1 / 41

Sustainable biomass supply in the EU Dr. Berien Elbersen, Alterra

Sustainable biomass supply in the EU Dr. Berien Elbersen, Alterra. Presented at the Biomass Futures-FNR Workshop Biomass sustainability criteria November 30, 2010 in Berlin. 1. Outline. Environmentally sustainable biomass availability

kirestin-pollard
Télécharger la présentation

Sustainable biomass supply in the EU Dr. Berien Elbersen, Alterra

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Sustainable biomass supply in the EU Dr. Berien Elbersen, Alterra Presented at the Biomass Futures-FNR Workshop Biomass sustainability criteriaNovember 30, 2010 in Berlin June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010 1

  2. Outline • Environmentally sustainable biomass availability • Estimates of different biomass potentials and related sustainability considerations • Waste • By-products agriculture • Dedicated cropping • Cost-supply relations • Conclusions and further steps June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010 2

  3. Biomass categories included • Biomass from waste • Waste biomass • Primary, secondary, tertiary residues • Biomass from agriculture • Dedicated cropping • Primary residues (straw, prunnings, manure) • Biomass from forestry • Round wood production • Additionally harvested wood • Primary forestry residues • Secondary forestry residues June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010 3

  4. Environmental constraints No sustainability constraints Many sustainability constraints • Different biomass resources have different sustainability considerations: • Waste products • By-products • Forestry products • Dedicated cropping June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010 4

  5. Wastes Source: Eurostat waste statistics (year 2008). June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  6. Present recovery of which some going to bioenergy June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  7. Verge grass EU: 1.9 mln TOE (2% of total potential) June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  8. Summary for wastes June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  9. Conclusions on waste potential • Overall large potential, but other competing uses, especially for cardboard and wood-wastes • Practically no sustainability problems related to the use • Present collection systems different in EU • In principle cheap resource, but still many logistical problems related to collection • EU wide data on availability unreliable June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  10. Agricultural by-products • Manure • Straw • Prunings June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  11. Manure Factors determining potential: • Type and animal numbers (LSU/ ha forage area) • Sustainability constraints: • Loss of soil fertility (over-exploitation of manure) • Abandonment of grazing (abandonment of land) to move to housing system and collect manure • Therefore the sustainable potential is only the the surplus manure (surplus= >170 kgN/ha) • Source data used: Eurostat FSS, NVZ maps, own elaborations June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  12. Manure available (2005) EU: 6.7 mln TOE (4.8% of total potential) EU: 1.6 mln TOE (1.1% of total potential) June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  13. Straw • JRC approach • Sources of straw: all cereals, maize (straw of corn), rapeseed, sunflower • Sustainability constraints: • too much straw removal could lead to soil fertility (Soil C) loss • Therefore estimated sustainably harvested potential (40% for cereals and 50% for rest) • Minus competing uses (animal bedding, mushroom production) June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  14. Straw EU: 28 mln TOE (based on CAPRI baseline scenario 2020) EU: 16 mln TOE (12% of total potential) June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  15. By-products from pruning and clearing Factors determining potential: • Permanent cropping area (e.g. vineyards, fruit trees, nuts and berries, olives and citrus) • Sustainability constraints: • Some risk of soil compaction, if heavy machinery used • Loss of soil carbon when roots removed of old plantations, certainly when ploughed up after many years • Source data used: Eurostat FSS, own elaborations June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  16. Pruning material available (2005) June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  17. Total pruning material (2005) EU: 6.7 mln TOE (5% of the total present potential) June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  18. Dedicated cropping: sustainability June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  19. Biomass cropping/harvesting effects on environment through: • Land use change effect (including iluc) • Conversion of natural/semi-natural land use categories (e.g. tropical forests, extensive grasslands) • Conversion of degraded land • Conversions in existing arable land (e.g. from annual to perennial) • Intensification/extensification effect in existing agricultural lands because of an overall change in practice (e.g. crops, input use) • Climate change effect, mitigation (?) reduces adverse effects on biodiversity June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  20. Present situation Dedicated bioenergy crops 2008 June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  21. Land & water requirements bioenergy: present June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  22. Future situation? • Biofuel crops • Perennial crops June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  23. 2020 CAPRI biofuel cropping EU Product coverage in the CAPRI 2020 biofuel module: BAS scenario Shock: EU biofuel demand in 2020 June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010 Source: IPTS (2010) CAPRI derived these from AGLINK-COSIMO simulations.

  24. CAPRI supply distribution 2020 RED But demand for imported biodiesel and bioethanol not included! June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  25. CAPRI-2020 RED • Net change in: • Land use (cropping pattern) • Livestock (numbers+types) • This effect was assessed within EU in EEA study • Soil N2O emissions • Changes in Soil C • N-Leaching (inside and outside HNV farmland) June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  26. Effect: Soil N2O emissions June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  27. Net impact of Soil C (2004-2020 compared) June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  28. Change in N-surplus HNV + RED HNV + NO RED NO HNV+ NO RED NO HNV + RED June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  29. Future dedicated cropping with perennials • Based on land availability and cropping mix as predicted by CAPRI in baseline scenario • 3 options: • High support for cropping, competes with arable crops on good-medium productive arable lands • Some cropping support, is economic on fallow land and former olives and vineyards i.e. the lower productive lands • Some support for establishment and bringing back into production of abandoned land in areas with large abandoned land resource June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  30. On good-medium productive arable lands • Assumption of 5% of 2020 good-medium quality land • High yield per hectare • Very large indirect land effects • Southern Europe large pressure on scarce water resources • Largest potential: 30 Mln TOE June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  31. On low productive arable lands • Assumption: 10% of 2020 fallow, olive and vineyards • Medium-low yield per hectare • Limited indirect land effects • Large adverse effects on biodiversity • Lowest potential: 10 mln TOE June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  32. On former abandoned lands • Estimate: regional abandoned land share 5%-10% of UAA. Of this 5% used for dedicated biomass cropping • Low yield per hectare • No indirect land effects • Some negative effects on biodiversity • Effect on soil C: tbd • Average potential: 15.5 mln TOE June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  33. Conclusions dedicated cropping • Present dedicated cropping area still relatively small both inside and outside EU. • In 2020 net environmental effect of biofuel dedicated cropping in EU still relatively small, not very large difference with No-RED situation. • But environmental effect is expected to be much larger outside EU (cereal, sugar, soya, palm-oil demand). • Environmental effects of dedicated cropping with perennials could be diverse depending on stimulation methods. Abandoned lad option should be investigated further. June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010 33

  34. Cost-supply June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  35. Cost-supply France June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010 35

  36. Cost-supply Netherlands June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010 36

  37. Cost-supply Germany June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010 37

  38. Cost-supply Poland June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010 38

  39. Total cost-supply EU 2008 • Very large potential at very low price: • >50% industrial + household wastes, but now mostly unused or not for bioenergy • By-products agriculture (straw, prunings) June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010 39

  40. Conclusions • Largest cheap potential in waste. Improved organisation of collection, treatment, logistics will increase access to this resource • By-products from agriculture also have important potential, now still underutilized • Sustainability constraints on dedicated cropping are significant both inside and outside EU and will have important effects on economic availability • Forestry potential should be included. Will certainly add importantly June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010

  41. Future work • Draft results need further critical review and improvements • Scenario application to extrapolate present potentials to future technical-economic and sustainable potential • Forestry potential still to be included (updated EFI work) • Cuttings/pruning from landscape elements, recreational and nature conservation areas should still be mapped (but difficult) June 2009- December 2011- EIE/08/653 30/4/2010 41

More Related