Environmentalists in California are raising concerns over the removal and burning of dead trees from fire-ravaged forests, arguing that current biomass practices may cause more harm than good. The dead trees, known as “snags,” left standing after wildfires like the 2020 Castle fire, have become a focal point of debate surrounding forest management and renewable energy policies.

Under U.S. Forest Service contracts, large areas of dead trees in the Sequoia National Forest are being cleared to reduce the risk of future wildfires and facilitate replanting efforts. However, groups such as Sequoia ForestKeeper contend that this approach harms forest ecosystems by destroying habitat essential to endangered species, including the California spotted owl, the Southern Sierra Nevada fisher, and the California condor. The organization filed a federal lawsuit in September seeking to halt logging operations on these grounds.

Environmental advocate and Sequoia ForestKeeper member Khosla has been investigating the fate of these trees. Following trucks transporting wood chips made from burned trees from the forest to processing sites near McFarland, California, she aimed to uncover how these materials are used. Despite preliminary indications that the chips were sold for landscaping, questions remain about the scale and ultimate purpose of the wood products.

Biomass fuel, which includes materials like orchard cuttings and construction waste, gained prominence in California since the 1970s as a purportedly renewable energy source. At its peak in the 1980s, biomass plants supplied roughly 9% of the state’s electricity. However, competition from wind and solar power, loss of subsidies, and public opposition have led to a significant decline in the industry, with only about 20 plants remaining operational today.

Khosla’s investigation revealed one unexpected use: a facility operated by BioFiltro, a company specializing in wastewater treatment through the use of worms in beds of wood chips to filter dairy farm effluent. This process recycles water and converts the wood chips into soil amendments, representing a potential ecological benefit distinct from combustion-based biomass energy.

Further tracing of shipments showed some wood chips were transported to Nevada, possibly linked to biomass or composite product facilities, though verification proved inconclusive. Khosla also found evidence that one of the local biomass plants, Mt. Poso Cogeneration Co., while currently inactive, remains maintained under new ownership. The company, California Resources Corp., presents itself as focusing on carbon management and emissions reduction but did not provide comment.

The future of biomass energy in California is poised for change following the September signing of Assembly Bill 706 by Governor Gavin Newsom. The legislation establishes incentive rates for electricity generated from forest biomass waste, aiming to support and potentially expand biomass power generation. This move has been met with concern from environmental groups skeptical of the industry’s environmental claims.

While Khosla’s effort to follow a tree’s path from forest to energy production or product use has yet to yield definitive conclusions, her findings illustrate the complex intersection of forest ecology, renewable energy policy, and industry practices. The controversy underscores ongoing tensions over how best to manage fire-damaged landscapes and balance ecological preservation with renewable energy goals.