting 

from Co-Firing Biomass 

Feedstocks in Southeastern 

U.S. Coal-Fired Power Plants, 

Presentation by Burton English et 

al., University of Tennessee.

Summarizes the economic impacts in eight southeastern 

states from using biomass to co-fire power plants that 

traditionally have only used coal for fuel.

www.farmfoundation.org/

projects/documents/englishcofire.pptprojects/documents/

english-cofire.ppt 

Green Power Equivalency 

Calculator, U.S. EPA.

Allows any bioenergy user to communicate to internal and 

external audiences the environmental impact of purchasing 

or directly using green power in place of fossil fuel derived 

energy by calculating the avoided carbon dioxide (CO2) 

emissions. Results can be converted into an equivalent 

number of passenger cars, gallons of gasoline, barrels of oil, 

or American households’ electricity use.

www.epa.gov/grnpower/pubs/

calculator.htm

Job Jolt: The Economic Impacts 

of Repowering the Midwest: 

The Clean Energy Development 

Plan for the Heartland, Regional 

Economics Applications 

Laboratory, November 2002.

Analyzes the economic and job creation benefits of 

implementing a clean energy plan in the 10-state Midwest 

region. 

www.michigan.gov/

documents/nwlb/Job_Jolt_

RepoweringMidwest_235553_7.

pdf

82 State Bioenergy Primer | Appendix A
Resource Description URL

Biofuels/Bioproducts

Alternative Fueling Station 

Locator, U.S. DOE.

Allows users to find alternative fuels stations near a specific 

location on a route, obtain counts of alternative fuels stations 

by state, view U.S. maps, and more. The following alternative 

fuels are included in the mapping application: compressed 

natural gas, E85, propane/liquefied petroleum gas, biodiesel, 

electricity, hydrogen, and liquefied natural gas.

www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/data/

geographic.html

Biomass Energy Data Book, 

ORNL, September 2008.

Describes a meta-analysis of energy balance analyses for 

ethanol, revealing the sources of differences among the 

different studies.

http://cta.ornl.gov/bedb/pdf/

Biomass_Energy_Data_Book.pdf

Changing the Climate: Ethanol 

Industry Outlook 2008, Renewable 

Fuels Association (RFA), 2008.

Forecasts that 4 billion gallons of ethanol production capacity 

will come on line from 68 biorefineries being constructed in 

2008 and beyond, increasing the 2007 figure by nearly 50%. 

www.ethanolrfa.org/objects/pdf/

outlook/RFA_Outlook_2008.pdf

Contribution of the Ethanol 

Industry to the Economy of the 

United States, RFA, 2007.

Finds that the industry spent $12.5 billion on raw materials, 

other inputs, and goods and services to produce about 6.5 

billion gallons of ethanol in 2007. An additional $1.6 billion 

was spent to transport grain and other inputs to production 

facilities; ethanol from the plant to terminals where it is 

blended with gasoline; and co-products to end-users. 

www.ethanolrfa.org/objects/

documents/576/economic_

contribution_2006.pdf

Economic and Agricultural 

Impacts of Ethanol and Biodiesel 

Expansion, University of 

Tennessee, 2006.

Finds that producing 60 billion gallons of ethanol and 1.6 

billion gallons of biodiesel from renewable resources by 2030 

would likely result in development of a new industrial complex 

with nearly 35 million acres planted dedicated to energy crops. 

http://beag.ag.utk.edu/pp/

Ethanolagimpacts.pdf

Ethanol and the Local 

Community, RFA, 2002.

Summarizes possible effects of ethanol production on local 

economic development. 

www.ethanolrfa.org/objects/

documents/120/ethanol_local_

community.pdf

Greener Fuels, Greener Vehicles: 

A State Resource Guide, National 

Governors’ Association, 2008.

Discusses alternative transportation fuels and vehicle 

technologies.

www.nga.org/Files/

pdf/0802GREENERFUELS.PDF

Greenhouse Gas Impacts of 

Expanded Renewable and 

Alternative Fuels Use, U.S. EPA, 

April 2007.

Provides a summary of GHG emissions from a variety of 

advanced fuel options. 

www.epa.gov/oms/

renewablefuels/420f07035.htm

New Analysis Shows Oil-Savings 

Potential of Ethanol Biofuels, 

National Resources Defense 

Council (NRDC), 2006.

Describes NRDC’s meta-analysis of energy balance papers 

and its standardized methods. 

www.nrdc.org/media/

pressreleases/060209a.asp

A Rebuttal to “Ethanol Fuels: 

Energy, Economics and 

Environmental Impacts,” National 

Corn Growers Association, 2002.

Refutes the contention in a previous article that more energy 

goes into producing ethanol than ethanol itself can actually 

provide, creating a negative energy balance. 

www.ethanolrfa.org/

objects/documents/84/

ethanolffuelsrebuttal.pdf

Renewable Fuel Standard 

Program, U.S. EPA. 

Describes efforts undertaken by U.S. EPA toward a National 

Renewable Fuels Standard under requirements of the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005. While these requirements are superseded 

by more recent legislation, links from this page provide 

useful background. In particular, the discussion of estimated 

costs summarizes the expected incremental costs of policies 

advancing ethanol. 

www.epa.gov/oms/

renewablefuels/

A.2 Benefits of Bioenergy (Environmental, Economic, Energy) (cont.)

 Appendix A | State Bioenergy Primer 83
Resource Description URL

Regulatory Impact Analysis: 

Renewable Fuel Standard 

Program, U.S. EPA, 2007.

Examines proposed standards that would implement a 

renewable fuel program as required by the Energy Policy Act 

of 2005. It notes, however, that renewable fuel use is forecast 

to exceed the standards due to market forces anyway. 

www.epa.gov/OMS/

renewablefuels/420r07004-

sections.htm

SmartWay Grow & Go Factsheet 

on Biodiesel, U.S. EPA, October 

2006.

