The Biomass Industry Will Gobble Up Urban Greenery It S Time We Regulate It

---

 
The global effort to transform economies from current wasteful and destructive approaches into more sustainable pathways has resulted in calls for a complete redesign of society. A key area is energy and particularly the need to shift from fossil fuels to renewables.
But this is no easy task as it goes well beyond making simple commitments about net-zero and replacing fossil fuels with alternative energy sources. One response has been a shift towards the use of biofuels, but that too has proved to be controversial as many of the transformations needed, if poorly implemented, invariably result in negative impacts. With biofuels, the controversy mainly centres around the conflict between using valuable arable land for producing biofuels on an industrial scale at a time when food security is a major concern worldwide and the loss of biodiversity due to the expansion of agricultural land for plantations under industrial regimes of production is at an all time high.
Closer to home, the Malaysian government has announced ambitious plans to tap into the growing global biomass industry estimated to generate RM17 billion in revenue by 2030. The intention is to transform agricultural waste material—primarily from palm oil trees—into useful resources such as bio-pellets, biofertilisers, and renewable energy.
At face value, the government’s plan would appear to be a win-win for the economy, job creation, and a sustainable approach to managing the carbon embedded in agri-waste, thus making a valuable contribution to the country’s climate change commitments. This is an important and timely economic initiative, but to minimise the large-scale unintended consequences in forests, rural areas, and even urban centres, it will require tight regulatory frameworks and enforcement
For years, Malaysia has grappled with the fallout of deforestation, undermining biodiversity and contributing heavily to greenhouse gas emissions, not to mention the impacts on indigenous and rural communities. It is also a major contributor to the annual floods experienced increasingly in many parts of the country, the costs of which run into billions. This is largely driven by timber extraction and the indiscriminate expansion of palm oil plantations, which now cover about 54% of the nation’s agricultural land. It is also hugely political, with poor enforcement of laws as rent- seeking is rife when it comes to opportunities to exploit the natural resources of the country.
The alarming rate of forest loss in Malaysia, with 3.2 million hectares at risk and a potential reduction of 16% in remaining forest cover, raises critical questions around the robustness of governance systems, corruption, and land use priorities.
Thus, when it comes to building a waste biomass industry there is a need to act with great caution and thoughtfulness. Converting waste biomass into biofuels or fertilisers via composting by utilising agricultural by-products such as rice husks and palm oil residues to produce biofuels, needs to be carefully regulated for a variety of reasons. A key reason is to ensure valuable agricultural land is not being converted from food production to biofuels. It would be an act of folly to prioritise cultivation of biofuel crops over food security needs, especially as the country faces an increasingly pressing food trade imbalance.
If left unregulated, the effects of a growing biomass industry will not just be felt in Malaysia’s rainforests and rural areas. They will also increasingly impact urban areas across the country as small unregulated businesses cash in on a growing black market for what is loosely termed agri-waste to feed the so-called eco-industry of renewable biomass.
To put it simply, there is likely to be a sharp increase in the incidence rate of illegal tree felling in urban areas.
This may seem like a mundane matter compared with the other more visible impacts of the rising biomass industry – including illegal logging in Malaysia’s rainforests – but this is the type of civic issue that can go unnoticed and thus uninhibited for a long while, leading to cumulative damage that impacts entire communities. Given that over 78% of Malaysia’s population lives in urban areas, this scale of impact is not to be disregarded.
Across the country and especially in the Greater Klang Valley area, acute observers have noticed a sharp increase in the culling of trees both in residential neighbourhoods and along roads and highways. These seem to be random and indiscriminate, almost perpetrated carefully, not to be detected by the authorities. But it has alerted many, including activists, to seek answers from the authorities. They are getting mobilised as the rate of felling and pruning seems to have little to do with legitimate concerns about safety – always a priority – and the upkeep of pavement etc.
This is all taking place at a time when urban temperatures are soaring as more roads are built and an endless stream of cars are added to the streets. Like many bustling metropolises, Kuala Lumpur suffers from the impacts of the urban heat island effect. With all that concrete, asphalt, and glass, temperatures are rising, creating a dire need for green spaces to relieve and mitigate the heat. Studies have shown that cities with abundant greenery have lower temperatures and better air quality. A survey in Singapore found that 85% of residents felt that green spaces significantly enhanced their physical and emotional well-being.
This urban heating phenomenon is putting pressure on city planners to cool the city for its millions of inhabitants. And one way is to plant millions of trees. Yet, as Malaysia aims to scale its biomass industry, there is a real threat that urban greenery will be threatened in the name of powering sustainable energy as unscrupulous actors exploit poor urban management and loopholes.
