Wood pellets (for fuel)

Click here for charts illustrating each EU member state's monthly imports and exports of wood pellets.
Click here for a related commentary on EU member states' trade in wood pellets.
Click here for a summary of the share price performance of Drax and Enviva Biomass.

Click here for charts which illustrate trade in methane

Global production, imports and exports
Sources based on:  [Production] FAOSTAT;  [Imports and Exports] official national statistics and UN Comtrade (footnote 2)
Three countries and the EU account for almost all imports, three countries outside the EU supplied almost all those (2023) imports. Three countries and the EU produced a large majority of the 2023 world total - and exported almost all their production.  The market is clearly geographically narrow.  It is also dependent on a single sector - except in Japan, a small number of power stations (typically large and formerly coal-fired) burn imported wood pellets to generate subsidies. Data for 2024 suggest that the market has  peaked - even in Japan.  Industrial markets - which would not be subsidised - are unlikely to convert from fossil fuel to wood pellets, or to use pellets as a raw material for chemicals.  Others take a different view - for example here (page 11).
  Enviva's bankruptcy demonstrates how risky investment in production is.  With costs rising and the industry's claims to be a climate panacea increasingly recognised as bogus, including within government, Enviva's rebirth may be short-lived.

Exporting countries' exports by destination  (Based on various official sources [Footnote 2])

Importing countries' imports  (Based on various official sources [Footnote 2])

Drax' biomass feedstock 
Source: based on Drax plc Annual Reports (various years).  5.8 million tonnes of imported wood pellets burned at Drax during 2023
Note 1: "low grade roundwood" may be a euphemism for logs from  trees of no commercial interest to sawmills, perhaps deriving from clear felling (self-evidently unsustainable).  This proportion supplied under this category is increasing.
Note 2: "sawdust and saw mill residues" might include roundwood delivered to a sawmill which the mill does not transform. Sawmilling and related clear felling and thinning would be less commercially viable if pellet mills do not procure this category of feedstock. The carbon emissions associated with this should be attributed to the pellets, pro rata, based on weight of sawmill output (not commecial value).

 
Wood pellets supplied by Drax companies versus what is burned at Drax
Source: based on Drax plc Annual Reports (various years).
Time lags aside, between 2013 and 2022, the weight burned at Drax has matched the weight which Canada's export statistics indicate were exported to the UK from British Columbia (the province from which Drax' supplies to markets world-side are likely to derive). In 2023 those exports from British Columbia amount to roughly half the amount from Canada burned at Drax.  Drax suggest that the proportion of its pellet production for world-wide markets burned at Drax is small enough to justify accounting for those burned at Drax at the market price - not cost.  This would tend to minimise taxable profit and help increase the CfDe strike price it secures if, perhaps contary to publiuc interest, Drax' business continues "come what may". The UK government has offered Drax a CfD, within constraints (below full capacity), to support the burning of imported wood pellets at Drax power station from (aptly) April Fool's Day 2027 to 31 03 2031

 
CfD-subsidised power generation at times of great national need
Source: based on  Low Carbon Conracts Company.(to end 04 2025)
Rather than address national need, CfD contracts negotiated with large generators for burning wood allowed and implicitly encouraged those generators to cease using their CfD-subsidised units, maximise their returns instead.  Is their heart really in decarbonisation of the UK power grid and the climate emergency?  Does it jeopardise their proposals to capture post-combustion CO2?

Contracts for Difference payments to each sector (Based on Low carbon Contracts Company)

UK imports of pellets compared with UK electricity prices
Source: [imports] based on Eurostat and UK Trade Info (to June 2024);   Drax annual reports;
[electricity prices] Low Carbon Contracts Company (from 31 07 2016) Electric Insights Q1 2024 (01 01 2010 to 31 03 2024)
Weak regulation of CfD subsidies? Pellet burners (and, if incentivised by remuneration strategy, senior executives) profiting by generating less when prices are high - thereby worsening price spikes for electricity (and, in turn, methane), prompting reduced heat and power use by the poor?  Almost all burned at Drax and EPH Lynemouth to generate subsidies & to pretend zero CO2 emissions?  Does this indicate that their owners are of insufficient character to partner with the UK in Net Zero?

