Understanding the influence of method choices on results in life-cycle assessments is essential to draw informed conclusions. As the climate impact of bioenergy remains a debated topic, the focus of this study is how the chosen temporal framing influences a comparison of the climate impact of utilizing residual biomass for biofuel production to that of leaving the biomass to decay. In order to compare the biofuel scenario to its corresponding reference scenario where biomass is left to decay, a variety of analytical approaches were used: using time-aggregated and time-dependent life-cycle inventories and climate-impact assessment methods, assuming biogenic carbon to be climate neutral or not, using metrics for cumulative or instantaneous climate impact, and with different time horizons. Two cases of residual biofuel feedstocks were assessed: logging residues from Norway spruce forest, and straw from wheat cultivation. Consideration of the studied method choices appears to be especially relevant for forest residual biomass, as illustrated by the ranges of parity times for logging residues (25 to 95 years), and the results which vary with the chosen climate-impact metric, time-horizon, and approach for including biogenic carbon. Illustrating the time-dependence of results can, in general, provide a better understanding of the climate impact of utilizing residual biomass for biofuels.