presentation during the kick-off meeting of the EC IEE financed BIOEUParks project in April 2013

1. http://www.eubionet.net
Solutions for biomass fuel market
barriers and raw material availability-
EUBIONET III 1.9.2008-31.8.2011
Philipp von Bothmer
Agency for Renewable Resources

2. 30/04/132
Project objectives
Photos: DTI & Vapo Oy
• To boost sustainable,
transparent international
biomass fuel trade,
• To secure the most cost
efficient and value-adding
use of biomass for energy
and industry
• To boost investments in best
practice technologies and
new services on biomass
heat sector

3. Project actions
• Biomass resources, trade and biomass use
in new industry sectors,
• Wood fuel prices and price mechanism,
• Sustainability, standards, and legal
incentives
• New biomass raw materials,
• Biomass heating and cooling,
• Forest industry and bioenergy
30/04/133

4. 30/04/134
Project partners
• VTT, Coordinator, Finland
• DTI, Denmark
• ECB, Slovakia
• Ekodoma, Latvia
• FNR, Germany
• SLU-Bio, Sweden
• UPEI VUT, Czech
• UMB, Norway
• CRA-W, Belgium
• FJ-BLT, Austria
• AEBIOM, Belgium
• CRES, Greece
• UU, Netherlands
• UNIFI, Italy
• LEI, Lithuania
• ICSTM, UK
• CBE, Portugal
• ApE, Slovenia
• AAE, Spain
• Subcontractors (Hungary, Ireland,
France, Romania)
• Cooperation mit IEA Bioenergy
Task 40

5. Biomass resources and trade
• Estimated annual biomass potential is 157 Mtoe in
EU24 (exluding waste)
– Of which 48% is currently utilised
– Greatest potential for increased use lies on forest
residues and herbaceous biomass
– Pellets use exceed production by 20%
• New industry sectors found for increased biomass use
(17 success stories and summary reprot published)
– Cement industry, food industry, chemical industry
• Customs statistic CN code (4401 30 20) for wood
pellets developed in cooperation with EUROSTAT
30/04/135

6. Unexploited agro-industrial biomass
residues in EU
• 54 new unexploited
agro-industrial
residues identified
estimated annual
potential 18–22 million
tons dry
matter annually – or
270–330 PJ (6.5–7.9
Mtoe)
30/04/136

7. Price mechanisms for wood fuels
• Two price surveys in European countries
– Pellets, wood chipls, brickettes, log wood
• Vergleich der Verfügbarkeit und Qualität der
Holzbrennstoffstatistiken in EU-Ländern
• Report on price mechanisms
• Price index for industrial wood pellets developed in
cooperation with Foex Indexes
30/04/137

8. Bioenergy and forest industry
• Target to understand the competition situation of
woody biomass between forest industry and energy
use and the impacts of different policy instruments on
wood availability and price level
• To illustrate the competition situation in EU-27, the
wood flows were shown in EU and in each country.
– Result of EU-27 is shown in next slide
• A large share of bioenergy in Europe originates from
by-products and residues from the forest industry,
both from mechanical and chemical processing, that
are not suitable for further processing for other
products.
• A large amount of forest growth is not used, and an
estimated annual increment of wood stock is over 300
million solid m3.
30/04/138

9. Wood flows in EU27, 2008
30/04/139
Energy use 240.8 m³ Final products 291.2 m³

10. Biomass heating and cooling
• About half of the final energy demand is used for
heating in EU27
• Biomass used for heating is about 55 Mtoe
• Estimated used of electricity for cooling is 270 TWh
• 35 case studies collected of biomass heating
substituting fossil fuels
– The potential to reduce CO2 equivalent emissions
range from 90 to 95%, depending on the fuel which
is replaced (gas or heating oil), the new biomass
fuel and the capacity of the new heating system.
– Average reduction 330 – 410 kg CO2/MWh,
maximum 1 020 kg CO2/MWh
• Catalogue of 59 boiler manufacturers collected
30/04/1310