UK imports of pellets from USA, weight by port and unit import value
Source: based on UK Trade Info  (up to 30 04 2025)
Import value per unit of weight will vary with the mix of long-term, contracted supplies and purchases (some speculative) on the spot market (spot prices rose steeply during autumn 2022). 
The increase in imports reflects MGT Teesside starting to generate electricity and the restart of CfD-subsidised generating units at Drax and Lynemouth (whose operation was curtailed for prolonged periods of peak demand between 2022 and 2023).
The port of Tyne supplies up to 100% of the wood pellets which EPH Lynemouth burns - to generate subsidies -  perhaps 30,000 tonnes per week  or 1.4 million tonnes per year (from 2018) 

Unit value of pellets exported from USA during spot market hiatus
Source: based on USITC Trade DataWeb successive 12-monthy periods - 2021 to 30 04 2025
"Energy security" would tend to have deteriorated due to the hiatus in spot market prices and corresponding subsidy payments.  The hiatus may have also revealed the fragility of the market and corporate behaviour - as Enviva admits in its Q3 2023 report, pellet trade contracts made at that time might contribute to its bankruptcy.  The trend shown in the chart is upwards, jeopardising prospects for continuted subsidy. Cost cutting will tend to further erode the false veneer that regional certification confirms sustainability and that, crucially, burning woody biomass is carbon neutral.  UK Contracts for Difference purportedly seek long-term decreases in price of energy delivered - yet they seem to have risen 30% (reflecting the increase in unit export value from $140 to $180 per tonne). 

USA's exports - by customs district (to 31 05 2025)
Source: based on USITC Trade Dataweb (code 440131) and Drax plc publications. 
Exports to all major markets except UK in decline?  UK will peak soon, once all units of Drax, Lynemouth and MGT Teesside are operating at high load factors again.  "Peak pellets?"
The 2022-2023 decline in exports to the UK reflects a loophole in CfD subsidies.  Instead of dispatching electricity to help overcome shortages of methane ("natural gas") and thereby minimise acute hardship amongst people unable to pay a surge in prices for gas and electricity, the two biomass burning power stations did not operate their CfD-subsidised generating units when market prices exceeded the strike price (obliging their owners to pay government the excess revenue the owners received).  One customer - Drax - in one country - UK - has burned most of the USA's exports of wood pellets (and, despite a decade or so since conversion, still heavily dependent on subsidies).  Exports to Netherlands are rising (subsidies having become available) but are flat to Belgium and Denmark (reflecting capacity and subsidy policy);  Exports to Japan are increasing rapidly - Japan copying ill-motivated UK and EU subsidy policy.  Drax' fourth & final unit started operating in 2018; EPH Lynemouth operating since 2019 (like Drax, power only & <40% efficient).
The UK government's adviser - the Climate Change Committee [page 14] - highlights that subsidies for unabated use of biomass as fuel in large-scale power stations should not continue after they expire (- 2027 for three of the four Drax units). During 2022, roughly 40% of the pellets burned by those four units were supplied by Drax Group enterprises.  Most of the remainder will have derived from Enviva (whose share price has, for unfavourable reasons, greatly declined during the last year or so).  The customs district of Charlotte became the customs district of Wilmington from 01 2025.
A "regional risk assessment" of land-use in private forests covering states in (southastern) USA was published during 2025.  This (and relaxation of refulations covering US National Forest) would have potential to influence the certification scheme which seems to serve as the de facto threshold for UK government subsidy.  To be more than box-ticking exercises, it and other assessments and public consultations should presumably actively seek and take fully into account input from local stakeholders and civil society groups.  There is concern about the management of forest tracts from which feedstock for certified pellets derive.  A class action law suit is being prepared in response to air quality violations in the vicinity of a pellet mill.  Although many such violations have been reported for pellet mills in both Canada and USA, these do not seem to be reflected in subsidy eligibility criteria.   

Exports of pellets from the USA - customs distrtict by destination
Source: based on USITC Trade DataWeb successive 12-monthy periods - 2021 to 31 05 2025
 Rate of clear-felling (/ loss of sequestered carbon) rising fastest in Alabama & Georgia?
Enviva (Southampton, VA) problems?  Exports to leading markets in Europe declining. 
Who is burning US pellets in "France"?  "GMR" refers to Guadeloupe, Martinique and Reunion (French territories).  Albioma burns wood pellets in those territories.