Describes how biodiesel is made, its benefits versus 

vegetable oil, performance, availability, affordability, and 

other characteristics.

www.epa.gov/smartway/

growandgo/documents/

factsheet-biodiesel.htm

SmartWay Grow & Go Factsheet 

on E85 and Flex Fuel Vehicles, 

U.S. EPA, October 2006.

Describes E85-fuel and flex-fuel vehicles, including their 

affordability and benefits.

www.epa.gov/smartway/

growandgo/documents/

factsheet-e85.htm

State-Level Workshops on 

Ethanol for Transportation: Final 

Report. 

Summarizes a series of DOE-sponsored, state-level 

workshops exploring and encouraging construction of 

ethanol plants.

www.nrel.gov/docs/

fy04osti/35212.pdf

TransAtlas Interactive 

Alternative Fuel Map, U.S. DOE.

Provides user-friendly Google Maps to display the locations 

of existing and planned alternative fueling stations, 

concentrations of different vehicle types, alternative fuel 

production facilities, roads, and political boundaries. 

www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/data/

geographic.html

Analysis of Potential Causes of 

Consumer Food Price Inflation, 

RFA, 2007. 

Asserts that the “marketing bill,” not increased ethanol 

production, is responsible for rising food prices.

www.ethanolrfa.org/resource/

facts/food/documents/Informa_

Renew_Fuels_Study_Dec_2007.

pdf

Ethanol Juggernaut Diverts 

Corn from Food to Fuel, Raloff, 

Janet, Science News, 2007.

Makes the case that ethanol is driving up food prices. www.sciencenews.org/view/

generic/id/8179/title/Food_for_

Thought__Ethanol_Juggernaut_

Diverts_Corn_from_Food_to_

Fuel

Food versus Fuel in the United 

States, Institute for Agriculture 

and Trade Policy, 2007.

Finds that biofuel production is not diverting food from 

tables in the U.S. or abroad. 

www.iatp.org/iatp/publications.

cfm?accountID=258&refID= 

100001

U.S. Corn Growers: Producing 

Food and Fuel, National Corn 

Growers Association, 2006. 

Provides the corn growers’ perspective that producing food 

and fuel from corn is working out well, without undue impact 

on food prices. 

www.ncga.com/files/pdf/

FoodandFuelPaper10-08.pdf

Aggressive Use of Bioderived 

Products and Materials in the 

U.S. by 2010, A.D. Little, Inc., 2001.

The presentation and report summarize near-term 

opportunities to dramatically increase the use of biomass to 

make nonfuel products. 

www.p2pays.org/ref/40/39031.

pdf

Industrial Bioproducts: Today 

and Tomorrow, U.S. DOE, July 

2003.

The report finds that a bioindustry could harness the energy 

and molecular building blocks of biomass (crops, trees, 

grasses, crop residues, forest residues, animal waste, and 

municipal solid waste) to create products now manufactured 

from petroleum, making us far less dependent on fossil fuels. 

www.brdisolutions.com/pdfs/

BioProductsOpportunitiesReportFinal.

pdf

Preliminary Screening Technical 

and Economic Assessment 

of Synthesis Gas to Fuels and 

Chemicals with Emphasis on the 

Potential for Biomass-Derived 

Syngas, NREL, 2003.

Summarizes opportunities for biomass to be used to 

manufacture a variety of products beyond fuels alone. 

www.nrel.gov/docs/

fy04osti/34929.pdf

A.2 Benefits of Bioenergy (Environmental, Economic, Energy) (cont.)

84 State Bioenergy Primer | Appendix A
Resource Description URL

Environmental Life Cycle 

Implications of Fuel Oxygenate 

Production from California 

Biomass – Technical Report, 

NREL, 1999.

Looks at the costs and benefits of biomass-derived ethanol, 

ETBE, and E10 as fuel oxygenates across their life cycles. 

www-erd.llnl.gov/

FuelsoftheFuture/pdf_files/

lifecyclecalif.pdf

Quantifying Cradle-to-Farm 

Gate Life-Cycle Impacts 

Associated with Fertilizer used 

for Corn, Soybean, and Stover 

Production, NREL, May 2005.

Documents the costs, such as eutrophication, and benefits of 

nitrate and phosphate fertilizers used in production of three 

crops. 

www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/

pdfs/37500.pdf

Life Cycle Analysis of Ethanol 

from Corn Stover, NREL, 2002.

This comprehensive accounting of ethanol’s flows to and 

from the environment focuses on ethanol produced from 

corn stover

www.nrel.gov/docs/gen/

fy02/31792.pdf

Life Cycle Inventory of Biodiesel 

and Petroleum Diesel for Use 

in an Urban Bus: Final Report, 

NREL, 1998.

Examines the relative costs and benefits of using biodiesel 

versus petroleum diesel in an urban bus.

www.nrel.gov/docs/legosti/

fy98/24089.pdf

Life Cycle Assessment of 

Biodiesel versus Petroleum 

Diesel Fuel, Institute of Electrical 

and Electronics Engineers, 1996. 

The proceedings of the 31st Intersociety Energy Conversion 

Engineering Conference, held August 11–16, 1996, in 

Washington, DC. 

Accessible by subscription only

Life Cycle Assessment of 

Biomass-Derived Refinery 

Feedstocks for Reducing CO2, 

NREL, 1997.

Discusses the two processes for producing 1,4-butanediol. 

The first process is the conventional hydrocarbon feedstockbased approach, utilizing methane to produce formaldehyde, 

and acetylene with synthesis under conditions of heat and 

pressure. The second is a biomass-based feedstock approach 

where glucose derived from corn is fermented. 

