Transcript Geen diatitel - BIOMASS Energy Centre

Ways forward with
developing working
sustainable biomass markets
International Workshop: “Woodfuel Supply Chain –
Sharing Experiences”, Warwick - United Kingdom,
September 14-19, 2008.
André Faaij
Task Leader IEA Bioenergy Task 40
Copernicus Institute - Utrecht University
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Problems of bioenergy today
• GHG balances not OK
• Endless subsidies needed.
• Land and water constrain bioenergy to
marginal levels.
• Increases food prices and not good for
farmers.
• Other alternatives (solar, efficiency,
hydrogen) are better and really sustainable.
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
THIS hasn’t changed
(on the contrary):
Houston we have a problem!
•
•
•
•
•
•
Peak oil
Peak soil
Peak water
Peak biodiversity loss
Peak population
Peak GDP
•
•
•
•
•
Climate
Agriculture
Energy
Biodiversity
Poverty &
development
And it is urgent!
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
100
Scenario C1
Traditional renewables
Biomass
Hydro
Nuc.
80
Gas
Other
Percent
Energy & climate
crisis can only be
tackled by a portfolio
of all options we have
available.
Oil
60
Solar
40
Coal
20
0
1850
100
1900
1950
2000
2050
Scenario C2
Traditional renewables
Percent
Other
Gas
Solar
Oil
60
40
Nuclear
Coal
20
0
1850
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Biomass
Hydro
80
Copernicus Institute
2100
1900
GHG mitigation
Potentials
[IPCC AR4, 2007]
1950
2000
2050
2100
Agricultural land use!
• We need a lot more food (especially protein).
• We don’t have (a lot) more (agricultural) land.
• Agriculture and livestock main threat for biodiversity
(today…), main consumer of water, main emitter of
GHG’s.
• Agriculture and poverty interlinked: 70% of the world’s
poor in rural setting;
• Agricultural productivity is low on large parts of the
globe.
• Such agricultural practices often unsustainable as such.
• Poverty (and lack of investment) key driver for
unsustainable land use (erosion, forest loss).
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Uncertainties and key issues
• Water resources
• Management of biodiversity
• Interaction with conventional markets
(food, forestry).
• Proper GHG accounting and land-use
management.
• Balanced economic development
(macro & micro scale).
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
What’s it gonna be?
material/economic
A1
A2
population: 2050: 8.7 billion
2100: 7.1 billion
GDP:
2050: 24.2 103 billion $95/y
2100: 86.2 103 billion $95/y
technological growth: high
trade: maximal
population: 2050: 11.3 billion
2100: 15.1 billion
GDP:
2050: 8.6 103 billion $95/y
2100: 17.9 103 billion $95/y
technological growth: low
trade: minimal
globally oriented
regionally oriented
B1
B2
population: 2050: 8.7 billion
2100: 7.1 billion
GDP:
2050: 18.4 103 billion $95/y
2100: 53.9 103 billion $95/y
technological growth: high
trade: high
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
population: 2050: 9.4 billion
2100: 10.4 billion
GDP:
2050: 13.6 103 billion $95/y
2100: 27.7103 billion $95/y
technological growth: low
trade: low
environmental/social
Integration…
Pfff, it’s
complex…
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Dornburg et al., 2008
Limitations in
potentials: agri yields
Copernicus Institute
Compact food production >Biomass
Dornburg et al., 2008
yield increase
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Yields: perennials ~3x annual
Crop
Biomass yield
(odt/ha* yr)
Energy yield in fuel
(GJ/ha*yr)
Wheat
4-5
~ 50
Corn
5–6
~ 60
Sugar Beet
9 – 10
~ 110
Soy Bean
1–2
~ 20
10 – 20
~ 180
Palm Oil
10-15
~ 160
Jathropha
5-6
~ 60
SRC temperate climate
10 – 15
100 - 180
SRC tropical climate
15 - 30
170 - 350
Energy grasses good conditions
10 - 20
170 – 230
Perennials marginal/degraded lands
3 - 10
30 – 120
Sugar Cane
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Limitations in
degraded land, protected areas and water
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Impacts on (woody)
crop potentials
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Dornburg et al., 2008
Overall
Picture
Yes, biomass
can play a
significant
role in
future
energy
supply
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Dornburg et al., 2008
Key uncertainties
biomass potentials
Issue/effect
Supply potential of biomass
Improvement agricultural management
Choice of crops
Food demands and human diet
Use of degraded land
Competition for water
Use of agricultural/forestry by-products
Protected area expansion
Water use efficiency
Climate change
Alternative protein chains
Demand for biomaterials
Importance
***
***
***
***
***
**
**
**
**
**
*
demand
rece
Demand potential of biomass
Bio-energy demand versus supply
Cost of biomass supply
Learning in energy conversion
Copernicus
Institutemechanism food-feed-fuel
Market
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Impact
po
supply a
rece
**
**
**
**
So…
• Investment in agriculture (and livestock) is
essential (2nd green revolution)
• This is feasible (and necessary…)
• …with increased water use efficiency, less land,
protection of soils and better incomes.
