Availability Is Not the Same as Abundance

Many early biochar project concepts start with a simple assumption. Biomass exists. Therefore feedstock exists. Field experience shows a different reality. Abundant biomass in a region does not mean a biochar facility will secure a stable and affordable supply.

Bangun Adi Wijaya, a consultant working on biochar and bioenergy projects in tropical regions, recently shared practical observations from feasibility studies for carbon credit projects. His reflections highlight a problem many developers face once they move from desktop analysis to site visits. Biomass looks plentiful in theory. The supply chain proves far more complex in practice.

Three factors often determine whether a biochar project can operate reliably. Access. Price. Seasonality.

Access determines whether biomass can physically reach the facility. Residues may exist across plantations, processing facilities, or dispersed across fields. Satellite images and crop statistics rarely show this detail. A common mistake during feasibility studies is estimating plant capacity based on cultivated area rather than on the actual points where residues accumulate and can be collected. Logistics quickly become the limiting factor. Transport distance, storage conditions, and handling costs often decide whether feedstock is usable at scale.

Price introduces a second layer of complexity. Small differences in biomass price can alter the financial viability of a project. Even a difference of ten cents per unit of feedstock can shift the economics of a carbon removal project. Carbon methodologies also add constraints. Some verification approaches require proof that feedstock procurement does not create incentives for additional biomass production. Developers therefore need careful engagement with suppliers during early discussions. Expectations around demand can quickly change local pricing behavior.

Seasonality often becomes the third constraint. Agricultural residues rarely arrive evenly across the year. Harvest cycles concentrate biomass in specific months. Biochar facilities, however, operate best under stable production conditions. Projects must therefore design strategies to balance seasonal supply. Common approaches include mixing different feedstocks, coordinating supply across regions with different harvest periods, or building storage capacity for stockpiling.

These operational realities highlight an important point for project developers. Feedstock analysis cannot rely solely on theoretical biomass potential. Reliable projects require careful mapping of the supply chain. Where residues accumulate. Who controls them. How they move. When they appear during the year.

The gap between biomass potential and usable feedstock explains why many early biochar concepts struggle during feasibility assessments. Technology selection, carbon methodology, and financing often receive significant attention. Feedstock logistics receives less attention until late in project development. By then, correcting assumptions can become expensive.

These insights from field experience also raise a broader question for the biochar sector.

When assessing project feasibility, how often do we start from theoretical biomass availability rather than from the actual logistics of collecting, storing, and transporting residues?

And in your region, how well do feasibility studies account for the seasonal and economic realities of feedstock supply?

Source: Bangun Adi Wijaya, LinkedIn