Not available online

Life Cycle Assessment of 

Biomass Cofiring in a Coal-Fired 

Power Plant, NREL, 2001. 

Reports on a cradle-to-grave analysis of all processes 

necessary for the operation of a coal-fired power plant that 

co-fires wood residue, including raw material extraction, feed 

preparation, transportation, and waste disposal and recycling. 

Accessible by subscription only

Understanding Land Use 

Change and U.S. Ethanol 

Expansion, RFA, November 2008.

Discusses historical agricultural land use and crop utilization 

trends, explores the role of increased productivity, looks at 

the contributions of ethanol feed co-products, and examines 

global agricultural land use projections obtained from 

Informa Economics.

www.ethanolrfa.org/objects/

documents/2041/final_land_

use_1110_w_execsumm.pdf

National Biofuels Action 

Plan, Biomass Research and 

Development Board, October 

2008.

Outlines areas where cooperation between federal agencies 

will help to evolve bio-based fuel production technologies 

into competitive solutions for meeting U.S. fuel demands. 

Seven key areas for action are identified: feedstock 

production; feedstock logistics; conversion of feedstock to 

fuel; distribution; end Use; sustainability; and Environment, 

Health, and Safety.

www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/

pdfs/nbap.pdf

A.2 Benefits of Bioenergy (Environmental, Economic, Energy) (cont.)

 Appendix A | State Bioenergy Primer 85
a.3 Assessing Potential Markets for Biomass

Resource Description URL

Bioenergy

Biomass Resource Assessment 

Tool, U.S. EPA and NREL.

Online mapping tool that takes various biomass resource 

datasets and maps them, allowing user queries and 

analysis. For example, users can select a point on the map 

and determine the quantity of feedstock within a certain 

radius, and the quantity of energy that could potentially be 

produced from that biomass.

http://rpm.nrel.gov/biopower/

biopower/launch

Coordinated Resource Offering 

Protocol (CROP) Evaluations, 

U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of 

Land Management.

Provides the results of ten CROP evaluations that have been 

conducted for over 30 million acres of public forestlands 

potentially vulnerable to wildfires. The evaluations contain 

detailed resource-offering maps that illustrate the growing 

fuel load problem within major forest systems and quantify 

the biomass available for removal within five years.

www.forestsandrangelands.gov/

Woody_Biomass/supply/CROP/

index.shtml

USFS Forest Inventory Data 

Online (FIDO). 

Provides access to the National Forest Inventory and Analysis 

databases. It can be used to generate tables and maps of 

forest statistics (including tree biomass) by running standard 

reports for specific states or counties and survey year, or 

customized reports based on criteria selected by the user. 

http://fiatools.fs.fed.us/fido/index.

html

Biomass Feedstocks, U.S. DOE. U.S. DOE Biomass Program Web site www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/

biomass_feedstocks.html

Dynamic Maps, GIS Data, and 

Analysis Tools, NREL.

Provides county-level biomass resource maps. The feedstock 

categories include crop residues, forest residues, primary 

mill residues, secondary mill residues, urban wood waste, 

methane emissions from landfills, methane emissions from 

manure management, methane emissions from wastewater 

treatment plants, and dedicated energy crops. The maps 

are derived from data contained in a report, Geographic 

Perspective on the Current Biomass Resource Availability in 

the United States (described below). Note that these maps 

present technical biomass resource data. The economic 

biomass resource availability will most likely be somewhat 

less than what is presented in the maps. 

www.nrel.gov/gis/biomass.html

Geographic Perspective on 

the Current Biomass Resource 

Availability in the United States, 

NREL, 2006. 

Provides the basis for the maps and data presented in 

NREL’s Dynamic Maps, GIS Data, and Analysis Tools Web site 

described above. The report provides a geographic analysis 

of biomass resource potential at the county level, and can 

give state officials a sense of the major biomass resources 

available within their state and their technical potential 

relative to other states.

www.nrel.gov/docs/

fy06osti/39181.pdf

State Assessment for Biomass 

Resources (SABRE), U.S. DOE. 

Provides detailed information on biomass resources and 

utilization throughout the United States. It features statespecific information on conventional fuel and biofuel use, 

ethanol and biodiesel stations and production plants, 

and biofuel production capacities. In addition, it offers 

state-by-state snapshots of available feedstocks, data on 

potential production capacities, and projections on the 

future use of biofuels.

www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/sabre/

index.php

86 State Bioenergy Primer | Appendix A
Resource Description URL

State Woody Biomass 

Utilization Policies, 

University of Minnesota, 

Department of Forest 

Resources, Staff Paper 199. Becker, 

D.R., and C. Lee. 2008. 

Documents information on state policies to facilitate 

comparison of the types of approaches used in certain 

areas, policy structures and incentives employed, program 

administration, and relationships to complementary local and 

federal actions.

www.forestry.umn.edu/

publications/staffpapers/

Staffpaper199.pdf

Biopower/Bioheat

Initial Market Assessment for 

Small-Scale Biomass-Based CHP. 

National Renewable Energy 

Laboratory, NREL, January 2008.

Examines the energy generation market opportunities 

for biomass CHP applications smaller than 20 MW. Using 

relevant literature and expert opinion, the paper provides 

an overview of the benefits of and challenges for biomass 

CHP in terms of policy and economic drivers, and identifies 

primary characteristics of potential markets.

www.nrel.gov/docs/

fy08osti/42046.pdf

Green Power Marketing in the 

United States: A Status Report, 

NREL.

Documents green power marketing activities and trends in 

voluntary markets in the United States.

http://apps3.eere.energy.

gov/greenpower/resources/

pdfs/38994.pdf

U.S. EPA's Landfill Methane 

Outreach Program (LMOP).

