Methodology report on quantification of sustainability standards impacts on biomass supply

Final D 4.2 Delivery of the

project funded by

prepared by: Berien Elbersen, Alterra

Uwe R. Fritsche Oeko-Institut

with inputs from Hans Böttcher (IIASA)

Wageningen/Darmstadt, March 2012

Alterra/Oeko-Institut D 4.2: Methodology

ContentsPage

1 Introduction.........................................................................................1

2 Sustainability Standards for Bioenergy............................................2

3 Methodology to Analyze Impacts of Sustainability Standards on Bioenergy Supply.......................................................4

4 Key Results of the Analysis...............................................................8

References..............................................................................................10

Abbreviations.........................................................................................13

Annex: Data Background.....................................................................A-1

Biomass Futures D 4.2: Methodology report on quantification of impacts of sustainability standards on biomass supply

i

Alterra/Oeko-Institut Biomass Futures: Methodology

Preface

This paper was prepared within the Biomass Futures project1 and is based on work of Alterra and Oeko-Institut in WP 3 and 4. Inputs we also received from project partners2.

It represents Deliverable D 4.2 of the Biomass Futures project, and the authors hope that it will provide orientation and beneficial information to those working towards sustainable bioenergy production and use.

The sole responsibility for the content of this publication lies with authors.

It does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Communities. The European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.

Wageningen/Darmstadt, March 2012 The Authors

1 “Biomass Futures: Biomass role in achieving the Climate Change & Renewables EU policy targets. Demand and Supply dynamics under the perspective of stakeholders” (www.biomassfutures.eu) funded by the Intelligent Energy Europe programme of the European Commission, DG Energy (IEE 08 653 SI2. 529 241).

2 Partners in this work were especially colleagues from IIASA (Hannes Böttcher, Michael Obersteiner), ECN (Ayla Uslu), and Imperial College (Calliope Panoutsou).

Biomass Futures D 4.2: Methodology report on quantification of impacts of sustainability standards on biomass supply

ii

Alterra/Oeko-Institut Biomass Futures: Methodology

1 Introduction

The Biomass Futures project (www.biomassfutures.eu ) work package 4 aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of sustainability standards for all bioenergy, and respective sustainable biomass supply potentials regarding availability and costs in the 2020- 2030 time horizons.

This paper gives an overview on the methodologies used to determine the impacts of sustainability standards (as developed in BiomassFutures) on the bioenergy supply.

It relies on work of work package 3 (supply) in which the spatially explicit modeling of bioenergy supply was carried out (Alterra, IIASA 2012; IIASA 2012), and the methodological and data development in other studies on sustainable bioenergy prepared in parallel to the Biomass Futures project (EEA 2012; IFEU, CI, OEKO 2012).

In Section 2, the paper briefly describes the background for the sustainability standards and respective criteria and indicators applied in the analysis.

Section 3 presents and briefly discusses the methodology developed for analyzing sustainability standards impacts on the bioenergy supply as developed in the Biomass Futures project.

In Section 4, a summary of the key results is given.

Biomass Futures D 4.2: Methodology report on quantification of impacts of sustainability standards on biomass supply

1

Alterra/Oeko-Institut Biomass Futures: Methodology

2 Sustainability Standards for Bioenergy

Since 2007, the landscape of the previously voluntary and manifold sustainability standards for biomass – from cotton and wood to organic food, flowers, coffee and "green biopower" – has changed: both the US and European countries and the EU as a whole developed mandatory standards and criteria for liquid biofuels3.

The EU Renewables Energy Directive (RED) adopted in April 2009 (EC 2009) established mandatory sustainability requirements for bioenergy carriers used as transport fuels and for liquid bioenergy carriers in general.

In March 2010, the EU Commission (EC) presented a report on the extension of the RED to all bioenergy carriers and proposed that the RED criteria could be voluntarily adopted by the EU Member States to apply to solid and gaseous bioenergy carriers as well (EC 2010). In 2012, the EC will report on developments in that regard, noting that several EU countries began introducing broader sustainability requirements for bioenergy (e.g., BE, DE, NL, UK)4.

