- Email: [email protected]
IEA Bioenergy update
Biomass and Bioenergy
International Energy Agency “This article was produced by the Implementing Agreement on Bioenergy, which forms part of a programme of international energy technology collaboration undertaken under the auspices of the International Energy Agency.”
News from the Secretariat The 57th meeting of the Executive Committee was held in Paris, France on 18-19 May, with J. Peter Hall as Chairman and John Tustin as Secretary. The meeting was supported by IEA Headquarters. The Chairman expressed the appreciation of the ExCo to Peter Tulej and Bridget Errington for the excellent meeting arrangements. The opportunity was also taken for a joint meeting with IEA Headquarters staff. Some of the outcomes of these meetings are detailed below. Changes in the Executive Committee New Executive Committee Members are: Mr Maurice Dohy, France and Mr Kees Kwant, The Netherlands. New Alternate Members are: Mr JeanChristophe Pouet, France; Mr Erik Wissema, The Netherlands; Dr Per Nielsen, New Zealand; Mr Marcus Phago, South Africa and Dr Maria Fernandez Gutierrez, European Commission. Task Participation for 2006 Since ExCo56, Germany has joined Tasks 31, 38 and 40 and has also been granted Observer status in Task 36. In addition, Italy and UK have joined Task 40. Task participation by the Member Countries now totals 110, which is the highest level ever in the history of the Agreement. Special Project A new project ‘Analysis and identification of gaps in fundamental research for the production of second
IEA Bioenergy U P D A T E
2 4
generation liquid transportation biofuels’ has been started under the umbrella of Task 41: Bioenergy Systems Analysis. This project will be led by Professor Michael Ladisch of the Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department, Purdue University, USA. There are six participants: Finland, The Netherlands, Sweden, UK, USA and the EC. IEA Bioenergy Website Update The upgrading of the IEA Bioenergy website has now been completed. The look and feel of the old site has been maintained as much as possible so as to cause minimal disruption to users, whilst providing improved functionality and flexibility. Changes to the side menu panel include drop-down menu items, providing more direct access to documents. The library, media and events items can be sorted by clicking on any column heading, and some longer lists such as the library list, support grouping by categories. Any comments on the new website are most welcome - please contact the Secretary. Keith Richards Awarded OBE In the Queen’s birthday honours list of 2005, Keith Richards was awarded an OBE for his services to sustainable development made over the past 25 years. This award recognises his work for the UK Government and the South East Region of England on renewable energy, including contributions to the IEA and other international fora. Keith reported ‘the Queen asked what sustainable development really meant. Both a hard and an easy question and with only one minute to answer before ‘the handshake’ a real challenge. I did my best. I did also point out that TV Bioenergy was in discussion with Crown Estates
Biomass and Bioenergy
IEA Bioenergy
International Energy Agency (the organisation that manages the Royal Estate) concerning the supply of wood fuel to local projects in the Thames Valley. Her Majesty did know about this which was immensely reassuring. We look forward one day to perhaps being a purveyor of quality wood chip with a royal pedigree!’
He also assisted his wife Susan in her role as Secretary of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants. His colleagues in IEA Bioenergy extend their deepest sympathy to Susan at this time.
Keith also recently received a Regional Government sustainable business award for innovation for the bioenergy work that TV Energy is doing in the South East of England.