Promotes the use of landfill gas as a renewable, green energy 

source. Its Web site contains general information, tools, and 

links to databases containing specific landfill data. 

www.epa.gov/lmop/

U.S. EPA’s Landfill Methane 

Outreach Program (LMOP) 

Landfill Database. 

Provides a nationwide listing of operational and underconstruction LFG energy projects; candidate municipal solid 

waste landfills having LFG energy potential; and information 

on additional landfills that could represent LFG energy 

opportunities. The database can be accessed as a series 

of downloadable Excel spreadsheets, which are updated 

and posted to the Web site each month. The information 

contained in the LMOP database is compiled from a variety 

of sources, including annual voluntary submissions by LMOP 

partners and industry publications.

www.epa.gov/lmop/proj/index.

htm

Landfill Gas Energy Project 

Development Handbook, U.S. 

EPA Landfill Methane Outreach 

Program. 

Provides landfill gas energy project development guidance, 

with individual chapters on the basics of landfill gas energy, 

gas modeling, technology options, economic analysis and 

financing, contract and permitting considerations, and 

selection of project partners. 

www.epa.gov/lmop/res/

handbook.htm

Market Opportunities for Biogas 

Recovery Systems, U.S. EPA

AgStar.

Assesses the market potential for biogas energy projects at 

swine and dairy farms in the United States. For the top ten 

swine and dairy states, the guide characterizes the sizes and 

types of operations where biogas projects are technically 

feasible, along with estimates of potential methane 

production, electricity generation, and greenhouse gas 

emission reductions. 

www.epa.gov/agstar/pdf/

biogas%20recovery%20systems_

screenres.pdf

U.S. EPA’s Combined Heat and 

Power (CHP) Partnership.

Promotes the use of biomass-fueled CHP and the use of 

biogas at wastewater treatment facilities.

www.epa.gov/chp

A.3 Assessing Potential Markets for Biomass (cont.)

 Appendix A | State Bioenergy Primer 87
Resource Description URL

Biofuels/Bioproducts

State Assessment for Biomass 

Resources, U.S. DOE.

Provides detailed information on biomass resources and 

utilization throughout the United States. It features statespecific information on conventional fuel and biofuel use, 

ethanol and biodiesel stations and production plants, 

and biofuel production capacities. It offers state-bystate snapshots of available feedstocks, data on potential 

production capacities, and projections on the future use of 

biofuels. The site is particularly useful for states interested in 

evaluating resource potential for producing biofuels.

www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/sabre/

index.php

Environmental Laws Applicable 

to Construction and Operation 

of Ethanol Plants, U.S. EPA.

This compliance assistance manual, issued by EPA Region 7, 

serves as a road map of information on federal environmental 

programs and federal and state agency roles applicable to the 

construction, modification, and operation of ethanol plants.

www.epa.gov/region07/priorities/

agriculture/ethanol_plants_

manual.pdf

Environmental Laws Applicable 

to Construction and Operation 

of Biodiesel Production 

Facilities, U.S. EPA.

This compliance assistance manual, issued by EPA Region 7, 

serves as a road map of information on federal environmental 

programs and federal, state, and local agency roles 

applicable to designing, building, and operating biodiesel 

manufacturing facilities.

www.epa.gov/region07/priorities/

agriculture/biodiesel_manual.pdf

State Examples

California An Assessment of Biomass Resources in California, 2007, 

provides an updated biomass inventory for the state along 

with an assessment of potential growth in biomass resources 

and power generation that could help to satisfy the state 

renewable portfolio standard (RPS).

http://biomass.ucdavis.edu/

materials/reports%20and%20

publications/2008/CBC_Biomass_

Resources_2007.pdf

Georgia Biomass Wood Resource Assessment on a Countyby-County Basis for the State of Georgia provides a 

biomass wood resource assessment on a county-level 

basis for Georgia.

www.gfc.state.ga.us/

ForestMarketing/documents/

BiomassWRACountybyCountyGA05.

pdf

Hawaii Biomass and Bioenergy Resource Assessment: State of 

Hawaii provides an assessment of current and potential 

biomass and bioenergy resources for the state. Includes 

animal wastes, forest products residues, agricultural residues, 

and urban wastes.

www.hawaii.gov/dbedt/info/

energy/publications/biomassassessment.pdf

Mississippi Mississippi Institute for Forest Inventory Dynamic Report 

Generator provides a continuous, statewide forest resource 

inventory necessary for the sustainable forest-based 

economy. The inventory information is derived from 

sampling estimation techniques with a presumed precision of 

+/- 15% sampling error with 95 percent confidence.

www.mifi.ms.gov/

South Carolina Potential for Biomass Energy Development in South Carolina 

quantifies the amount of forestry and agricultural biomass 

available for energy production on a sustainable basis in 

South Carolina. Also includes an analysis of the economic 

impacts of transferring out-of-state costs for coal to in-state 

family forest landowners and biomass processors.

www.scbiomass.org/Publications/

Potential%20Biomass%20

Energy%20in%20SC.pdf

A.3 Assessing Potential Markets for Biomass (cont.)

88 State Bioenergy Primer | Appendix A
Resource Description URL

Oregon Biomass Energy and Biofuels from Oregon’s Forests assesses 

the statewide potential for production of electricity and 

biofuels from woody biomass, including the available 

wood supply and the environmental, energy, forest health, 

and economic effects. Reviews and summarizes efforts 

underway to promote electric energy and biofuels from 

woody biomass, and identifies gaps in existing efforts. 