Taking into account the developments regarding sustainability standards in other countries such as Argentina, Brazil and Mozambique as well as Thailand and the US5,6, among others, and by UN organizations such as FAO and UNEP as well as UNCTAD and the Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP)7, the Biomass Futures project provided an overview and developed a set of “RED plus” criteria and indicators for all bioenergy (OEKO 2012).

It is important to note that there are yet no binding rules concerning indirect effects on GHG emissions8 and on positive of negative impacts of increased bioenergy production on food security, or its (again: positive or negative) social effects.

Thus, the respective criteria and indicators developed by Biomass Futures – which include indirect effects - are a proposal (see Table 1).

3 In parallel to these statutory provisions, RSPO (www.rspo.org) and RSB (www.rsb.org) are voluntary sustainability standards – which reach beyond the RED – and the European standardization organization CEN as well as the global ISO body are also working on own drafts.

4 On extending the RED to solid bioenergy see http://www.iinas.org/Work/Projects/REDEX/redex.html 5 EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency) 2010: Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS2): Program Amendments;

Washington DC http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/renewablefuels/regulations.htm 6 CARB (California Air Resources Board) 2010: Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS)

http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/lcfs.htm 7 GBEP is a partnership of the G8+5 (G8 states plus Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa) founded at

the Gleneagles G8 summit in 2005; its Secretariat is hosted by the FAO in Rome. Meanwhile, more international institutions including FAO, UNEP and UNIDO as well as industrialized and developing countries have joined GBEP. For the bioenergy sustainability indicators developed and agreed by GBEP, see GBEP (2011) More information on GBEP is given at www.globalbioenergy.org

8 with the noteworthy exception of the mentioned US EPA rulemaking for the RFS-2 and the LCFS in California, see footnotes 5 and 6.

Biomass Futures D 4.2: Methodology report on quantification of impacts of sustainability standards on biomass supply

2

Alterra/Oeko-Institut Biomass Futures: Methodology

Table 1 Biomass Futures Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Bioenergy

Criterion Indicator MetricsSustainable Resource Use

Land Use Efficiency* GJbio/ha

Secondary Resource Use Efficiency* %

Biodiversity Conservation of land with significant biodiversity values

no-go areas

Land management without negative effects on biodiversity

sustainable practices applied

Climate Protection Life cycle GHG emissions incl. direct land use changes

75%

Inclusion of GHG effects from indirect land use changes9

3.5 t CO2/ha/year

Soil Quality Erosion zero erosion cultivation systems and practices

Soil Organic Carbon maintain SOC

Soil Nutrient Balance soil maps identifying “go” areas10

Water Use and Quality Water Availability and Use Efficiency TARWR11

Water Quality N, P and BOD + pesticide loadings

Airborne Emissions SO2 equivalents12 g/GJbioenergy

Particulate Emissions PM10 g/GJbioenergy

Food Security Price and supply of national food basket

€/t, t/a

Social Use of Land changes in land tenure and access evidence13

Healthy Livelihoods and Labor Conditions

Adherence to ILO Principles evidence

Source: compiled from OEKO (2012); * = considering by- and co-products of bioenergy life cycles

9 Data for 2020; until 2030, a revised ILUC factor should be determined which reflects progress regarding international policies to contain or reduce LUC effects

10 See http://www.iinas.org/Work/Projects/REDEX/redex.html11 new bioenergy cropping and conversion facilities placed outside of areas with severe water stress12 calculated for life cycles, should be lower than fossil benchmark13 Degree of legitimacy of the process related to the transfer (i.e. change in use or property rights) of land for new

bioenergy production, and extent to which due process is followed in the determination of the new title

Biomass Futures D 4.2: Methodology report on quantification of impacts of sustainability standards on biomass supply

3

Alterra/Oeko-Institut Biomass Futures: Methodology

3 Methodology to Analyze Impacts of Sustainability Standards on Bioenergy Supply

The overall land use and forestry potentials in the EU27 have been analysed in Work Package 3 of Biomass Futures (Alterra, IIASA 2012) and established the baseline (reference) cases for 2020 and 2030. These potentials take into account only the current RED sustainability requirements (i.e. only GHG emissions from life-cycles and direct LUC, some biodiversity constraints) for liquid biofuels and bioliquids.

