andre faaij copernicus institute - utrecht university the netherlands

Copernicus InstituteSustainable Development and Innovation Management

Developing Bioenergy Potentials and the Possible Role for

International Trade.(+ and some on IEA Task 40)

Bioenergy Australia Meeting, Organized by Bioenergy Australia

- March 26 2004, Sydney, Australia –Andre Faaij

Copernicus Institute - Utrecht UniversityThe Netherlands


Background (1)• A reliable and sustainable supply of biomass is vital to

any market activity aimed at bio-energy production. • Given high expectations for bio-energy on global scale,

pressure on available biomass resources increases. • Without the development of biomass resource

potentials (e.g. energy crops) and a well functioning biomass market those ambitions may not be met.

• A lack of availability of good quality (and competitive) biomass resources has proven to be a structural showstopper for many market initiatives.


Background (2)• Much experience in various countries with building

biomass markets, as well as related sectors.• Relatively recently, international trade of biomass

resources became part of the portfolio of market parties. • Optimism about opportunities, fear for unsustainable

practice.

• Previous debate concluded: “Structure and institutionalise (…) debate for a longer period of time, involving all key stakeholders. This does include international institutions, NGO’s, industry, national bodies and the scientific community alike…”


Phases in bio-energy use and market

development…1. Waste treatment and process residues; use on site, low costs.2. Local use of (more expensive) forest and agricultural

residues; some infrastructure development.3. Regional biomass markets, larger scale utilisation,

increasingly complex logistics; supportive policies needed.4. National markets with complex set of suppliers and buyers;

often increased availability. Some crop production.5. Increasing scale, cross-border flows; role for cultivated

biomass; bilateral activities.6. Global market; pricing mechanisms; complex interlinkages

with existing markets (food, forestry, feedstocks)?


population

GDP

trade

land productivity

future land use patterns

agricultural policy

agricultural system

irrigation, breeding, mechanization,

chemicals

biotechnology

energyconsumption

POTENTIAL FOR BIO-ENERGY?


Key elements for assessing future bioenergy potentials (bottom-up

approach)Consumption (kcal/cap/day) of•vegetal products•animal products•marine food

Population•low•medium•high

Marine products (t)

Feed conversion efficiency (t feed/t product):•present or 2050•low level of technology•intermediate level of•high level of technology

Animal products (t)

Vegetal products (t)

Crop yields and areas suitable for production based on:•low level of technology•intermediate level of technology•high level of technology•intermediate rain-fed level of technology•intermediate rain-fed/irrigated system

Production of animal products per production:•mixed•pastoral

No landuse

Grass & fodderdemand (t)

Feeddemand (t)

Residues and scavenging demand (t)

No land use

Surplus or shortage of cropland land (ha) compared to 1998

Surplus or shortage of pastureland compared to 1998

III Production efficiency in the animal production system and land useI Demand for food

Yields for bioenergy crops:•low level of technology•intermediate level of technology•high level of technology

VI Bioenergy from surplus cropland

II Crop yields and land use

Feed demand and feed composition: •production system •level of technology

Supply of bioenergy

Total demand for fuelwood (m3)

No landuse

IV Demand for wood

VII Surplus wood production V Supply

of woodfuelwood from non-forest sources (m3)

industrial roundwood from forests (m3)

fuelwood from forests (m3)

Total demand for wood from forests (m3)Total demand for

industrial roundwood (m3)

Forest available for wood supply (ha) •no deforestation•excluding protected areas and 10% for nature conservation

Forest resources are classified as:•(un)available for wood supply•(un)commercial species

Gross annual increment (m3 ha-1)

Annual increment (m3 ha-1)

Theoretical wood production potential (m3)

Plantation area and establishment (ha)

VII Residues from agriculture and forestry

Consumption (kcal/cap/day) of•vegetal products•animal products•marine food

Population•low•medium•high

Marine products (t)

Feed conversion efficiency (t feed/t product):•present or 2050•low level of technology•intermediate level of•high level of technology

Animal products (t)

Vegetal products (t)

Crop yields and areas suitable for production based on:•low level of technology•intermediate level of technology•high level of technology•intermediate rain-fed level of technology•intermediate rain-fed/irrigated system

