Past research on identifying potentially negative impacts of forest management activities has primarily focused on traditional forest operations. The increased use of forest biomass for energy in recent years, spurred predominantly by policy incentives for the reduction of fossil fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions, and by efforts from the forestry sector to diversify products and increase value from the forests, has again brought much attention to this issue. The implications of such practices continue to be controversially debated; predominantly the adverse impacts on soil productivity and biodiversity, and the climate change mitigation potential of forest bioenergy. Current decision making processes require comprehensive, differentiated assessments of the known and unknown factors and risk levels of potentially adverse environmental effects. This paper provides such an analysis and differentiates between the feedstock of harvesting residues, roundwood, and salvage wood. It concludes that the risks related to biomass for energy outtake are feedstock specific and vary in terms of scientific certainty. Short-term soil productivity risks are higher for residue removal. There is however little field evidence of negative long-term impacts of biomass removal on productivity in the scale predicted by modeling. Risks regarding an alteration of biodiversity are relatively equally distributed across the feedstocks. The risk of limited or absent short-term carbon benefits is highest for roundwood, but negligible for residues and salvage wood. Salvage operation impacts on soil productivity and biodiversity are a key knowledge gap. Future research should also focus on deriving regionally specific, quantitative thresholds for sustainable biomass removal. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.