To factor in the “RED plus” criteria developed in Biomass Futures Work Package 4 (OEKO 2012), the reference potentials were re-calculated applying additional constraints which reduce the overall availability of biomass.

For this, the estimated land use for domestic biofuel feedstock production on future unused/released land potential (as compared to 2004) that may be used for dedicated biomass cultivation using annual or perennial crops were screened with additional scenario assumptions (see scheme in Figure 2) :

High-biodiverse land was “forbidden” (permanent grasslands, HNV farmland as additional “no-go” areas)

Life-cycle GHG reduction requirements – taking into account ILUC – were increased

Water and soil restrictions due to slope and bioclimatic conditions were applied.

Figure 1: Approach for Regionalized Sustainable Bioenergy Potentials

Source: Alterra, IIASA (2012)

Biomass Futures D 4.2: Methodology report on quantification of impacts of sustainability standards on biomass supply

4

Alterra/Oeko-Institut Biomass Futures: Methodology

The criteria used to derive the sustainable potentials are listed in the following table.

Table 2: Sustainability Criteria in Biomass Futures Potential Analysis

Scenario GHG mitigation criteria 2020

GHG mitigation criteria 2030

Other sustainability constraints 2020 and 2030

Reference Only for biofuels and

bioliquids consumed in EU a

GHG mitigation of 50% as

compared to fossil fuel is

required. This excludes

compensation for iLUC-

related GHG emissions.

Only for biofuels and bioliquids

consumed in EU a GHG

mitigation of 50% as compared

to fossil fuel is required. This

excludes compensation for

iLUC-related GHG emissions.

Only for biofuels and bioliquids

consumed in EU limitations on the

use of biomass from biodiverse land

or land with high carbon stock.

Sustainability For all bioenergy consumed

in the EU the following

mitigation requirements are

set:

Biofuel/bioliquids: 70%

mitigation as compared to

fossil fuel (comparator EU

average diesel and petrol

emissions 2020).

Bioelectricity and heat: 70%

mitigation as compared to

fossil energy (comparator

country specific depending on

2020 fossil mix) .

This includes compensation

for iLUC related GHG

emissions.

For all bioenergy consumed in

the EU the following mitigation

requirements are set:

Biofuel/bioliquids: 80%

mitigation as compared to fossil

fuel (comparator EU average

diesel and petrol emission

2030)

Bioelectricity and heat: 80%

mitigation as compared to fossil

energy (comparator country

specific depending on 2030

fossil mix)

This includes compensation for

iLUC related GHG emissions.

For all bioenergy consumed in EU

limitations on the use of biomass

from biodiverse land or land with

high carbon stock.

Source: Alterra, IIASA (2012)

The most important criteria for the sustainable potentials is the minimum GHG reduction requirement: For biofuels, it should include a compensation for iLUC related emissions, and reach 70% (by 2020) and 80% (by 2030).This was also applied for cultivated biomass used for heat and electricity production.

For the estimation of the minimum GHG reduction, the approach developed in the EEA (2012) study was used which includes GHG emissions from iLUC effects and

Biomass Futures D 4.2: Methodology report on quantification of impacts of sustainability standards on biomass supply

5

Alterra/Oeko-Institut Biomass Futures: Methodology

taking into account the type of feedstock and related downstream bioenergy pathways.

From this, the GHG reduction efficiency was derived in three steps:

1. Direct LUC emissions from the cultivation stage which are strongly linked to input and output levels which differ per EU region (NUTS 2 level)

2. The downstream emissions of the biomass feedstock conversion routes

3. The iLUC GHG emission factor (if previous land use is displaced).

For Steps 1 and 2, the following figure shows the overall data flows of the calculation.

Figure 2: Data Flows for the Sustainability Analysis of Bioenergy Systems

Source: own compilation by Alterra and Oeko-Institut

This approach is more spatially disaggregated than the GLOBIOM model used in Biomass Futures to determine global impacts14.

14 See IIASA (2012) for details. GLOBIOM was used in Work Package 3 to analyze the potential global GHG and biodiversity effects of biomass imports, i.e. impacts occurring outside of the EU27.

Biomass Futures D 4.2: Methodology report on quantification of impacts of sustainability standards on biomass supply

6

Alterra/Oeko-Institut Biomass Futures: Methodology

The emissions from cultivation and LUC were calculated using the Miterra-Europe model which assesses the impact of measures, policies and land-use changes on environmental indicators at the NUTS-2 and Member State level in the EU27 (Veldhof 2009).