Production of animal products per production:•mixed•pastoral

No landuse

Grass & fodderdemand (t)

Feeddemand (t)

Residues and scavenging demand (t)

No land use

Surplus or shortage of cropland land (ha) compared to 1998

Surplus or shortage of pastureland compared to 1998

III Production efficiency in the animal production system and land useI Demand for food

Yields for bioenergy crops:•low level of technology•intermediate level of technology•high level of technology

VI Bioenergy from surplus cropland

II Crop yields and land use

Feed demand and feed composition: •production system •level of technology

Supply of bioenergy

Total demand for fuelwood (m3)

No landuse

IV Demand for wood

VII Surplus wood production V Supply

of woodfuelwood from non-forest sources (m3)

industrial roundwood from forests (m3)

fuelwood from forests (m3)

Total demand for wood from forests (m3)Total demand for

industrial roundwood (m3)

Forest available for wood supply (ha) •no deforestation•excluding protected areas and 10% for nature conservation

Forest resources are classified as:•(un)available for wood supply•(un)commercial species

Gross annual increment (m3 ha-1)

Annual increment (m3 ha-1)

Theoretical wood production potential (m3)

Plantation area and establishment (ha)

VII Residues from agriculture and forestry

Sou

rce:

Sm

eets

, F

aaij

2004


B1-2010

Integrated assessment modelling using IMAGE (RIVM) for assessingland-use and production potentials of biomass for energy

Sou

rce:

Hoo

gwijk

, F

aaij

2004


B1 2020S

ourc

e: H

oogw

ijk,

Faa

ij 20

04


B1 2030S

ourc

e: H

oogw

ijk,

Faa

ij 20

04


B1 2040S

ourc

e: H

oogw

ijk,

Faa

ij 20

04


B1 2050S

ourc

e: H

oogw

ijk,

Faa

ij 20

04


A2 2050S

ourc

e: H

oogw

ijk,

Faa

ij 20

04


A1 2050S

ourc

e: H

oogw

ijk,

Faa

ij 20

04


B2 2050S

ourc

e: H

oogw

ijk,

Faa

ij 20

04


B1 2050S

ourc

e: H

oogw

ijk,

Faa

ij 20

04


Bioenergy production potential in 2050 for different scenario’s

434

111137

North AmericaJapan Ameri

0 0 0 0

Near East & North Africa

1 2 32 39

W.Europe0

1432 40

harves ting res idues

bioenergy crops

1460

100125

Oceania America

1560

100125

E.Europe

1 8 14 17

East Asia

1021

178221

410

sub-SaharanAfrica

41

149

331

Caribean &Latin America

178

253

315

46

2

68111

136

CIS & Baltic States

South Asia

1421

2124

434

111137

North AmericaJapan Ameri

0 0 0 0

Near East & North Africa

1 2 32 39

W.Europe0

1432 40

harves ting res idues

bioenergy crops

1460

100125

Oceania America

1560

100125

E.Europe

1 8 14 17

East Asia

1021

178221

410

sub-SaharanAfrica

41

149

331

Caribean &Latin America

178

253

315

46

2

68111

136

CIS & Baltic States

South Asia

1421

2124

Sou

rce:

Sm

eets

, F

aaij

2004

Potential Oceania 4-6 times projected primary energy use


Current Plantation area Potential Plantation area

Sou

rce:

IE

A T

ask

38,

Cow

ie


Global cost-supply curve for energy crops for four scenarios for the year

2050

0

1

2

3

4

5

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Geographical potential of energy crops (EJ y -1)

Pro

duct

ion

cost

of e

nerg

y cr

ops

($ G

J-1

)

A1 at abandoned agricultural landA2 at abandoned agricultural landB1 at abandoned agricultural landB2 at abandoned agricultural landA1 at rest landA2 at rest land B1 at rest landB2 at rest landB1_2000

B1 at abandoned

agricultural land in 2000

At abandoned

agricultural land At rest land

Sou

rce:

Hoo

gwijk

, F

aaij,

200

4


Productionsites

CentralGatheringpoint

Rail transport

River / ocean

Border

International bio-energy logistics

Shiptransport

Harbour and/orcoastal CGP

ConversionUnit

Sou

rce:

