Well, my point was that carbon neutrality is only one variable of the equation.

But if you want to focus specifically on biomass, I would say: "it depends". You can't answer that question easily. For instance, would you say a biomass plant producing electricity from wood pellets imported from Brazil is carbon-neutral? I think it isn't. When you're looking at biomass, you can't just look at the plant, you need to focus on how its fuel is sourced, what impacts this sourcing activity has, etc.

Because the fuel for the wood freighter is fossil carbon! This is an argument against fossil carbon, not against biomass.

> Because the fuel for the wood freighter is fossil carbon!

No; the reason is that this wood is a byproduct of land use change, which is a source of increased carbon emissions [1].

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_use,_land-use_change,_and...

The fuel you burn is neutral in that it pulled as much carbon from the air while growing, as is released by burning it.

But the carbon cost to manage, process and transport that fuel is not neutral.

> But the carbon cost to manage, process and transport that fuel is not neutral.

Because gasoline for the trucks and coal for the electricity is fossil carbon. Which is not biomass. My point.