Assesses constraints and challenges to the development of 

biomass energy and biofuels from Oregon forests, including 

economic, environmental, legal, policy, infrastructure, and 

other barriers and develops recommendations on how to 

overcome these barriers.

www.oregonforests.org/assets/

uploads/Biomass_Full_Report.pdf

Northeastern states (CT, DE, ME, 

MD, MA, NH, NJ, NY, PA, RI, VT)

Securing a Place for Biomass in the Northeast United States: 

A Review of Renewable Energy and Related Policies provides 

a biomass feedstock assessment for northeastern states. 

www.nrbp.org/pdfs/nrbp_final_

report.pdf

Western states (WA, OR, ID, MT, 

WY, CO, NM, AZ, UT, NV, CA, TX, 

OK, ND, SD, NE, KS, AK, HI)

The Western Bioenergy Assessment includes a series of 

technical reports produced for the Western Governors’ 

Association. These reports extensively evaluate biomass 

resources in the western states, biofuel conversion 

technologies, spatial analysis and supply curve development, 

and deployment scenarios and potential policy interactions.

www.westgov.org/wga/initiatives/

transfuels/index.html

Western states (WA, OR, ID, MT, 

WY, CO, NM, AZ, UT, NV, CA, TX, 

OK, ND, SD, NE, KS, AK, HI)

The Western Governors’ Association Transportation Fuels for 

the Future Initiative provides seven working group reports 

and a final report analyzing the potential for the development 

of alternative fuels and vehicle fuel efficiency in the West.

www.westgov.org/wga/initiatives/

transfuels/index.html

Western states (WA, OR, ID, MT, 

WY, CO, NM, AZ, UT, NV, CA, TX, 

ND, SD, NE, KS, AK, HI)

Biomass Task Force Report focuses on the use of biomass 

resources for the production of electricity as part of an overall 

effort of the Western Governors’ Association to increase the 

contribution of clean and renewable energy in the region. 

www.westgov.org/wga/initiatives/

cdeac/Biomass-full.pdf

A.3 Assessing Potential Markets for Biomass (cont.)

 Appendix A | State Bioenergy Primer 89
A.4 Tools to Help Estimate Economic, Energy, and/or Environmental Benefits

Resource Description URL

Tools for Evaluating Benefits

AirCRED, Argonne National 

Laboratory, August 2007.

This tool is used to support local air emission reductions 

claims associated with alternative-fuel vehicles within the 

State Implementation Planning process. 

www.transportation.anl.gov/

modeling_simulation/AirCred/

index.html

Biomass Technology Analysis 

Models and Tools.

Web sites of models and tools that demonstrate biomass 

technologies and uses, and can be used in life-cycle 

assessments. Most tools can be applied on a global, regional, 

local, or project basis.

www.nrel.gov/analysis/analysis_

tools_tech_bio.html

Biomass Feedstock Composition 

and Property Database.

Provides data results from analysis of more than 150 samples 

of potential biofuels feedstocks, including corn stover, wheat 

straw, bagasse, switchgrass and other grasses, and poplars 

and other fast-growing trees.

www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/

feedstock_databases.html

CHP Emissions Calculator, U.S. 

EPA.

Enables a quick and easy analysis of the criteria air pollutant 

and GHG emission reductions from incorporating CHP 

designs into plants and production facilities. It also translates 

these reductions into “cars” and “trees” to convey their value 

to a nontechnical audience.

www.epa.gov/chp/basic/

calculator.html

Clean Air Climate Protection 

Software, ICLEI and NACAA.

Helps local governments create greenhouse gas inventories, 

quantify the benefits of reduction measures, and formulate 

local climate action plans.

www.cacpsoftware.org/

Emissions & Generation 

Resource Integrated Database 

(EGRID), U.S. EPA.

Provides a comprehensive database of electric-sector 

emissions at the plant, state, and regional levels. These 

can be compared to emissions from biopower to estimate 

emissions’ effects. 

www.epa.gov/cleanrgy/egrid/

index.htm

Greenhouse Gases, Regulated 

Emissions, and Energy Use in 

Transportation (GREET) Model, 

Argonne National Laboratory, 

August 2007.

Includes full fuel-cycle and vehicle-cycle emissions and 

energy estimation capability. While not a full life-cycle 

assessment tool, it allows estimation of upstream emissions 

and energy effects. For some state policy questions, it may 

provide sufficient analytic detail on its own. For decisions 

with greater financial implications, it may be most appropriate 

to use for initial screening to support development of a more 

detailed study. States may wish to use GREET directly or to 

consider analyses that have been done using this tool. 

www.transportation.anl.gov/

modeling_simulation/GREET/

Job and Economic Development 

Impact (JEDI) Models.

Easy-to-use, spreadsheet-based tools that analyze the 

economic impacts of constructing and operating power 

generation and biofuel plants at the local and state levels.

www.nrel.gov/analysis/jedi

Power Profiler, U.S. EPA. Provides a quick estimate of electricity emissions rates 

by location, which could be compared to emissions from 

biopower to estimate emissions effects. 

www.epa.gov/grnpower/buygp/

powerprofiler.htm

Standard Biomass Analytical 

Procedures.

Provides tested and accepted methods for performing 

analyses commonly used in biofuels research.

www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/

analytical_procedures.html

Theoretical Ethanol Yield 

Calculator.

Calculates the theoretical ethanol yield of a particular 

biomass feedstock based on its sugar content.

www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/

ethanol_yield_calculator.html

Thermodynamic Data for 

Biomass Conversion and Waste 

Incineration, NREL, National 

Bureau of Standards. 

Provides heat of combustion and other useful data for 

biopower and biofuels research on a wide range of biomass 

and non-biomass materials.

www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/

pdfs/2839.pdf

90 State Bioenergy Primer | Appendix A
A.5 Financing Bioenergy Projects

Resource Description URL

Bioenergy

Capturing the Full Potential of 

Bioenergy: A Model for Regional 

Bioenergy Initiatives, GEN

Publishing, Inc., 2007.