ExCo57 Workshop
Obituary - Dr Robert Gambles It is with sincere regret that we report the recent death in Toronto of Robert (Bob) Gambles after a short illness and period of hospitalisation. Bob gained his PhD in wood science at the University of Toronto and held a position there as a research assistant for a number of years before his time became dedicated primarily to IEA Bioenergy. In addition to his organisational skills, his attention to detail and his mentoring, he is well remembered by his university colleagues for his sense of humour, his warmth, and his loyalty to his family and friends. When the Executive Committee approved Tasks II, III and IV in April 1986, Bob was appointed assistant to Louis Zsuffa, Operating Agent for Task II ‘Improvement of Biomass Growth and Production Technology in Short Rotation Forestry for Energy’. He continued in this role until 1997. During that period, he was a regular participant at ExCo meetings and Technical Advisory Committees. He attended his last ExCo meeting in May 1997. His broad knowledge of forestry and forest biomass production, combined with strong organisational skills and attention to detail, were a valuable asset to the management of the biomass production Activities and Tasks. He was well regarded by his IEA Bioenergy colleagues for these attributes. Following his retirement from working with the Implementing Agreement in 1997, Bob devoted his time to his hobbies, particularly bird watching, photography, art, music, wood working, and travel.
A very successful workshop titled ‘Planning for the New Triennium’ was well attended by ExCo Members and Task Leaders. Dr J. Peter Hall, the Rapporteur summarised the discussions as follows: Direction and Leadership from the ExCo Members identified a need for more ‘direction’ and ‘leadership’ by the ExCo. There were a number of suggestions on how to achieve this and the best format for it. Also the Operating Agents’ interaction with the Tasks needed to be uniformly more supportive and strengthened by new mechanisms, e.g., a ‘managing coordinator’ role was proposed. Task Focus Members identified the two main functions of the Tasks as technology information exchange and the development of policy relevant outputs. Both of these need to continue, with more effort on developing policy relevant outputs. The technology information exchange function is perceived as working well, but the second function has yet to be fully developed. Policy Related Outputs Members concluded that a process was needed to enable the Agreement to deliver on the policy related outputs, but no consensus or decision was reached as to how that would be accomplished. It was noted that the 10% held back funds were to be used to support this activity. Hall said Members decided that future strategic outputs should be based on the priorities
Biomass and Bioenergy
International Energy Agency developed by a committee headed by Dr Douglas Kaempf and presented at ExCo55 in Copenhagen. Members also decided that a position paper on ‘Life cycle analysis of biomass fuels, power, heat and products as compared to their petroleum-based counterparts and other renewables’ should be prepared under the direction of Task 38, and managed by an ExCo Committee. Support for the Chair and Vice Chair The question of expert advice/support for the Chair/Vice Chair received considerable discussion. The need for this position arose from a heavy workload responding to enquiries from IEA Headquarters. It was noted that these responses all provide positive visibility for the Agreement and should be seen as an investment. There was acceptance of the need for additional support and general agreement from the meeting that this was appropriate use of the 10% held back funds. The possibility for the ‘managing coordinator’ position proposed by the Task Leaders to be joined with the ‘expert’ position was discussed and many of the ExCo found this idea to be attractive. A committee was formed to draft a proposal for ExCo58. Selection of Task Leaders Discussion on the selection process for Task Leaders concluded that it was best to leave the current system in place. The ExCo was not in favour of term limits for Task Leaders. Members acknowledged the value of bringing in new Task Leaders and Tasks, but considered that the contribution of the experience of the long-serving Task Leaders outweighed any other advantages. Liquid Biofuels There was agreement that the liquid biofuels area needed better coordination and a workshop was suggested to address the issue.
IEA Bioenergy New Members/Sponsors Expansion of the Agreement as an end in itself was not considered appropriate. It was decided that the Agreement would examine each application on its merits. Only countries showing strong interest and with a significant national programme in bioenergy RD&D should be considered. Similarly the question of Sponsors should be evaluated on a case by case basis. Planning Process Members felt that the planning process used (in particular the questionnaire summaries) was very useful, both for guidance in the next triennium, and in providing long term benefits for the Implementing Agreement.