11. Sustainability
• Evaluated 44 different national or international
sustainability criteria for biomass, biofuel and
bioenergy
– Measuring and quantifying sustainability of bioenergy is a
very complicated issue.
– The meaning of sustainability can be defined in different
ways, depending on the context and own values and
interests.
– It is almost a philosophical question how to measure
something, those three dimensions (environmental,
social, and economic) sometimes are even in conflict with
each other.
• Questionnaire of sustainability criteria
– 475 answers from 34 countries received and 285 used for
analysis
30/04/1311

12. Results of sustainability questionnaire
30/04/1312
All countries
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Minimization of GHG emissions
Optimization of energy balance
Minimization of deforestation
Conservation of High Conservation Value areas
Minimization of (indirect) land-use changes
Sustaining the yield of the land
Protection of soil quality and quantity
Protection of w ater quality and quantity
Protection of air quality
Minimization of loss of biodiversity
Priority for local food & construction product supply
Priority for energy security
Social w ell-being (labour and human rights compliance)
Minimization of child-labour
Minimization of indirect social and economic impacts
Land-use rights compliance
Local w elfare (improvement local economy)
Effect of the end-use on the local environment
Most relevant Very relevant Relevant Not relevant

13. 13
Indication of importance to include
sustainability criteria in a European
biomass and bioenergy certification
system:
Top 3 (all responses):
1. GHG emission reduction
2. Optimalisation energy balance
3. Water quality and quantity
The stakeholder and country groups show a difference
in:
• Degree of importance for criteria and;
• Priorities between criteria.
30/04/13

14. Remarks from the questionnaire:
• Do you think that European certification system is
needed?
– 81% YES (although there are limitations and should be
linked to existing systems and declarations)
• Certification increases the credibility of European
certified biomass as renewable energy source:
– 83% YES
• Certification stimulates the discussion about
certification of biomass use for other non-food
(industrial raw) materials and food applications:
– 76% YES
30/04/13
14

15. Conclusions I
• Based on the country reports the evaluation report
contains 44 appendixes, which describe various
national and international systems and initiatives to
guarantee the sustainability of biomass
• For the market the variety of the certification systems
is confusing
30/04/13
15

16. Conclusions II
• Respondents of the questionnaire stress the need for a
level playing field in the market, meaning that the
European sustainability requirements for biomass and
bioenergy should be extended to other geographical
world regions and to other feedstock and renewable
energy sources
• The large variety of geographical areas, crops,
residues, production processes and end-uses is seen
as key area of attention that limits the development
towards a harmonized certification system for
sustainable biomass and bioenergy
• Many respondents consider the risk for administrative
burdens high
• Most important criterion for the stakeholder in our
questionnaire was the criterion on the ‘minimization of
GHG emissions’
30/04/13
16

17. Conclusions III
• There is an interest for including socio-economic
criteria in a certification system for biomass and
bioenergy
• The aim should be to develop some basic principles
which apply for all agriculture and forestry to
guarantee a sustainable land use in aim to produce
bioenergy
• It could be even considered not only to expand
sustainability certification to all bioenergy, but also to
all biomass usage
30/04/13
17

18. • Thank you!
• For questions on EUBIONET 3 and published reports,
you can contact Aino Martikainen,
a.martikainen@fnr.de
30/04/1318

19. 19
Forest certifications
• The highest certification rate has Austria, 100 % ,
followed by Finland, 95%
• Low certification rates in Greece (0,6), Spain
(4,5%), Bulgaria (4,8%) and Italy (7,1%)
• Big differences between the systems: Finland
almost only PEFC, the Baltic states only FSC
PEFC ha FSC ha Forest and
other wooded
area ha
% certified of
the forest area
58 352 825 26 269 446 188 333 000 44,9%
Results for EU-26
30/04/13

20. Forest certifications
• Greenhouse gas emissions not fully covered by the
criteria
• Biodiversity issues covered, but without reference
date
• No protection of high carbon land
20 30/04/13