Advances a step-by-step approach for advancing bioenergy. www.liebertonline.com/doi/

abs/10.1089/ind.2007.3.120

Clean Energy-Environment 

Guide to Action: Policies, Best 

Practices, and Action Steps for 

States, U.S. EPA, 2006.

This Web site and guide present 16 policies that states use to 

advance clean energy. 

www.epa.gov/cleanrgy/

stateandlocal/guidetoaction.htm

Clean Energy Lead by Example 

Guide, U.S. EPA, 2009.

Describes proven strategies, resources, and tools to help 

states save money and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 

adopting clean energy practices in their facilities, operations, 

and vehicle fleets.

www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/

documents/epa_lbe.pdf

Database of State Incentives for 

Renewable Energy (DSIRE).

Searchable database of incentives relevant to bioenergy, by 

state. Select a renewable energy search, by technology, for 

biomass, CHP, and/or landfill gas. The database is updated 

routinely.

www.dsireusa.org/

State Policies for Promoting the 

Next Generation of Biomass 

Technologies, Great Plains 

Institute, November 22, 2006.

Summarizes recommendations on state policies to advance 

biomass. 

www.ef.org/documents/BWG_

State_Policy_Menu_Final_v3.pdf

State Incentives and Resources 

Search, U.S. DOE.

This Web page includes state energy information for 

biomass, other renewable energy, and fossil energy.

www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/

about/state_activities/incentive_

search.asp

Developing State Policies 

Supportive of Bioenergy 

Development, Southern States 

Energy Board, 2002.

Analyzes policy options to advance bioenergy, based on 

regional experiences in the Southeast. 

www.osti.gov/bridge/

servlets/purl/828971-Pbx12e/

native/828971.pdf

Environment and Energy Study 

Institute (EESI).

This Web site includes information on bioenergy and federal 

and state incentives.

www.eesi.org/Sustainable_

Biomass_Energy_Program

It All Adds Up to Cleaner 

Air Resources Toolkit, U.S. 

Department of Transportation. 

While not explicitly designed for bioenergy, this step-by-step 

guide to implementing a public outreach program provides 

many tips that would be appropriate to any outreach 

campaign. 

www.italladdsup.gov/tools/

how_to.asp

Southern Forest Research 

Partnership.

Offers numerous publications, presentations, links, images, 

case studies, activities, videos, and other educational tools 

that can be used to share woody biomass information with 

natural resource management and extension professionals as 

well as community planning and development professionals.

www.forestbioenergy.net/

training-materials

State Woody Biomass Utilization 

Policies, University of Minnesota, 

Department of Forest Resources, 

Staff Paper 199. Becker, D.R., and 

C. Lee. 2008. 

A comprehensive database of woody biomass legislation for 

each state in the United States.

www.forestry.umn.edu/

publications/staffpapers/

Staffpaper199.pdf

 Appendix A | State Bioenergy Primer 91
Resource Description URL

Biopower/Bioheat

Green-e Certification Process. A voluntary market for renewable energy certificates exists, 

and some kinds of biopower generation are eligible for 

Green-e certification. Eligible sources must go through the 

certification process to be able to sell certified products.

www.green-e.org/docs/

Appendix_D-Green-e_National_

Standard.pdf

and www.green-e.org/getcert_

re_6steps.shtml#rec

State Energy Program. This collaboration of DOE and the states provides joint 

funding for state formula grant projects and local energy 

efficiency and renewable energy projects.

http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/

state_energy_program/

State Technologies Advancement 

Collaborative Program, U.S. 

DOE, National Association of 

State Energy Officials, Association 

of State Energy Research and 

Technology Transfer Institutions.

This collaboration provides funding for state energy 

efficiency and renewable energy projects.

www.stacenergy.org

Biofuels/Bioproducts

Alternative Fuels Data Center: 

All State Incentives and Laws, 

U.S. DOE, NREL.

The data center is a comprehensive clearinghouse of data, 

publications, tools, and information related to advanced 

transportation technologies.

www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/data/

methodology.html

Funding Database – Biomass/

Biogas, U.S. EPA.

This database of financial and regulatory incentives at the 

state level is updated monthly.

www.epa.gov/chp/funding/bio.

html

Understanding and Informing 

the Policy Environment: 

State-Level Renewable Fuels 

Standards, NREL, January 2007.

Summary and analysis of state actions on renewable fuels 

standards. 

www.nrel.gov/docs/

fy07osti/41075.pdf

Funding Landfill Gas Energy 

Projects: State, Federal, and 

Foundation Resources, U.S. EPA.

This guide from the Landfill Methane Outreach Program 

details potential sources of funding for landfill gas projects.

www.epa.gov/lmop/res/guide/

index.htm

State Examples

Arkansas State-Specific Financing Information http://arkansasenergy.org/solarwind-bioenergy/bioenergy.aspx

Florida State-Specific Financing Information www.floridafarmtofuel.com/

Downloads/FTF%20Grant%20

Agreement%20Contract%20

092507.pdf

Michigan State-Specific Financing Information http://michigan.gov/documents/

cis/CIS_EO_Funding_

Opportunities_192768_7.pdf

Montana State-Specific Financing Information www.deq.state.mt.us/Energy/

bioenergy/Biodiesel_Production_

Educ_Presentations/Combined_

Biodiesel_Ethanol_Govt_Incentives_

Montana_Jan07_bshh.pdf

Washington State-Specific Financing Information http://agr.wa.gov/Bioenergy/

A.5 Financing Bioenergy Projects (cont.)