Joint Meeting with IEAHQ In conjunction with ExCo57, 36 attendees (including nine IEA Headquarters staff) participated in a joint meeting on 17 May. There were some excellent presentations from the Headquarters staff. Maria Argiri, Senior Energy Analyst gave a comprehensive overview titled ‘World Energy Outlook: Strategic Challenges’. The challenges include security of supply, CO2 emissions and energy and poverty. She illustrated some scenarios and then drew some key messages: • If governments stick with current policies, global energy needs will be more than 50% higher in 2030 than today. • Projected market trends raise serious concerns: increased risk for energy security; rising environmental concerns and persistent energy poverty. • Renewable energy can contribute largely towards meeting these challenges.
Biomass and Bioenergy
International Energy Agency
IEA Bioenergy
Michel Francoeur, Head of Coal, Electricity and Renewables Statistics Division, made a presentation titled ‘Renewables and Wastes: Energy Statistics at IEA’. He pointed out the need for a solid data collection framework for proper monitoring and reporting of the renewable energy market. This in turn provides a foundation for policy and market analyses and leads to a better-informed policy decision process.
Other presentations from IEA Headquarters included: Jan Barbiere on ‘Global Renewable Energy Policies and Measures Database’, Samantha Ölz on ‘Renewables and Energy Security’, Carrie Pottinger on ‘Raising Awareness/IAs’ and Peter Tulej on ‘Role of CERT/REWP’, ‘IA on Renewable Energy Technology Deployment (RETD)’ and ‘IEA’s Global Renewable Energy Markets and Policies Programme’.
Nobuyuki Hara of the Renewable Energy Technology Unit (REU) made a presentation ‘Renewable Energy RD&D Priorities’. He said the priority RD&D areas for biomass were: availability of cheap feedstock; conversion efficiency of basic processes through material development; the bio-refinery concept and dedicated crops; ethanol from lignocellulosics; bioenergy in a hydrogen economy and social and environmental issues. The key messages were that renewable energy RD&D represents less than 8% of total IEA energy RD&D and has not increased for the past 20 years; renewable energy RD&D spending and markets are concentrated in few countries; RD&D has to complement market deployment policies to realise renewable energy potential; cost reduction is still needed to achieve further market penetration and RD&D should address both technical and nontechnical barriers to deployment.
Dr Antonio Pflüger, Head of Energy Technology Collaboration Division, spoke about IEA’s NEET (Networks of Expertise in Energy Technology) Initiative. This is IEA’s response to a request from the G8 Leaders at their Gleneagles meeting in 2005. The aim is to activate dynamic worldwide networks for energy technology R&D, as part of their pledge of concerted action to secure a ‘clean, clever, and competitive energy future’.
Ralph Sims also of the REU spoke on biofuels. Bioethanol is currently 2% of the world gasoline market and biodiesel is 0.2% of the world diesel market. He said engine manufacturers were generally supportive of the move to increased production of biofuels but trade barriers needed to be removed. Semi-tropical energy crops (e.g., sugar cane, palm oil) are generally more cost-effective feedstocks than temperate crops, which need subsidies and carbon credits to be competitive. He displayed an interesting graph of biofuels vs. oil price. On the future potential of biofuels he said national target levels by 2010-12 equate to 2.8% of current transport fuel demand. The World Energy Outlook for 2004 suggests biofuels will have 4% market share by 2030; others suggest 2025% by 2050.
Peter Tulej also made a presentation titled ‘Bioenergy IA/IEA Collaboration Opportunities’. He outlined some of the things that could be improved e.g., visibility at HQ level, better marketing of products, participation in REU projects, proposing new joint projects and the ability to respond quickly to emerging issues. He also detailed a number of current collaboration opportunities including the World Energy Outlook, policy analysis, statistics, biofuels and the NEET (G8) initiative. The meeting ended with a wide ranging discussion, including opportunities for information sharing and collaboration on projects of mutual interest. J. Peter Hall, on behalf of IEA Bioenergy, agreed that the Implementing Agreement should assist with these and especially asked for a more interactive environment in which this could take place. Peter Tulej had raised the concern that IAs including IEA Bioenergy needed to be able to respond quickly with input to emerging technology and market issues. ExCo Members were appreciative of this and there was general agreement that IEA Bioenergy should position itself to provide timely responses - possibly through the use of the 10% held back funds.