Tree planting is happening in Singapore on a mega-scale – there is zero indiscriminate felling of trees – and is driven by science and tough regulations. There are claims that this is happening in KL too, but it is not obvious. Large parts of urban areas are bereft of trees where the opportunities for planting are plentiful but ignored. Why? This runs counter to the claims that large-scale planting is under way. Yet there remains an opportunity to turn the greater Klang Valley into the world’s first botanical city.
Moreover, the illegal felling of trees in KL is happening at a time when the Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has famously stated that for every tree felled, 100 should be planted. But the reality on the ground tells a different story as his pleas are being ignored. Large trees, once abundant in neighbourhoods and parks, are disappearing at an alarming rate. Formerly leafy avenues are slowly and surely becoming barren, and the city’s green cover continues to dwindle. One only needs to look at the wealthy parts of the city – both commercial and residential – where management oversight is in place, to note how lush and beautiful the city can be made to look.
Many urban residents are voicing frustrations as healthy trees are removed unnecessarily, often with little consultation or proper justification. Yes, removing ageing or hazardous trees may be necessary for public safety, especially given reports of 14 accidents involving fallen trees in recent years. Still, too often, healthy trees are felled without due consideration to alternatives such as pruning or maintenance.
To understand the problem a good starting point is to follow the money. The question then arises-: Where does the money for all this felling come from, what revenue does it generate and where does it go? Where do the felled trees go given that there is valuable timber in this too? Are they being funnelled into the biomass industry or a black market for timber?
So, what can be done?
Local authorities, such as Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL), need to take a more structured and accountable approach to managing urban trees which are public goods to be enjoyed by all citizens.
First and foremost, a transparent process for the felling of trees is essential. Every tree that is targeted for removal should require a permit with clear documentation justifying the action. Local Members of Parliament (MPs) and neighbourhood committees should be informed in advance – a minimum of 4 weeks unless the safety issue is urgent – and consulted before action is taken. This ensures that the community has a voice in the process and can hold local authorities accountable. It also prevents action from being taken simply because a few influential people complained about a tree whilst the majority would not want it removed. In the age of social media this is easily done.
Next, replanting and restoration initiatives should be prioritised. For every tree that is felled for safety reasons, there should be a plan in place to plant a new one that is appropriate for the location. The current practice of leaving a gaping large stump should be a thing of the past. Replanting efforts should be well-documented and communicated to the public to maintain accountability.
Monitoring biomass waste management is also critical. The disposal of felled trees should be tracked through a trip-ticket system to ensure that the valuable biomass is handled responsibly and legally. It is potentially a revenue source for DBKL. DBKL should create a register of certified biomass contractors to ensure proper disposal or sale to vendors and deter illegal activity. When biomass or timber from urban trees is sold it should be only to approved buyers and the revenue generated should be reinvested into urban forestry programmes. A key objective is to close all loopholes that provide incentives for illegal and indiscriminate felling and pruning of trees.
Additionally, expertise from certified arborists should be incorporated into the tree management process. Arborists should be working independently of vested interests to assess tree health and offer alternatives to removal, such as pruning or bracing. When a tree has been deemed in need of being pruned or removed, a representative from the community should be invited in advance so they can observe and both the contractor and a city official or arborist should be present. City officials should also ensure that contractors have personnel trained in tree-cutting and pruning practices.
Contractors who are invited to cut or prune should be certified and come from a panel. They should carry certificates and have a license which communities should be able to inspect. As part of the license, their workers should also be trained to do this work.
Finally, community involvement and oversight are essential to maintaining the integrity of urban greenery. DBKL must actively engage residents by addressing concerns and complaints about tree removal. Contractors should not be allowed to work without supervision; clear guidelines should be established for their responsibilities. This would foster a sense of community vigilance and ensure that residents have a say in preserving their urban environment.
As Malaysia pushes forward with its biomass industry, the balance between economic development and environmental sustainability must be carefully managed. The unintended consequences of these initiatives on urban ecosystems need to be addressed with great urgency. Transparency, accountability, and community engagement are key to ensuring that the pursuit of sustainable energy does not come at the expense of the green spaces vital to urban life. - FMT
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.

---