A description of the calculation is given elsewhere (Alterra, IIASA 2012; EEA 2012).

The emissions of the downstream part of the bioenergy pathways and of the fossil comparators are based on GEMIS15

For Step 3, a simplified approach towards iLUC-related GHG emissions was applied using an “ILUC factor” for the different bioenergy systems which was taken from the EEA (2012) study. With that, an average iLUC GHG factor was calculated to estimate the GHG reduction for each bioenergy pathway.

For the sustainable potentials, stricter sustainability criteria apply than in the reference, and these were also applied to solid and gaseous biomass sources.

15 See www.gemis.de for details. Data on the life-cycle GHG emissions calculated for Biomass Futures are given in Deliverable D 3.4 (Alterra, IIASA 2012) and the EEA (2012) study.

Biomass Futures D 4.2: Methodology report on quantification of impacts of sustainability standards on biomass supply

7

Alterra/Oeko-Institut Biomass Futures: Methodology

4 Key Results of the Analysis

The spatially disaggregated bioenergy potentials which used the sustainability criteria are given in Deliverable 3.3 (Alterra, IIASA 2012), and summarized in the following figure for the EU27 aggregation.

Figure 3: Reference and Sustainable Bioenergy Potentials in the EU27

Source: Alterra, IIASA (2012)

The results of the cost-supply curves (see Figure 3) can be translated into cost differences between the reference and the sustainable bioenergy potentials, as shown in the following figure.

Biomass Futures D 4.2: Methodology report on quantification of impacts of sustainability standards on biomass supply

8

Alterra/Oeko-Institut Biomass Futures: Methodology

Figure 4: Cost Differences between the Reference and Sustainable Bioenergy Potentials in the EU27 in 2020

Source: Alterra, OEKO (2012)

These results indicate that the total sustainable bioenergy potential in the EU27 will be slightly lower, but also less costly:

Due to the sustainability restrictions which especially disfavor annual bioenergy crops, the costly options available in the reference potentials are not part of the sustainable potential, thus reducing the total cost.

A similar effect exists for the additional roundwood extraction: this would be available in the reference potential – but at a high-cost – and avoided in the sustainability case.

Thus, the impact of the sustainability criteria for the European bioenergy potential is twofold:

The overall availability of bioenergy is reduced by some 10% until 2030 The average cost is slightly reduced in parallel.

It should be noted, though, that the spatially disaggregated results (Member State and NUTS-2 levels) differ significantly so that policy considerations should be based on the refined results given in Deliverable 3.3 (Alterra, IIASA 2012).

Biomass Futures D 4.2: Methodology report on quantification of impacts of sustainability standards on biomass supply

9

Alterra/Oeko-Institut Biomass Futures: Methodology

References

Alterra 2012: Working paper on results of the bottom- up analysis of sustainability constraints for regionalised biomass potentials; Deliverable 4.3 of the Biomass Futures project: Elbersen B et al.; Wageningen

Alterra, IIASA (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis) 2012: Atlas of EU biomass potentials - Deliverable 3.3: Spatially detailed and quantified overview of EU biomass potential taking into account the main criteria determining biomass availability from different sources; Elbersen B et al.; Wageningen http://www.biomassfutures.eu/work_packages/WP3%20Supply/D_3_3__Atlas_of_technical_and_economic_biomass_potential_FINAL_Feb_2012.pdf

Börjesson P, Tufvesson L 2011: Agricultural crop-based biofuels – resource efficiency and environmental performance including direct land use changes; in: Journal of Cleaner Production vol. 19 pp. 108-120

Boettcher H et al. 2012: Setting priorities for land management to mitigate climate change; in: Carbon Balance and Management 2012, 7:5

Bringezu S, O’Brien M, Schütz H 2012: Beyond biofuels: Assessing global land use for domestic consumption of biomass - A conceptual and empirical contribution to sustainable management of global resources; in: Land Use Policy vol. 29 pp. 224– 232

EC (European Commission) 2009: Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC; OJ June 5, 2009 L 140 pp. 16-62 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:140:0016:0062:EN:PDF