Biomass and Bioenergy
International Energy Agency
IEA Bioenergy
Bioenergy in France Jean-Christophe Pouet, ADEME, France. The energy consumed in France comes mainly from non-renewable fossil resources. Despite a commitment under the Kyoto Protocol to stabilise its greenhouse gas emissions in 2010 at the same level as in 1990, current trends suggest France’s emissions will exceed this target by more than 50 million tonnes CO2 equivalent. Using biomass for energy and raw materials is one of the pathways to achieve the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Woodfuel represents about 10 MTOE annually, or 4% of primary energy consumption in France. The Woodfuel Programme 2000-2006 includes activities in the residential (over 80% of fuelwood consumption), industrial and collective/tertiary sectors. In the residential sector, the aim is to improve the energy and environmental performance of household appliances by supporting fuel standards and appliance labelling. The recommended energy and environmental performance criteria were approved by the Finance Ministry for a 40% tax credit effective 1 January 2005, and initial results show a clear market trend towards high-performance devices and increased sales volume. As a result, emissions should fall and the use of fuelwood for heating should rise. The objective for boilers in industrial and collective facilities is to displace 300,000 TOE of fossil fuels over the period 2000-2006, avoiding 750,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions. The development of this market remains dependent on a sure and steady supply of high-quality fuelwood. Intermediate results are very encouraging because consumption of wood chips in this sector was 14 times higher in 2005 than in 2000. Furthermore, today there are over 60 major fuelwood suppliers throughout the country. The increase in oil prices has been favourable to the development of renewable energies and resources, and France has set a number of objectives in its Energy Policy law enacted in July 2005.
• Boost the share of renewable electricity to 21%, from 14% in 2003. • Increase the share of thermal renewable energy from 10 to 15 MTOE. • Expand the use of biofuels for transport to 5.75% by 2010, compared to less than 1% today. In light of these ambitious objectives, biomass is poised to play a crucial role. France possesses abundant forestry and agricultural resources,
Biomass and Bioenergy
International Energy Agency including 15 million hectares of wooded land in which more than 40% of the annual forest growth is not exploited. Over 5 million hectares of agricultural land is used for export crops or set-aside land, some of which could be devoted to energy crops. Experts estimate there are 40 MTOE biomass resources that could be used for energy, of which only 10 MTOE are used today. Choices must be made between different biomass uses - heating, electricity, fuels - to make the most of this contribution. With current technology, electricity generation alone is a waste of resources, because conversion efficiencies of combustion and steam turbine are around 20%. Even if gasification technologies achieve 40% efficiency in the near future, cogeneration is a better option for getting the most value from a limited resource. Heating systems must first be modernised, particularly in singlefamily homes where the same heating output could be obtained with 25% to 30% less biomass (for 6 million homes fully or partly heated with fuelwood).The use of fuelwood for industrial and collective facilities must be developed, in particular via district heating, preferably using cogeneration. The most valuable use of biomass, partly because there are no other realistic options for substitution in the short and medium term, is to replace fossil fuels used for transport. This should be France’s priority if the promise of lignocellulosic biofuels is confirmed. To respond to the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect the environment, we must frame our action today in terms of sustainable development for our country. Forestry, agriculture and energy crops, and energy production facilities will enable us to increase our energy independence, conserve fossil resources, develop local and world economies, and shape our countryside by maintaining rural areas. For more information contact Jean-Christophe Pouet, Woodfuel Project Manager at ADEME. Email: [email protected]