• …and essential for food security.
• Bioenergy can get the money and sustainable
economic activity into the rural regions…
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
A future vision on global
bioenergy…
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
[GIRACT FFF Scenario project; Faaij, 2008]
Certification bioenergy:
ongoing initiatives
• Governments: UK, NL, D, B, and more EU
nations…; EC, US, DC’s…
• NGO’s & International bodies.
• Market initiatives/multistakeholder:
roundtables on palm, soy, sugar and
biofuels, utilities,…
IEA Task 40:Van Dam et al., 2008;
Biomass & Bioenergy.
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
www.bioenergytrade.org
Cramer Cie.: minimum safeguard->
stabilisation-> improvement…
1. GHG balance -> Chain performance (30-80%+..)
2. Land-use/competition with food: reporting; to be
developed.
3. Biodiversity -> reporting/FSC/RSPO; to be developed.
4. Wellfare -> Reporting EPI; to be developed further.
5. Well being -> ILO, Social accountability standards, etc.
6. Environment
–
–
–
–
Copernicus Institute
Waste; law, GPG’s
Agrochemicals; law, GPG’s (further development).
Soil quality; reporting/monitoring (further development).
Water quality & quantity; law, reporting/monitoring (further
development).
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Cramer et al., 2007
Certification bioenergy:
concerted action…
• First time that governments actually try to set
‘sustainability criteria’ for a commodity! ->
Paradigm shift with implications for food
products, fodder, materials etc.
• This takes time (allow for learning).
• Concerns differ: palm oil/soy bean/corn… most
debated, other (residues, wood) largely approved
• Methodological issues to be resolved:
competition, biodiversity, a.o.
• Global convergence, dialogue and deployment
priority (leadership needed).
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Operationalisation of sustainability criteria
Criteria
deforestation
competition with
food production
land
availability
Impact
biodiversity
soil erosion
yield
quantity
costs
cost supply
curve
fresh water
nutrient leaching
pollution from
chemicals
employment
child labour
wages
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
crop
management
system
[Smeets et al., 2005/2008]
Ethanol in Brazil; the costs of
compliance with various sustainability
criteria compared to the reference
situation
Smeets,
Junginger,
Faaij,
Walter,
Dolzan, 2006/2008
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Production costs sugarcane [US$/tonne] and ethanol [US$/m 3]
Estimated future costs of
sugarcane and ethanol production
assuming 8% annual growth
10
Cumulative ethanol production [106 m3]
40
80
160
320
640
20
1280
800
PR = 0.81 + 0.02
Explaining the experience
curve:
Cost reductions of
Brazilian ethanol from
sugarcane
J.D. van den Wall Bake, M.
Junginger, A. Faaij, T.Poot,
A. da Silva Walter
Biomass & Bioenergy, 2008
400
200
2020
40
20
PR = 0.68 + 0.03
10
Sugarcane
Ethanol prod. cost (excl. feedstock)
Expected range of cane prod. costs in 2020
Expected range of ethanol prod. costs in 2020
1000
Copernicus Institute
2000
4000
8000
16000
6
Cumulative sugarcane production [10 TC]
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
2020
32000
Land use change Indonesia
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
[Wicke, et al., 2008 (forthcoming)]
GHG emissions for different palm
oil production and supply systems
Copernicus Institute
[Wicke, et al., Biomass & Bioenergy, 2008]
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
GHG Balances and land conversion issues
3372 g CO2-eq / kWh
1200
Forested peatland: extremely
high emissions
1000
800
Natural rainforest: high
emissions
600
400
200
Base case - Logged over
forest: emissions about half
of modern natural gas power
0
-200
Copernicus InstituteCPO electricity
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Cases
Average EU
Coal
Modern natural gas
Average Dutch
Claus power plant
Peatland grass
Peatland forest
Degraded land
-600
Natural rain forest
-400
Base case
GHG emissions (g CO2-eq/kWh
CPO)
1400
Fossil reference electricity
production
Degraded land: CO2 uptake
[Wicke, et al.,
Biomass & Bioenergy, 2008]
Yield developments in
Europe
Historic yield
development
 example: wheat
The Western European
Countries
The Central and
Eastern European
Countries
Significant difference!
