Using sustainably-grown biomass as the sole fuel, or co-fired with coal, is an effective way of reducing the net CO(2) emissions from a combustion power plant. There may be a reduction in efficiency from the use of biomass, mainly as a result of its relatively high moisture content, and the system economics may also be adversely affected. The economic cost of reducing CO(2) emissions through the replacement of coal with biomass can be identified by analysing the system when fuelled solely by biomass, solely by coal and when a coal-biomass mixture is used. The technical feasibility of burning biomass or certain wastes with pulverised coal in utility boilers has been well established. Cofiring had also been found to have little effect on efficiency or flame stability, and pilot plant studies had shown that cofiring could reduce NO(x) and SO(x) emissions. Several technologies could be applied to the co-combustion of biomass or waste and coal. The assessment studies here examine the potential for co-combustion of (a) a 600 MWe pulverised fuel (PF) power plant, (i) cofiring coal with straw and sewage sludge and (ii) using straw derived fuel gas as return fuel; (b) a 350 MWe pressurised fluidised bed combustion (PFBC) system cofiring coal with sewage sludge; (c) 250 and 125 MWe circulating fluidised bed combustion (CFBC) plants cofiring coal with straw and sewage sludge; (d) 25 MWe CFBC systems cofiring low and high sulphur content coal with straw, wood and woody matter pressed from olive stones (WPOS); and (e) 12 MWe CFBC cofiring low and high sulphur content coal with straw. The technical, environmental and economic analysis of such technologies, using the ECLIPSE suite of process simulation software, is the subject of this study. System efficiencies for generating electricity are evaluated and compared for the different technologies and system scales. The capital costs of systems are estimated for coal-firing and also any additional costs introduced when biomass is used. The Break-even electricity selling price is calculated for each technology, taking into account the system scale and fuel used. Since net CO(2) emissions are reduced when biomass is used, the effect of the use of biomass on the electricity selling price can be found and the premium required for emissions reduction assessed. Consideration is also given to the level of subvention required, either as a Carbon dioxide Credit or as a Renewable Credit, to make the systems using biomass competitive with those fuelled only with coal. It would appear that a Renewable Credit (RC) is a more transparent and cost-effective mechanism to support the use of biomass in such power plants than a Carbon dioxide Credit (CC). (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.