IEA Bioenergy Task 38/Task 40 Joint Workshop A report from the Task 38/Task 40 Workshop ‘Greenhouse Gas Credits Trade Versus Biomass Trade: weighing the benefits’ held in Trondheim, Norway in April 2006. Trade in biomass fuels, electricity from renewable resources, renewable certificates and CO2 credits provide options for business and policy makers to use biomass available in other parts of the globe to reduce GHG emissions, increase renewable energy and meet increasing energy demands. The main objective of this workshop was to address the advantages and disadvantages of biomass trading possibilities, and to assess the necessary accounting rules and criteria to select the most efficient mechanisms under varying circumstances. It provided a forum to exchange and gain information on the status of the various trading markets. Session one on international biomass trade and greenhouse gas accounting covered examples of developing and established trading markets. One case study revealed exporting wood pellets from beetle-damaged forests in Canada to the Netherlands for electricity production could result in net GHG emission reductions of over 200 ktonnes of CO2 Eq per year. In Belgium and the Netherlands, the sustainability of the biomass import schemes are of increasing importance, in particular the overall GHG and energy balances of (imported) biomass and use. Furthermore, two studies were presented evaluating physical trade of biomass from Brazil, Mozambique and Sweden to the Netherlands. Main findings were that transport distances are of minor importance, but that reference systems in both exporting and importing countries have a major impact on the apparent benefits of physical trade vs. trade in CO2 certificates. Also land use change
Biomass and Bioenergy
International Energy Agency accounting rules and the timeframe considered have influence on the results. Session two focused on the use of biomass under emission trading and certificate trading schemes. In Finland the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) has increased the average price of fuel and the amount of biomass available for bioenergy. The increase in price has meant that board manufacturers have reduced production and price may also impact on the pulp and paper industry indicating it is important to look at national policy to avoid such occurrences. Norway has a green certificate system whereby a unit of renewable energy (hydro, wind or biomass) generates a separate green certificate, which can be sold independently of the electricity. Biomass is more complicated to certify than other renewable energies due to the use of renewable and nonrenewable primary energy. To facilitate international trade, internationally harmonised systems are required. CDM was the focus of a number of presentations from a range of perspectives. An overview of CDM projects was presented and indicated that biomass energy projects were the most common CDM projects among renewables, with an expected installed capacity of 2511 MW, largely from cogeneration of bagasse and agricultural waste. A common theme running through presentations was the need for biomass CDM projects to contribute to local sustainable development and other local objectives e.g., job creation, and also have a monitoring or certification system that proves the sustainability of the biomass resource for local use or international trade. International trade in biomass may be in competition with the local use of biomass. The workshop concluded that the various trading options for biomass and emission credits produced by biomass have various pros and cons for buyers and sellers, depending on the potentials, markets and timeframes considered. Nevertheless, trading
IEA Bioenergy options strongly enhance the use of biomass altogether, because supply and demand for energy, CO2 emission reduction and other benefits of biomass can be matched where this was previously not the case. Furthermore, the development of proper and workable GHG accounting systems and overall sustainability evaluations (e.g., for biofuel production and trade) is needed, but could be developed in conjunction with the lessons (being) learned for CDM bio energy projects. This is a very important field for market parties, policy makers and the teams of Tasks 38 and 40 that will certainly be addressed in future work. For further information, please visit www.joanneum.at/iea-bioenergytask38/workshops/ trondheim06/ and www.bioenergytrade.org/
International Energy Agency “This article was produced by the Implementing Agreement on Bioenergy, which forms part of a programme of international energy technology collaboration undertaken under the auspices of the International Energy Agency.”