Ham

elin

ck,

Faa

ij, 2

003


GHG impacts existing biotrade chains

GHGharvesting+stem transport

debarking

truck transport residues

pelletisation

truck transport pellets

ship-transport

barge transport

emission co-firing

cultivation

FFB transport

truck transport shells

ship-transport

barge transport

emission co-firing

-1500

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

g C

O2

-eq

/kW

h

pellet co-firing inc landfilling

PKS co-firing inc pile burning

PKS co-firing inc soybean production

reference 1a: 100% coal

reference 1b: Dutch power production

Damen, Faaij, 2003


Many possible ‘biotrade chains’

Exporter Transport/transfer/storage

Importer

Biomass production ‘raw’ biomass Fullconversion

Biomass production &pre-treatment

Pre-treated (pellets,bales, bio-oil) biomass

(partial)conversion

Biomass production &conversion

Fuels (H2, MeOH,EtOH, HC’s)

End-use

Production andconversion

Electricity transport End-use

Biomass production ‘conversion along theway’

End-use


model structure for chain analysis

Step 1

Step n

Step 2

Step 0Step results

CostsEnergy use

CO2 emissionsIntermediate resultsMaterial characteristics

Embodied costs and energyAvailability window

Amount•Operation•Min # units•Distance•Dedication•Window adjustment

•Biomass source•Input scale

Total costsEnergy useCO2 emissions

User input Model parameters

•Material characteristics•Supply window•Embodied costs, energy use

•Economic parameters•Conversion efficiency•Energy use•Material changes / loss

Calculation

Material characteristicsAvailability windowAmount

Output

Sou

rce:

Ham

elin

ck,

Faa

ij, 2

003


Composing chains…

D e d i c a t e d 5 0 k m

L o g s C h i p s B a l e sB a l e sL o g s

B a l e sL o g s

R o a d s i d e

1 0 0 k m

1 0 0 k m

1 1 0 0 - 1 1 , 5 0 0 k m

H a r b o u r

P l a n t


R o a d s i d e

C G P =T e r m i n a l

1 1 0 0 k m

P l a n t

R o a d s i d e R o a d s i d e

C G P C G P =T e r m i n a l

1 0 0 k m 1 1 0 0 k m

H a r b o u r

P l a n t

P l a n t

1 0 0 k m

E M

E M

E M

E M

C G P

E M

E M

D e d i c a t e d 5 0 k m D e d i c a t e d 5 0 k m




1 0 0 k m 1 1 0 0 k m

H a r b o u r

H a r b o u r

P l a n t

P l a n t

1 0 0 k m

D e d i c a t e d 5 0 k m D e d i c a t e d 5 0 k m D e d i c a t e d 5 0 k m D e d i c a t e d 5 0 k m

R o a d s i d e R o a d s i d e R o a d s i d e R o a d s i d e

C G PC G P =T e r m i n a l


1 0 0 k m 1 1 0 0 k m

1 0 0 k m

P l a n t

P l a n t

E M

E M

M

1 0 0 k m 1 1 0 0 k m

H a r b o u r P l a n t

1 0 0 k m

P l a n t

M

P P


1 5 0 k m 5 0 k m

H a r b o u r T e r m i n a l

1 1 0 0 k m

P l a n t

P l a n t1 0 0 k m

EP M

EP M

1 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

1 0m m

1 1 0 0 - 1 1 , 5 0 0 k m

1 1 0 0 - 1 1 , 5 0 0 k m

1 1 0 0 - 1 1 , 5 0 0 k m

1 1 0 0 - 1 1 , 5 0 0 k m

1 1 0 0 - 1 1 , 5 0 0 k m

> > M e O HB a l e sL o g s > P y r o

P e l l e t sB r i q u e t t e s

3 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m


L o g s C h i p s B a l e sB a l e sL o g s

B a l e sL o g s

R o a d s i d e

1 0 0 k m

1 0 0 k m

1 1 0 0 - 1 1 , 5 0 0 k m

H a r b o u r

P l a n t


R o a d s i d e

C G P =T e r m i n a l

1 1 0 0 k m

P l a n t



1 0 0 k m 1 1 0 0 k m

H a r b o u r

P l a n t

P l a n t

1 0 0 k m

E MEEE MM

E MEEE MM

E MEEE MM

E MEEE MM

C G P

E MEEE MM

E MEEE MM





1 0 0 k m 1 1 0 0 k m

H a r b o u r

H a r b o u r

P l a n t

P l a n t

1 0 0 k m

D e d i c a t e d 5 0 k m D e d i c a t e d 5 0 k m D e d i c a t e d 5 0 k m D e d i c a t e d 5 0 k m

