AB 1666 creates the Biomass Innovation Parks Act and a new Biomass Innovation Park Grants and Financing Program administered by the Natural Resources Agency to identify sites that aggregate California-sourced wood waste and host only noncombustion conversion technologies. The bill requires parks to use best-available air pollution controls, establish community benefits programs, and restrict processing to wood waste that originated in California; it also directs regional wood-availability assessments, a feedstock-tracking system, and a CARB life-cycle emissions assessment for alternative wood-waste uses.
The agency must report to the Legislature by December 31, 2027, and the chapter is set to become inoperative at the end of 2031.
The measure ties program support to funds authorized by the 2024 Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparedness, and Clean Air Bond Act by appropriating an unspecified portion of the $50 million allocated for noncombustion infrastructure to the Natural Resources Agency. The bill further directs state planning bodies to encourage engineered wood in housing and building standards.
Separately, the bill contains a nonbinding legislative intent statement to designate Bigfoot as the official state cryptid.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill requires the Natural Resources Agency, with the Department of Food and Agriculture, to identify one or more Biomass Innovation Parks and issue guidelines to solicit proposals from eligible applicants to develop, operate, and manage those parks. It establishes programmatic duties—regional feedstock assessments, a tracking system to authenticate forest biomass origins, CARB lifecycle analysis, and a grant/financing program funded from an existing bond allocation.
Who It Affects
Directly affected parties include state and local agencies, California Indian tribes, nongovernmental organizations, joint powers authorities, special districts, forest restoration contractors, engineered-wood manufacturers, and housing and building regulators. Communities near proposed parks will be subject to the community benefits obligations the parks must adopt.
Why It Matters
The bill creates a centralized, state-led approach to scale noncombustion uses of woody residues and link those markets to housing and embodied-carbon policy. By combining feedstock tracking, lifecycle assessment, and targeted grant funding, it aims to shift woody residues away from burning and decay toward engineered products and carbon-beneficial pathways, which could reshape supply chains and state procurement and building incentives.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
AB 1666 adds a new chapter to the Public Resources Code called the Biomass Innovation Parks Act and sets out how the state will identify and incubate locations that concentrate woody residues for conversion by noncombustion technologies. The law defines key terms—forest biomass residues, agricultural biomass residues, and wood waste—and lists who can apply to develop a park, from tribes and local agencies to NGOs and joint powers authorities.
The agency must prepare guidelines and run a planning and solicitation process; those guidelines must limit parks to processing California-origin wood waste, require noncombustion conversion technologies, mandate best-available air controls, and require a community benefits program, while allowing the agency discretion to add more planning requirements.
To support feedstock certainty and traceability, the bill directs the Natural Resources Agency and the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation to produce regional wood waste availability assessments and to adopt a tracking system that traces and authenticates the origin of forest biomass. The bill also anticipates coordination with entities that manage federal and nonindustrial private lands by authorizing technical assistance to public agencies that will help secure long-term feedstock supplies.The State Air Resources Board must post a life-cycle emissions assessment of alternative uses of California-sourced wood waste and include engineered wood products in the state’s embodied carbon trading construct referenced in Health and Safety Code Section 38561.6.
The Strategic Growth Council and Department of Housing and Community Development are asked to consider engineered wood in housing grants, and the California Building Standards Commission should identify code measures that incentivize engineered wood products.Program administration is established via a Biomass Innovation Park Grants and Financing Program run by the Natural Resources Agency; the agency must deliver a legislative report by December 31, 2027, and the chapter’s reporting requirement and program authority are scheduled to lapse (become inoperative) on December 31, 2031. Funding is drawn from an existing $50 million allocation in the 2024 bond act, with this bill appropriating an unspecified portion of that allocation to the agency to support the new program.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Section 4821(e) excludes trees grown primarily for energy from the definition of “forest biomass residues,” narrowing allowable feedstock to mitigation and restoration removals.
Section 4822(b)(2) requires parks to host only noncombustion conversion technologies, explicitly listing engineered wood products, biomethane, clean hydrogen, and carbon dioxide removal as intended end uses.
Section 4823(b) directs the agency to develop or support public agencies to facilitate long-term feedstock supply specifically from federal and nonindustrial private lands and authorizes technical assistance for that purpose.
Section 4824(b) requires CARB to ensure engineered wood products are included in the embodied carbon trading system established under Health and Safety Code Section 38561.6.
The bill amends Section 91530 to appropriate an unspecified sum from the $50,000,000 bond allocation to the Natural Resources Agency to support the Biomass Innovation Park Grants and Financing Program, leaving the exact appropriation amount to legislative budget action.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Legislative findings on wood waste and policy context
This introductory section frames the problem: large volumes of forest and agricultural residues are being burned or left to decay, producing carbon and air pollution. It cites the State Air Resources Board’s 2022 Scoping Plan language favoring noncombustion biomass solutions to situate the new program within existing state climate policy—useful context for agencies crafting program criteria and for project evaluators weighing greenhouse-gas outcomes.