Canada's exports  (to 31 05 2025)
Source: based on Statistics Canada (code 440131) (April and May 2024 exports to UK from BC identical - an error?)
Continued decline in exports from BC - is the end nigh (for Drax and Japan)?
The triumph of ambition (remuneration incentives and the need to convey the appearance of momentum) over due diligence in Drax' acquisition of Pinnacle and subsequent expansion in BC? The steep decline in exports from BC to UK reflects greater profit available to Drax under its contracts with markets in Japan, than supplying Drax power station from BC.  This suggests that Drax (which dominates pellets supply in BC) has a substantial competitive advantage over Enviva in supplying those markets.  Drax supplied - to countries other than the UK - almost 1.5 million tonnes of pellets from Canada.  Increasing costs due to wildfire (in part a consequence of the unsustainability of supposedly sustainable forest management practices) threaten long-trerm exports from British Columbia.

 

Canada's exports of sawnwood of coniferous species  (to 30 04 2025)
Source: based on Statistics Canada (code 4407.1x.xx)
This chart illustrates the decline in availability of sawmilling residues (30% since Drax acquired Pinnacle (04 2021).  Such residues are said to be the predominant raw material in the pellets which Drax exports from British Columbia.  The pellet industry helps sustain the commercial viability of sawmilling industries (implicitly compounding forest-degradationa and foregone sequestration).

 

Canada's exports of pellets to the UK, by province  (to 31 03 2025)
Source: based on Statistics Canada (code 4401.31)
Grand Valley Pellets is a leading producer of pellets in New Brunswick;  its feedstock is from JD Irving sawmills;  it is represented on the Standards Committee of the Sustainable Biomass Program.

EU-27 imports of pellets (& other HS4401 customs code products) (to 28 02 2025)
Source (based on): Eurostat
Bans against imports from Russia and Belarus helped reduce the impact of EU27 consumption outside the EU.  EU27 pellet imports are now largely dependent on contested imports from USA, notably Enviva (about which, post-bankruptcy, there is a lack of market information).
 

Japan's monthly imports
Source: based on Trade Statistics of Japan (code 44013100)  [01 01 2016 to 31 05 2025]
Supplies from Canada, increasingly troubled, are declining, as are those from USA

 

Republic of Korea's imports
Source: based on Korea Customs Service (code 440131) - to 31 05 2025
Note step-change increase in imports from Russia and flat current overall trend (which may significantly dampen enthusiasm for pellet-fuelled energy in the global market).
Korea is a world leader in deciding to reduce support for use of wood as power station fuel.

Republic of Korea's imports  (- import value per unit of weight)
Source: based on Korea Customs Service (code 440131) - to 31 05 2025
Note large price premium for pellets from Canada.

 

Taiwan's imports  (- import value per unit of weight)
Source: based on CPT Single Window - Statistics Database Query (code 440131) - to 30 03 2025
Interest has slumped, despite efforts by leading pellet suppliers.  The import value per unit of weight of German pellets greatly exceeds that of pellets from Asia - perhaps reflecting a need for quaity.


EU-27 pellet production Source: based on FAOSTAT
The chart above ilustrates that production in the EU has peaked (implying an insufficiency of viable woodland).



EU-27 - pellet consumption Source: based on FAOSTAT (production) and Eurostat (trade)
The FAO has provided estimates for a number of (typically recent) years' production in several EU member states.
Strong increase in use of pellets within most EU member states - primarily for heat.  Latvia and Spain each accounted for roughly 20% of "Other EU-27" in 2022 and 2023. 


 
Estonia's exports of pellets, wood fuel, chips and wood residues
Source: based on Eurostat (CN8, monthly, codes 440131, 44011*, 44012*, other 4401*) to 31 03 2025
Remarks:  Ørsted's Asnæs CHP station started burning chips during 2020

 

Latvia's exports of pellets, wood fuel, chips and wood residues
Source: based on Eurostat (CN8, monthly, codes 440131, 44011*, 44012*, other 4401*) to 31 03 2025

 

Denmark's exports of pellets, wood fuel, chips and wood residues
Source: based on Eurostat (CN8, monthly, codes 440131, 44011*, 44012*, other 4401*) to 31 03 2025
Remarks: the great majority of the pellets reported as exports by Denmark are probably re-exports, not least because the leading destination countries for those pellets report negligble quantities of pellets as imports from Denmark.

