Biomass Carbon Lifecycle Calculator

Because they represent the same carbon. The CO2 released when a ton of biomass burns is, by design, modeled as exactly the CO2 its source plants absorbed from the atmosphere while growing -- that is what "biogenic carbon" means. This calculator sets the combustion and sequestration factors equal per fuel type so that biogenic exchange nets to zero, leaving transport and processing emissions as the only things that separate one scenario from another.

No. Since combustion and sequestered CO2 are modeled as equal and cancel out, net CO2 reduces to transport plus processing emissions, both of which are non-negative fossil-fuel terms. A true carbon-negative fuel cycle would require an active carbon-removal step, such as converting some of the biomass to biochar and burying it, which this calculator does not model -- it only tracks combustion, hauling, and preparation of fuel that gets burned.

Cordwood needs only harvesting and splitting before it can be burned, while wood pellets require industrial drying and pelletizing -- energy-intensive steps that typically run on grid electricity or fossil fuel, adding real emissions cordwood doesn't incur. This calculator reflects that with a higher processing factor for pellets, consistent with published lifecycle assessments that generally rank pellets above cordwood on total supply-chain emissions despite both having the same biogenic combustion/sequestration balance.

Combustion CO2 depends only on how much fuel you burn and its combustion factor; sequestered CO2 depends only on how much fuel you burn and its sequestration factor. Processing CO2 likewise depends only on tonnage and fuel type. None of those three formulas includes transport distance -- transport emissions are calculated and added as a completely separate term, reflecting that hauling the fuel is a distinct emissions source from burning, preparing, or growing it.