News from the Secretariat The 57th meeting of the Executive Committee was held in Paris, France on 18-19 May, with J. Peter Hall as Chairman and John Tustin as Secretary. The meeting was supported by IEA Headquarters. The Chairman expressed the appreciation of the ExCo to Peter Tulej and Bridget Errington for the excellent meeting arrangements. The opportunity was also taken for a joint meeting with IEA Headquarters staff. Some of the outcomes of these meetings are detailed below. Changes in the Executive Committee New Executive Committee Members are: Mr Maurice Dohy, France and Mr Kees Kwant, The Netherlands. New Alternate Members are: Mr JeanChristophe Pouet, France; Mr Erik Wissema, The Netherlands; Dr Per Nielsen, New Zealand; Mr Marcus Phago, South Africa and Dr Maria Fernandez Gutierrez, European Commission. Task Participation for 2006 Since ExCo56, Germany has joined Tasks 31, 38 and 40 and has also been granted Observer status in Task 36. In addition, Italy and UK have joined Task 40. Task participation by the Member Countries now totals 110, which is the highest level ever in the history of the Agreement. Special Project A new project ‘Analysis and identification of gaps in fundamental research for the production of second
IEA Bioenergy U P D A T E
2 4
generation liquid transportation biofuels’ has been started under the umbrella of Task 41: Bioenergy Systems Analysis. This project will be led by Professor Michael Ladisch of the Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department, Purdue University, USA. There are six participants: Finland, The Netherlands, Sweden, UK, USA and the EC. IEA Bioenergy Website Update The upgrading of the IEA Bioenergy website has now been completed. The look and feel of the old site has been maintained as much as possible so as to cause minimal disruption to users, whilst providing improved functionality and flexibility. Changes to the side menu panel include drop-down menu items, providing more direct access to documents. The library, media and events items can be sorted by clicking on any column heading, and some longer lists such as the library list, support grouping by categories. Any comments on the new website are most welcome - please contact the Secretary. Keith Richards Awarded OBE In the Queen’s birthday honours list of 2005, Keith Richards was awarded an OBE for his services to sustainable development made over the past 25 years. This award recognises his work for the UK Government and the South East Region of England on renewable energy, including contributions to the IEA and other international fora. Keith reported ‘the Queen asked what sustainable development really meant. Both a hard and an easy question and with only one minute to answer before ‘the handshake’ a real challenge. I did my best. I did also point out that TV Bioenergy was in discussion with Crown Estates
Biomass and Bioenergy
IEA Bioenergy
International Energy Agency (the organisation that manages the Royal Estate) concerning the supply of wood fuel to local projects in the Thames Valley. Her Majesty did know about this which was immensely reassuring. We look forward one day to perhaps being a purveyor of quality wood chip with a royal pedigree!’
He also assisted his wife Susan in her role as Secretary of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants. His colleagues in IEA Bioenergy extend their deepest sympathy to Susan at this time.
Keith also recently received a Regional Government sustainable business award for innovation for the bioenergy work that TV Energy is doing in the South East of England.
ExCo57 Workshop
Obituary - Dr Robert Gambles It is with sincere regret that we report the recent death in Toronto of Robert (Bob) Gambles after a short illness and period of hospitalisation. Bob gained his PhD in wood science at the University of Toronto and held a position there as a research assistant for a number of years before his time became dedicated primarily to IEA Bioenergy. In addition to his organisational skills, his attention to detail and his mentoring, he is well remembered by his university colleagues for his sense of humour, his warmth, and his loyalty to his family and friends. When the Executive Committee approved Tasks II, III and IV in April 1986, Bob was appointed assistant to Louis Zsuffa, Operating Agent for Task II ‘Improvement of Biomass Growth and Production Technology in Short Rotation Forestry for Energy’. He continued in this role until 1997. During that period, he was a regular participant at ExCo meetings and Technical Advisory Committees. He attended his last ExCo meeting in May 1997. His broad knowledge of forestry and forest biomass production, combined with strong organisational skills and attention to detail, were a valuable asset to the management of the biomass production Activities and Tasks. He was well regarded by his IEA Bioenergy colleagues for these attributes. Following his retirement from working with the Implementing Agreement in 1997, Bob devoted his time to his hobbies, particularly bird watching, photography, art, music, wood working, and travel.