Act title and definitions, applicant eligibility
These provisions establish the statute’s scope and set the definitional boundaries that determine what material and which actors the program covers. Important mechanics: agricultural residues explicitly exclude dairy manure and energy crops, and “eligible applicant” is broadly written to include tribes, NGOs, JPA’s, special districts, and public agencies—language that keeps the solicitation open to nontraditional operators and community-based entities.
Park identification, planning guidelines, and minimum requirements
Section 4822 drives the procurement design: the agency must draft guidelines and run a solicitation process. The statute fixes four minimum requirements—California-origin feedstock only, noncombustion-only projects, best-available air controls, and a community benefits program—while reserving discretionary powers for the agency to add planning requirements. Practically, that means the legislative text sets hard red lines (origin and combustion) but leaves implementation detail—what constitutes ‘community benefits’ or which control technologies qualify—to guideline development.
Regional assessments and feedstock tracing
This section requires regional wood availability assessments and creation or support of public agencies to secure long-term supplies from federal and nonindustrial private lands. It also mandates a tracking system to authenticate forest biomass origins. The combination of supply assessments and traceability is designed to reduce double-counting of feedstock, enable verification for lifecycle accounting, and underpin procurement decisions, but it will require interoperable data standards across landowners and jurisdictions.
CARB emissions analysis and building-incentive alignment
CARB must publish a lifecycle-emissions assessment of alternative uses of California-sourced wood waste and ensure engineered wood products enter the state’s embodied carbon trading construct. Meanwhile, the Strategic Growth Council, HCD, and the Building Standards Commission are directed to consider and identify incentives for engineered wood in grant programs and code. These clauses create cross-agency linkages: grant selection criteria, housing program rules, and building-code updates can be synchronized with park outputs to develop demand for durable wood products.
Program establishment, reporting timeline, appropriation link
The bill formally establishes the Biomass Innovation Park Grants and Financing Program and requires a Legislature-facing report by December 31, 2027; the reporting duty becomes inoperative on December 31, 2031, signaling a limited statutory lifespan. The bill also amends Section 91530 to appropriate an unspecified portion of a $50 million bond allocation toward the program; because the exact amount is blank, implementation depends on subsequent budgetary action and appropriation language.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Environment across all five countries.
Explore Environment in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- County and local wildfire and forest management programs — gain new market outlets and coordinated technical assistance to move woody residues off-site, reducing on-the-ground burning and pile stocks that create local air pollution and wildfire fuel loads.
- Engineered-wood and mass-timber manufacturers — receive a potential, state-supported feedstock aggregation model and demand signals from building-code and housing-grant incentives that can lower feedstock costs and spur investment in noncombustion conversion capacity.
- California Indian tribes and eligible community-based organizations — are explicitly eligible applicants, creating an opportunity to host or manage parks that provide local employment, workforce training, and community benefits if guidance is structured to favor community participation.
Who Bears the Cost
- Natural Resources Agency and coordinating state offices — face new administrative duties (guideline development, grant underwriting, tracking system procurement, regional assessments) that will require staff time and programmatic funding beyond a currently unspecified appropriation.
- Small feedstock aggregators, haul-and-chip contractors, and rural landowners — may face added compliance costs for traceability and restrictions that limit where material can be processed (parks only process California-origin wood waste; some end markets are excluded).
- Combustion-based biomass energy and gasification operators — are effectively excluded from park-sited projects because the statute prioritizes noncombustion technologies, potentially redirecting feedstock and investment away from those firms, and compressing local market options.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The statute balances two legitimate aims that can pull in opposite directions: accelerating market development for durable, carbon-beneficial wood products (and thereby storing carbon and creating new industries) versus ensuring sufficient, affordable, and verifiable feedstock and near-term local air-quality outcomes. Prioritizing noncombustion markets and traceability strengthens long-term climate integrity but raises costs and administrative burdens that could shrink participation and unintentionally favor well-capitalized, large-scale operators over community-based or small private suppliers.
The bill sets firm policy direction—noncombustion, California-origin feedstock, community benefits—but leaves crucial implementation details to agency guidelines and later budget choices. The practical success of parks depends on a functioning tracking system and reliable feedstock supplies; connecting federal, tribal, and private-land removals into a single authenticated chain of custody is technically and legally complex and will require interoperability standards and possibly new data-sharing agreements.
If the tracking system is slow, expensive, or narrowly scoped, it risks bottlenecking projects or excluding smaller suppliers.
Funding ambiguity is another practical constraint. AB 1666 ties program support to an existing $50 million bond allocation but leaves the actual appropriation blank.
That pushes a substantial part of the program’s viability into the annual budget process. Separately, requiring noncombustion-only projects and placing engineered wood into embodied-carbon trading could rapidly change market dynamics—good for durable-product manufacturers but risky for communities and contractors who today rely on combustion or on-site burning as a low-cost disposal route.
The community benefits requirement creates an important accountability lever but is left undefined in the statute, creating a risk that benefits become checklist items rather than substantive local investments.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.