Wood pellets
One of the EU's leading suppliers of wood pellets has recently been declared bankrupt and there are allegations that its interests in pellet manufacturing in the USA were fraudulent.[-]  The group's bankruptcy jeopardised proposals to convert the Langerloo power station (in Belgium) to use biomass fuel (which has now ceased burning coal[-] until that power station was acquired by Graanul Invest (based in Estonia), which claims to be the biggest producer of wood pellets in Europe.[-]  There is little public information about the ownership and financing of the group.  The group indicates that its pellets derive from the by-products of saw mills in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.[-]

The discrepancy between the weight of pellets exported to the UK from Latvia and the weight of pellets imported by the UK from Latvia is sufficiently large and persistent to warrant explanation by Drax and the SBP (which, being largely controlled by Drax and major electricity generating companies, has a clear conflict of interest as a scheme which certifies its owners supplies of pellets). The discrepancy also warrants liason between the customs services of Latvia and the UK, and their compatriots in Competent Authorities under the EU's "Timber Regulation" (given that fraud might be a leading explanation). None of the Baltic States imports substantial quantities of wood pellets from Russia and/or Belarus.

One of the power stations which have been awarded large subsidies from the UK government[Slide 6] has yet to be built.  Its main contractor[-][-] is currently subject to bankruptcy proceedings[-] This will presumably delay[-] not only the project's financial close[-][-], but also the commencement of construction (now expected Q2 2017[-]).  The contractor's bankruptcy would have jeopardises the proposed construction of a 215MW power station in Belgium, but a replacement contractor has been appointed.[-][-].

The sole supplier of wood pellets to that power station[search term MGT] would seem to be linked to an enterprise against which a formal complaint has been made to the USA's Securities and Exchange Commission[-].  That complaint alleges misrepresentation of evidence provided to investors.

According to a statement by its developer, greenhouse gas emissions of the Teesside power station are capped at a level roughly five times less than those of a coal-fired power station of the same capacity.  This is so unlikely that investors and officials should question why that statement has been made.  Given that the power station's fuel, wood (in the form of pellets and/or chips) emits at least as much CO2 on combustion as coal per unit of calorific value, such a cap on its emissions would implicitly cap the power station's output, in turn capping the power station's potential revenue to roughly five times less than if it were coal-fired.

The developer also states that the power station will save a substantial quantity of CO2 during its life,[-] as does its financial adivser[footnote ii].  However, power stations do not sequester CO2 and sustaining cheap electricity supplies tends to promote consumption (- typically and for the time being, of products having a signigificant greenhouse gas footprint).  Further, as is the convention amongst those who promote the generation of electricity from biomass, that purported saving assumes that biomass burned in power stations does not emit CO2.

The requirement that its wood fuel will derive from sources which are sustainably managed will severely constrain the supply of that fuel.  Very little woodland in south eastern USA is certified as being sustainably managed.  Given that the structure of woodland ownership is highly fragmented and given that owners are subject to minimal regulation - particularly in relation to sustaining the nature of that land - there is little assurance that certified woodland will remain eligible (and there is a risk that if that woodland is not already a plantation, it will be cleared in order to become one, fundamentally changing the nature of that land).

 

 

Suggested reading:
"Burning wood from Southern US forests to generate electricity in Europe"
(letter from US Scientists to the EC 08 2013)

"Forest Bionergy for Europe - What science can tell us" EFI (2014)

"Review of literature on biogenic carbon and life cycle assessment of forest bioenergy" Forest research (05 2014)

"State of play on the sustainability of solid and gaseous biomass used for electricity, heating and cooling in the EU" EC (2014)

"Carbon Emissions and Climate Change Disclosure by the Wood Pellet Industry – A Report to the SEC on Enviva Partners LP" Partnership for Policy Integrity and Dogwood Alliance (03 2016)

"Woody Biomass for Power and Heat: Impacts on the Global Climate" D Brack for Chatham House (02 2017)