EC (European Commission) 2010a: Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on sustainability requirements for the use of solid and gaseous biomass sources in electricity, heating and cooling; SEC(2010) 65/SEC(2010) 66; Brussels http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/transparency_platform/doc/2010_report/com_2010_0011_3_report.pdf

EC (European Commission) 2010b: Report from the Commission on indirect land-use change related to biofuels and bioliquids; COM(2010) 811 final; Brussels http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/biofuels/doc/land-use-change/com_2010_811_report_en.pdf

EP (European Parliament) 2012: Proceedings of the EP ILUC Workshop, Jan 25, 2012 in Brussels http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/studiesdownload.html?languageDocument=EN&file=67431

GBEP (Global Bio-Energy Partnership) 2011: The GBEP Sustainability Indicators for Bioenergy; Rome http://www.globalbioenergy.org/fileadmin/user_upload/gbep/docs/Indicators/Report_21_December.pdf

IEA (International Energy Agency) 2012: Technology Roadmap – Bioenergy for electricity and heat; Paris

Biomass Futures D 4.2: Methodology report on quantification of impacts of sustainability standards on biomass supply

10

Alterra/Oeko-Institut Biomass Futures: Methodology

http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/bioenergy.pdf

IFEU (Institute for Energy and Environmental Research), CI (Copernicus Institute), OEKO (Oeko-Institut - Institute for applied ecology) 2012: Global Assessments and Guidelines for Sustainable Liquid Biofuels Production in Developing Countries; GEF Targeted Research Project executed by UNEP/FAO/UNIDO; Heidelberg/Utrecht/Darmstadt http://www.unep.org/bioenergy/Portals/48107/doc/activities/GEF%20Liquid%20Biofuel%20Project.pdf

IFPRI (International Food Policy Research Institute) 2011: Assessing the Land Use Change Consequences of European Biofuel Policies; prepared for EC DG TRADE; Washington DC http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2011/october/tradoc_148289.pdf

IIASA (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis) 2012: Deliverable 3.4: Biomass availability & supply analysis; Böttcher H et al.; Laxenburg http://www.biomassfutures.eu/work_packages/WP3%20Supply/Biomass%20Futures%20WP3%20Del34_draft_for_stakeholders.pdf

JRC-IE (EC Joint Research Centre - Institute for Energy) 2010: Indirect Land Use Change from increased biofuels demand - Comparison of models and results for marginal biofuels production from different feedstocks; Edwards R, Mulligan D, Marelli L; Ispra http://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/bf-tp/download/ILUC_modelling_comparison.pdf

JRC-IE (EC Joint Research Centre - Institute for Energy) 2011a: Critical issues in estimating ILUC emission - Outcomes of an expert consultation 9-10 November 2010, Ispra (Italy); Marelli, Luisa/Mulligan, Declan/Edwards, Robert; report JRC 64429/EUR 24816 EN; Ispra http://iet.jrc.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/EU_report_24816.pdf

JRC-IE (EC Joint Research Centre - Institute for Energy) 2011b: Estimate of GHG emissions from global land use change scenarios, Marelli, L. et al.; report JRC 64430/EUR 24817 EN; Ispra http://iet.jrc.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Technical_Note_EU24817.pdf

NNFCC (UK National Centre for Biorenewable Energy, Fuels and Materials) 2011: Evaluation of Bioliquid Feedstocks & Heat, Elec. & CHP Technologies; report NNFCC 11-016; Heslington http://www.nnfcc.co.uk/tools/evaluation-of-bioliquid-feedstocks-and-heat-electricity-and-chp-technologies-nnfcc-11-016/at_download/file

OEKO (Oeko-Institut - Institute for Applied Ecology) 2011: Indirect Land Use Change and Biofuels; Fritsche U, Wiegmann K; study prepared for the European Parliament's Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety; IP/A/ENVI/ST/2010-15; Brusselshttp://www.europarl.europa.eu/activities/committees/studies/download.do?language=en&file=35128

OEKO (Oeko-Institut - Institute for Applied Ecology) 2012: Sustainable Bioenergy: Key Criteria and Indicators - Deliverable D 4.1 of the Biomass Futures project; Fritsche, U et al.; Darmstadt

UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme), OEKO (Oeko-Institut - Institute for

Biomass Futures D 4.2: Methodology report on quantification of impacts of sustainability standards on biomass supply

11

Alterra/Oeko-Institut Biomass Futures: Methodology

applied ecology), IEA BioT43 (IEA Bioenergy Task 43) 2011: The Bioenergy and Water Nexus - Full Report; Paris http://www.unep.fr/energy/bioenergy/documents/pdf/Assessing%20Biofuels-full%20report-Web.pdf

Whittaker C et al. 2011: Energy and greenhouse gas balance of the use of forest residues for bioenergy production in the UK; in: Biomass and Bioenergy vol. 35 no. 11, pp. 4581-4594

Biomass Futures D 4.2: Methodology report on quantification of impacts of sustainability standards on biomass supply

12

Alterra/Oeko-Institut Biomass Futures: Methodology

Abbreviations

BSI Better Sugarcane Initiative

CBD United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity

CI Copernicus Institute, Utrecht University

EC European Commission

EEA European Environment Agency

EU European Union

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

FCCC Framework Convention on Climate Change

FSC Forest Stewardship Council

GBEP Global Bioenergy Partnership

GHG greenhouse gas(es)

IEA International Energy Agency

iLUC indirect land use changes

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources

IWMI International Water Management Institute

LUC land use changes

PEFC Pan-European Forest Certification

RED EU Directive for the Promotion of Renewable Energy Sources

REDD Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation

RSB Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels

RSPO Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil

RTFO Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation

RTRS Roundtable on Responsible Soy

SEI Stockholm Environment Institute

UK United Kingdom

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

UNEP-WCMC United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre

WBGU German Advisory Council on Global Change

WWF World-Wide Fund for Nature

Biomass Futures D 4.2: Methodology report on quantification of impacts of sustainability standards on biomass supply

13

Annex: Data Background

Table 3 Data for land use from electricity generation in the EU, year 2030

electricity fromland use m2/GJel

Note

el-mix EU27 0,29 Excluding transmission and distributionlignite 0,10 Lignite in Germany, new steam-turbine powerplantcoal 0,06 import coal (surface mining), new steam-turbine powerplantnuclear 0,04 German supply mix, steam-turbine powerplantnatural gas 0,02 EU supply mix incl. imports, new combined-cycle powerplanthydro 0,03 100 MWel run-of-river plantwind onshore 0,26 10 x 2 MWel onshore wind parksolar-PV 2,7 1 kWel (peak) system, full land usesolar-CSP 1,9 80 MWel concentrating solar power system in Southern Spaingeothermal 1,2 1 MWel ORC system

biogas-maize ICE 106Biogas from maize in internal combustion engine cogeneration plant (energy allocation)

SRC cogen 112Woodchips from short-rotation coppice in steam-turbine cogeneration plant (energy allocation)

bio-SNG SRC cogen 164Biomethane from short-rotation coppice in gas-turbine cogeneration plant (energy allocation)

bio-SNG SRC CC 128 Biomethane from SRC in CC powerplantSource: own computation with GEMIS 4.8; ORC= organic rankine cycle; ICE = internal combustion engine; SRC = short-rotation coppice; CC = combined-cycle

Table 4 Data on land productivity for bioenergy systems, year 2030

feedstock (EU production) bioenergy output land productivity GJbio/ha

rapeseed 1G biodiesel 87

short-rotation coppice 2G biodiesel (BtL) 116

switchgrass 2G biodiesel (BtL) 75

wheat (grain) 1G EtOH 128

switchgrass 2G EtOH 80

short-rotation coppice pellets 183

switchgrass pellets 198

short-rotation coppice biomethane 126

for comparison: non-EU production

sugarcane 1G EtOH 207

palm 1G biodiesel 154Source: own computation with GEMIS 4.8; calculated using energy allocation for by- and co-products; 1G = 1st generation; 2G = 2nd generation; BtL = biomass-to-liquid; EtOH = ethanol

Sustainable Bioenergy: Key Criteria and Indicators - Annex

Alterra/Oeko-Institut Biomass Futures: Methodology

Biomass Futures D 4.2: Methodology report on quantification of impacts of sustainability standards on biomass supply

2