Several corporations, including major technology firms like Microsoft, are investing significantly in Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS). However, certain concerns regarding this technology have been highlighted, echoing other issues seen in similar climate strategies such as carbon offsets and alternative jet fuels.
A primary challenge of BECCS relates to its carbon accounting. Focusing on trees as a biomass source, it is understood that as trees grow, they absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. When harvested for products like paper, the remaining biomass can be burned for energy. This process is theoretically carbon neutral, as the burning emissions are offset by the carbon absorbed during the trees’ growth, provided the trees are replanted after harvesting.
Introducing carbon-scrubbing technology at facilities burning biomass enhances this process, theoretically making it carbon negative by removing net emissions from the atmosphere. However, discrepancies arise in the calculations. The model does not account for emissions that occur during the harvesting, transportation, and processing of wood. Additionally, the need to clear land for planting trees or crops may result in further emissions.
These challenges in carbon math are not unique to BECCS. Previous investigations into carbon offsets have shown that some programs intended to mitigate emissions can inadvertently increase carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.
An advantage of BECCS is that it can be integrated into existing facilities with relative ease. This minimizes construction requirements compared to technologies that directly capture atmospheric carbon, potentially lowering overall costs. This cost-effectiveness is one reason BECCS is currently considered cheaper than direct air capture methods and various other carbon removal technologies.
Source: https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/10/16/1125794/carbon-removal-beccs-problems/