R o a d s i d e R o a d s i d e R o a d s i d e R o a d s i d e



1 0 0 k m 1 1 0 0 k m

1 0 0 k m

P l a n t

P l a n t

E MEE M

E MEE M

MMM

1 0 0 k m 1 1 0 0 k m

H a r b o u r P l a n t

1 0 0 k m

P l a n t

MMM

PPP PPP


1 5 0 k m 5 0 k m

H a r b o u r T e r m i n a l

1 1 0 0 k m

P l a n t

P l a n t1 0 0 k m

EP MEEP MM

EP MEEP MM

1 0m m1 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

1 0m m1 0m m

1 1 0 0 - 1 1 , 5 0 0 k m

1 1 0 0 - 1 1 , 5 0 0 k m

1 1 0 0 - 1 1 , 5 0 0 k m

1 1 0 0 - 1 1 , 5 0 0 k m

1 1 0 0 - 1 1 , 5 0 0 k m

> > M e O HB a l e sL o g s > P y r o

P e l l e t sB r i q u e t t e s

3 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

3 0m m

P P M M

E E

L e g e n d

H a r v e s t o r c o l l e c t i o n T r a n s p o r t p e r t r u c k ( s o l i d s ) . . . p e r t r a i n … p e r s h i p … o f l i q u i d s

L o o s e b i o m a s s L o g s o r b a l e s C h i p s 3 0 m m F i n e s 1 0 m m P e l l e t s o r b r i q u e t t e s

S t o r a g e o f l o g s o r b a l e s . . . o f c h i p s o r f i n e s …

o f l i q u i d s ( i n t a n k ) i n a s i l o . . .

D r y i n g c h i p s

C o n v e r s i o n E l e c t r i c i t y P y r o l y s i s o i l M e t h a n o l

Sou

rce:

Ham

elin

ck,

Faa

ij, 2

003


Fuel use as a function of the ship size

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0 50 10

0 150 20

0 250 30

0 350

Fu

el u

se (

ton

ne/

km)

15 knots 14 knots 13 knots 12 knots

15

16 ballast

14

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 deadweight (thousand long tons)

15 knots 14 knots 13 knots 12 knots

16 loaded

12

15

14

13

Sou

rce:

Ham

elin

ck,

Faa

ij, 2

003


Primary energy use of biomass supply chains to a Dutch power

plant


CO2 emissions for chains delivering pellets


Cost breakdown of solid biomass delivered to the

Netherlands

0

40

80

120

160

Residues Scandinavia 12.5MW

Pellets per Ship Crops Scandinavia

300MW Pelletsper Ship

Crops LA inland 300MW Pellets

Crops LA Coastal 300MW Pellets

Crops LA inland 1200MW Pellets

Crops (future) LA inland 1200 MW

Pellets Crops Eastern Europe

1200 MW Pellets per train

Crops Eastern Europe 1200MW

Pellets per ship

Costs

(€/

ton

ne d

ry d

eliv

ered)

Storage Densification Drying Sizing Ship Train Truck Wire Biomass


Cost breakdown of electricity delivered to the Dutch grid

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Co

sts

(€

/GJ

po

we

r d

eli

ve

red

)

Conversion Storage Densification Drying Sizing Ship Train Truck Wire Biomass

Residues Scandinavia

12.5MW Pellets per ship

Residues Scandinavia

12.5MW Pyro per ship

Crops Scandinavia 300MW

Pellets per ship Crops Scandinavia

300MW Pyro per ship

Crops LA inland 300MW

Chips per ship Crops LA inland

300MW Logs per ship

Crops LA inland 300MW

Pellets per ship Crops LA inland

300MW Pyro per ship

Crops E. Europe 1200 MW

pellets per ship

Co

sts

(€

/kW

h d

eli

vere

d)

0

0.05

0.10


Bio- methanol produced from North & Eastern European and Latin American

biomass supplied to Rotterdam Harbour.