92 State Bioenergy Primer | Appendix A
Appendix B

Glossary

 Appendix B | State Bioenergy Primer 93

A

■ agricultural residue: Plant parts, primarily stalks and 

leaves, not removed from fields with the primary food 

or fiber product. Examples include corn stover (stalks, 

leaves, husks, and cobs), wheat straw, and rice straw. 

■ algae: Simple photosynthetic plants containing chlorophyll, often fast growing and able to live in freshwater, 

seawater, or damp oils. May be unicellular and microscopic or very large, as in the giant kelps.

■ anaerobic: Living or active in an airless environment.

■ anaerobic digestion: Degradation of organic matter by 

microbes in the absence of oxygen to produce methane 

and CO2

.

B

■ benzene: Aromatic component of gasoline that is a 

known cancer-causing agent.

■ biodiesel: Biodegradable transportation fuel used in 

diesel engines. Biodiesel is produced through transesterification of organically derived oils and fats. It may 

be used either as a replacement for or component of 

diesel fuel.

■ bioenergy: Renewable energy produced from biomass.

■ biofuels: Fuels for transportation made from biomass 

or its derivatives after processing. The major biofuels 

include ethanol and biodiesel.

■ biogas: Gaseous mixture of CO2

 and methane produced by anaerobic digestion of organic matter.

■ biomass: Any plant-derived organic matter. Biomass 

available for energy on a sustainable basis includes herbaceous and woody energy crops, agricultural food and 

feed crops, agricultural crop wastes and residues, wood 

wastes and residues, aquatic plants, and other waste 

materials, including some municipal wastes. 

■ biopower: Use of biomass to produce electricity 

and heat. 

■ bioproducts: Commercial or industrial products 

(other than food or feed) that are composed in whole 

or significant part of biomass. 

C

■ carbohydrate: Organic compounds made up of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen and having approximately 

the formula (CH2

O)n; includes cellulosics, starches, and 

sugars. 

■ carbon dioxide: (CO2

) Naturally occurring gas, and 

also a by-product of burning fossil fuels and biomass, 

as well as land use changes and other industrial processes. It is the principal anthropogenic GHG that 

affects the earth’s radiative balance. 

■ carbon monoxide: (CO) Colorless, odorless, poisonous gas produced by incomplete combustion.

■ catalyst: Substance that increases the rate of a chemical 

reaction without being consumed or produced by the 

reaction. Enzymes are catalysts for many biochemical 

reactions.

■ cellulase: Family of enzymes that break down cellulose 

into glucose molecules.
■ cellulose: Carbohydrate that is the principal constituent of wood and other biomass and forms the structural framework of the wood cells. 

■ chips: Small fragments of wood chopped or broken by 

mechanical equipment. Total tree chips include wood, 

bark, and foliage. Pulp chips or clean chips are free of 

bark and foliage.

■ cofiring: Use of a mixture of two fuels within the same 

combustion chamber.

■ cogeneration: Technology of producing electric energy 

and another form of useful energy (usually thermal) for 

industrial, commercial, or domestic heating or cooling 

purposes through sequential use of the energy source. 

Also called combined heat and power (CHP).

■ combustion: Chemical reaction between a fuel and 

oxygen that produces heat (and usually light).

■ coproducts: Resulting substances and materials that 

accompany production of a fuel product such as 

ethanol.

■ corn stover: Refuse of a corn crop after the grain 

is harvested.

■ criteria pollutants: Pollutants regulated under the 

federal NAAQS, which were established under the 

Clean Air Act. Criteria pollutants include CO, lead, 

nitrogen dioxide, PM (PM2.5, PM10), ground-level 

ozone, and SO2

.

D

■ digester: Biochemical reactor in which anaerobic bacteria are used to decompose biomass or organic wastes 

into methane and CO2

.

E

■ E10: Mixture of 10 percent ethanol and 90 percent 

gasoline based on volume.

■ E85: Mixture of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent 

gasoline based on volume.

■ effluent: Liquid or gas discharged after processing activities, usually containing residues from such use. Also 

discharge from a chemical reactor.

■ energy crop: Crop grown specifically for its fuel value. 

These include food crops such as corn and sugar 

cane, and nonfood crops such as poplar trees and 

switchgrass.

■ enzyme: Protein or protein-based molecule that speeds 

up chemical reactions in living things. Enzymes act as 

catalysts for a single reaction, converting a specific set 

of reactants into specific products.

■ ester: Compound formed from the reaction between 

an acid and an alcohol. 

■ ethanol: (CH3

CH2OH) A colorless, flammable liquid 

produced by fermentation of sugars. Ethanol is used as 

a fuel oxygenate. Ethanol is the alcohol found in alcoholic beverages, but is denatured for fuel use.

■ eutrophic conditions: In surface waters, conditions 

such as significant algae growth and subsequent oxygen depletion, which can be caused by excessive nutrients from fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides. Some 

aquatic species cannot survive eutrophic conditions.

F

■ feedstock: Any material used as a fuel directly or converted to another form of fuel or energy product.

■ fermentation: Biochemical reaction that breaks down 

complex organic molecules (such as carbohydrates) 

into simpler materials (such as ethanol, CO2, and water). Bacteria or yeasts can ferment sugars to ethanol.

■ fluidized bed: Gasifier or combustor design in which 

feedstock particles are kept in suspension by a bed of 

solids kept in motion by a rising column of gas. The 

fluidized bed produces approximately isothermal conditions with high heat transfer between the particles 

and gases.

■ forestry residues: Includes tops, limbs, and other 

woody material not removed in forest harvesting 

operations in commercial hardwood and softwood 

stands, as well as woody material resulting from forest 

management such as precommercial thinnings and 

removal of dead and dying trees.

■ fossil fuel: Carbon or hydrocarbon fuel formed in 

the ground over millions of years from the remains of 

dead plants and animals. Oil, natural gas, and coal are 

fossil fuels. 