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
y = 0.0764x - 147.16
R2 = 0.9468
6
Yield [ton/ha]
Average yields
plotted for
7
5
4
3
y = 0.0377x - 71.637
R2 = 0.497
2
1
0
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
Source FAOSTAT
[Wit & Faaij, 2008]
Yield projections Europe
Observed yield
Linear
extrapolation of
historic trends
Widening yield gap
Applied scenarios
Low, baseline and high
Yield [ton/ha]
CEEC and WEC
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1960
Observed historic yields
1970
1980
1990
2000
Projections
2010
2020
2030
Source FAOSTAT
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
[Wit & Faaij, 2008]
Results - spatial production
potential
Arable land available for dedicated
bio-energy crops divided by the
total land
Potential
Countries
Low
potential
< 6,5%
NL, BE, LU, AT,
CH, NO, SE and FI
Moderate
potential
6,5%
- 17%
FR, ES, PT, GE,
UK, DK, IE, IT and
GR
High
potential
> 17%
PL, LT, LV, HU, SL,
SK, CZ, EST, RO,
BU and UKR
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
[Wit & Faaij, 2008]
Results - spatial cost
distribution
Production cost (€ GJ-1) for
Grassy crops
Potential
Countries
Low
Cost
< 2,00
PL, PT, CZ, LT, LV,
UK, RO, BU, HU, SL,
SK, EST, UKR
Moderate
Cost
2,00 –
3,20
FR, ES, GE, IT, SE,
FI, NO, IE
High
Cost
> 3,20
NL, BE, LU, UK, GR,
DK, CH, AT
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
[Wit & Faaij, 2008]
Results – cost-supply curves
Production costs vs.
supply potential
for 2010, 2020 and 2030
Variation areas indicated
around the curves represent
uncertainties and scenario
variables.
Only CEEC cost level increases
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
[Wit & Faaij, 2008]
Total energy potential under
three different crop schemes.
‘
Low yielding crops’:
all arable land
available planted
with oil crops.
‘High yielding
crops’: all available
land planted with
grass crops.
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
[Wit & Faaij, 2008]
Economic performance 2nd generation
biofuels s.t. & l.t.; 3 Euro/GJ feedstock
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
[Hamelinck & Faaij, 2006]
Cost reduction potential in 2nd
generation technologies.
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
[Wit, Junginger, Faaij, et al. 2008]
Development in net feedstock use
for biofuels (REFUEL project;
example scenario)
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
[www.refuel.org, 2008]
key issues (I)
• Resources need to meet criteria in broad sense.
• Resource base needs to be diversified
(lignocellulose, cultivated, marginal & degraded
lands).
• Real market experience needs to be built in
different settings (DC’s!).
• Sustainable (international) markets and
certification to be established.
• International collaboration and harmonization on
criteria and standards.
• Stable and coherent policies.
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Key issues (II)
• Consider bioenergy as one option and not
just biofuels; use power and heat market as
stepping stones for 2nd gen. biofuels.
• Use niches for biofuels (residues with add on
hydrolysis units and co-gasification of
biomass).
• Facilitate learning (conversion, supply
infrastructure, biomass production).
• Stable and coherent policies.
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Stay with me for 3 more
seconds…
• Bioenergy is at the nexus of land-use (2nd
revolution!), development (poverty!), energy
(oil!) and climate (carbon stocks!); this is a
unique position.
• We have the bioenergy options to achieve
synergies (as well as the wrong ones)
• Governance is the key; across policy fields
(agriculture, energy, climate, development);
consistent and stable.
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Thanks for your attention
www.bioenergytrade.org
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management
Presenter Contact:
[email protected]
Copernicus Institute
Sustainable Development and Innovation Management