0 2 4

6 8

10 12

14 16

Residues Europe - Pellets per Ship -

Methanol Residues Europe -

Methanol per Ship - Methanol

Crops Europe - Pellets per Ship -

Methanol Crops Europe -

Methanol per Ship - Methanol

Crops LA 300MW inland - Pellets -

Methanol Crops LA 300MW inland - Methanol -

Methanol Crops LA 1200MW

inland - Methanol (4x) - Methanol

Crops LA 1200MW inland - Methanol -

Methanol Crops E Europe 300 MW - Methanol per

Ship 2000 km - Methanol

Co

sts

(€

/GJ

HH

V L

iqu

ids

)

Conversion Storage Densification Drying Sizing Ship Train Truck Wire Biomass


Some key findings…• Reference systems importing & exporting

country crucial for net GHG impact• Economies of scale crucial.• Pre-treated biomass or secondary energy

carriers preferred for international transport.

• Sea transport limited impact; road transport significant.

• Region specific (biomass distribution density, transport parameters, etc.)


New Task 40 under theIEA Bioenergy Agreement

on

Sustainable International Bio Energy Trade:

securing supply and demand

Working period 2004 – 2006


Rationale of international bio-energy trade:

• Cost effective emission reduction of greenhouse gases: Several world regions have inherent advantages in producing lower cost and large quantities of biofuels.

• Socio-economic development: benefits for national trade balances and a sustainable source of income for rural communities.

• Sustainable management and the rational use of natural resources: biomass production combined with better agricultural methods and restoration of degraded and marginal lands.

• Fuel supply security: diversify portfolio of fuels used & imported; also true for bio-energy as such (!)

International bio-energy trade is fetching momentum. Pursued by World Bank, FAO, WTO the UN and countries as Brazil, Russia, USA, Japan and various European nations.


Main objectives

• Investigate what is needed to create a “global market” for bio-energy.

• Contribute to the development of sustainable bio-energy markets on short and on long term and on different scale levels.


Gross list (1): objectives/activities/deliverabl

es• Overview & exchange of available information on

biomass markets and developments in various contexts. • Improve insights in influencing factors on the supply

and demand of biomass for the short, medium and long term

• Synthesis of existing trade experiences and survey possible effects on existing markets (forestry and agricultural)

• Synthesis of existing barriers, hampering development of a global market and how to overcome these.


Gross list (2): objectives/activities/deliver

ables• Identification of sustainability criteria (best practice

guidelines)• Evaluation of the political, social, economic and

ecological impact of biomass production and trade on rural regions.

• Dynamic demand and supply models of bio energy.• Strategies for integrating the production of biomass for

energy and export into agricultural and agro-forestry systems (DC’s)


Task management

• Combination of scientific and market party:– The Copernicus Institute of Utrecht University:

Scientific coordination - Andre Faaij– Essent Sustainable Energy: Management - Rob Remmers & Martijn Wagener

• Planned budget: ~100 kU$/yr; common breakdown.


Interest so far:• Countries:

– 4 Confirmed (Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Brazil)– 4 (!) Observers (Finland, EC, Croatia, Italy)– 2 undecided; industrial participation worked on (Canada,

UK).– No participation but efforts made: Austria, Denmark, NZ…

• International bodies participating – FAO, World Bank; (UNECE is interested)

• Remarkable (++) combination of market parties and scientific world.


Intended collaboration with other IEA Tasks:

• Task 30 (Forestry systems); e.g on guidelines for sustainable production.

• Task 31 (Short Rotation Coppice systems); e.g on guidelines for sustainable production and land-use impacts.

• Task 29 (Socio-economic drivers in implementing bio-energy projects); e.g on “FairTrade” concepts for exporting bio-energy.

• Task 38 GreenHouse Gas Balances); e.g. on accounting rules and relevant international frameworks .


Final remarks

• Preliminary work programme now started.• Team may grow over time (flexible starting

phase…).• Task as a platform for other activities: projects,

pilots, networking…• IEA Strategic objectives: task aims to meet

market needs, use global experience and work in supra-national setting.

andre faaij copernicus institute - utrecht university the netherlands

Documents