G

■ gasification: Any chemical or heat process used to 

convert a feedstock to a gaseous fuel.

■ greenhouse gas: Gas—such as water vapor, CO2

, tropospheric ozone, methane, and low-level ozone—that 

contributes to the greenhouse effect.

94 State Bioenergy Primer | Appendix B
H

■ hemicellulose: Hemicellulose consists of short, highly 

branched chains of sugars. In contrast to cellulose, 

which is a polymer of only glucose, a hemicellulose is a 

polymer of five different sugars. 

■ herbaceous plants: Non-woody species of vegetation, 

usually of low lignin content, such as grasses.

■ herbaceous energy crops: Perennial non-woody crops 

that are harvested annually, though they may take 

two to three years to reach full productivity. Examples 

include switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), reed canary 

grass (Phalaris arundinacea), miscanthus (Miscanthus x 

giganteus), and giant reed (Arundo donax).

■ hydrolysis: Conversion, by reaction with water, of a 

complex substance into two or more smaller units, 

such as conversion of cellulose into glucose sugar units.

I

K

L

■ landfill gas: Biogas produced from natural degradation of organic material in landfills. By volume, LFG 

is about 50 percent methane and 50 percent CO2

 and 

water vapor.

■ life-cycle analysis: Assessment of the impacts 

from all stages of a product’s development, from 

extraction of fuel for power to production, marketing, 

use, and disposal.

■ lignin: Structural constituent of wood and other native 

plant material that encrusts the cell walls and cements 

the cells together. 

■ lignocellulose: Plant materials made up primarily of 

lignin, cellulose, and hemicellulose.

M

■ methane: (CH4

) The major component of natural gas. 

It can be formed by anaerobic digestion of biomass or 

gasification of coal or biomass.

■ methanol (wood alcohol): (CH3

OH) Alcohol 

formed by catalytically combining carbon monoxide 

with hydrogen in a 1:2 ratio under high temperature 

and pressure. 

■ microorganism: Any microscopic organism such as 

yeast, bacteria, fungi, etc.

■ municipal solid waste: Any organic matter, including 

sewage, industrial, and commercial wastes, from municipal waste collection systems. Municipal waste does 

not include agricultural and wood wastes or residues.

N

■ net energy balance: Total amount of energy used over 

the full life cycle of a fuel, from feedstock production 

to end use.

■ nitrogen oxides: (NOX) Product of photochemical 

reactions of nitric oxide in ambient air, and the major 

component of photochemical smog.

■ nonrenewable resource: One that cannot be 

replaced as it is used. Although fossil fuels, such as 

coal and oil, are in fact fossilized biomass resources, 

they form at such a slow rate that, in practice, they 

are nonrenewable.

O

■ opportunity fuels: Biomass feedstocks derived from 

waste materials that would otherwise go unused or 

would be disposed of. Bioenergy production provides 

an opportunity to productively use these materials.

■ oxygenate: Compound that contains oxygen in its 

molecular structure. Ethanol and biodiesel act as oxygenates when they are blended with conventional fuels. 

Oxygenated fuel improves combustion efficiency and 

reduces tailpipe emissions of CO.

P

■ particulates: Fine liquid or solid particle, such as dust, 

smoke, mist, fumes, or smog, found in air or emissions.

■ petroleum: Any substance composed of a complex 

blend of hydrocarbons derived from crude oil, including motor fuel, jet oil, lubricants, petroleum solvents, 

and used oil.

■ pyrolysis: Breaking apart of complex molecules by 

heating in the absence of oxygen, producing solid, 

liquid, and gaseous fuels.

 Appendix B | State Bioenergy Primer 95
R

■ renewable energy resource: Energy resources that can 

be replaced as they are used, including solar, wind, geothermal, hydro, and biomass. MSW is also considered a 

renewable energy resource.

■ residues, biomass: By-products from processing 

all forms of biomass that have significant energy 

potential. For example, making solid wood products 

and pulp from logs produces bark, shavings, sawdust, 

and spent pulping liquors. Because these residues are 

already collected at the point of processing, they can 

be convenient and relatively inexpensive sources of 

biomass for energy.

S

■ silviculture: Science and practice of growing trees for 

human use.

■ stover: Dried stalks and leaves of a crop remaining 

after the grain has been harvested.

■ syngas: Synthesis gas produced by the gasification 

process using biomass feedstock. Syngas can be burned 

in a boiler or engine to produce electricity or heat, and 

can be used to produce a liquid for biofuels production.

T

■ tar: Liquid product of thermal processing of carbonaceous materials.

■ thermochemical conversion: Use of heat to change 

substances chemically to produce energy products.

■ transesterification: Chemical process that reacts an 

alcohol with triglycerides contained in vegetable oils 

and animal fats to produce biodiesel and glycerin.

U

V

■ volatile: Solid or liquid material that easily vaporizes.

W

X

■ xylose: (C5

H10O5) Five-carbon sugar that is a product 

of hydrolysis of xylan found in the hemicellulose fraction of biomass.

96 State Bioenergy Primer | Appendix B

z

■ zero net contribution: Refers to a process that results 

in contribution of no additional carbon emissions to the 

atmosphere. For example, combustion of biomass feedstocks returns the same amount of CO2

 to the atmosphere that was absorbed during growth of the biomass, 

resulting in no additional CO2 released into the air.

Source: Adapted from National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) Glossary of Biomass Terms, www.nrel.gov/biomass/glossary.html

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Atmospheric Programs

Climate Protection Partnerships Division

1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW (6202J)

Washington, DC 20460

www.epa.gov

EPA 430-R-09-024

NREL/TP-6A2-44688

September 2009