A very successful workshop titled ‘Planning for the New Triennium’ was well attended by ExCo Members and Task Leaders. Dr J. Peter Hall, the Rapporteur summarised the discussions as follows: Direction and Leadership from the ExCo Members identified a need for more ‘direction’ and ‘leadership’ by the ExCo. There were a number of suggestions on how to achieve this and the best format for it. Also the Operating Agents’ interaction with the Tasks needed to be uniformly more supportive and strengthened by new mechanisms, e.g., a ‘managing coordinator’ role was proposed. Task Focus Members identified the two main functions of the Tasks as technology information exchange and the development of policy relevant outputs. Both of these need to continue, with more effort on developing policy relevant outputs. The technology information exchange function is perceived as working well, but the second function has yet to be fully developed. Policy Related Outputs Members concluded that a process was needed to enable the Agreement to deliver on the policy related outputs, but no consensus or decision was reached as to how that would be accomplished. It was noted that the 10% held back funds were to be used to support this activity. Hall said Members decided that future strategic outputs should be based on the priorities
Biomass and Bioenergy
International Energy Agency developed by a committee headed by Dr Douglas Kaempf and presented at ExCo55 in Copenhagen. Members also decided that a position paper on ‘Life cycle analysis of biomass fuels, power, heat and products as compared to their petroleum-based counterparts and other renewables’ should be prepared under the direction of Task 38, and managed by an ExCo Committee. Support for the Chair and Vice Chair The question of expert advice/support for the Chair/Vice Chair received considerable discussion. The need for this position arose from a heavy workload responding to enquiries from IEA Headquarters. It was noted that these responses all provide positive visibility for the Agreement and should be seen as an investment. There was acceptance of the need for additional support and general agreement from the meeting that this was appropriate use of the 10% held back funds. The possibility for the ‘managing coordinator’ position proposed by the Task Leaders to be joined with the ‘expert’ position was discussed and many of the ExCo found this idea to be attractive. A committee was formed to draft a proposal for ExCo58. Selection of Task Leaders Discussion on the selection process for Task Leaders concluded that it was best to leave the current system in place. The ExCo was not in favour of term limits for Task Leaders. Members acknowledged the value of bringing in new Task Leaders and Tasks, but considered that the contribution of the experience of the long-serving Task Leaders outweighed any other advantages. Liquid Biofuels There was agreement that the liquid biofuels area needed better coordination and a workshop was suggested to address the issue.
IEA Bioenergy New Members/Sponsors Expansion of the Agreement as an end in itself was not considered appropriate. It was decided that the Agreement would examine each application on its merits. Only countries showing strong interest and with a significant national programme in bioenergy RD&D should be considered. Similarly the question of Sponsors should be evaluated on a case by case basis. Planning Process Members felt that the planning process used (in particular the questionnaire summaries) was very useful, both for guidance in the next triennium, and in providing long term benefits for the Implementing Agreement.
Joint Meeting with IEAHQ In conjunction with ExCo57, 36 attendees (including nine IEA Headquarters staff) participated in a joint meeting on 17 May. There were some excellent presentations from the Headquarters staff. Maria Argiri, Senior Energy Analyst gave a comprehensive overview titled ‘World Energy Outlook: Strategic Challenges’. The challenges include security of supply, CO2 emissions and energy and poverty. She illustrated some scenarios and then drew some key messages: • If governments stick with current policies, global energy needs will be more than 50% higher in 2030 than today. • Projected market trends raise serious concerns: increased risk for energy security; rising environmental concerns and persistent energy poverty. • Renewable energy can contribute largely towards meeting these challenges.
Biomass and Bioenergy
International Energy Agency
IEA Bioenergy
Michel Francoeur, Head of Coal, Electricity and Renewables Statistics Division, made a presentation titled ‘Renewables and Wastes: Energy Statistics at IEA’. He pointed out the need for a solid data collection framework for proper monitoring and reporting of the renewable energy market. This in turn provides a foundation for policy and market analyses and leads to a better-informed policy decision process.
Other presentations from IEA Headquarters included: Jan Barbiere on ‘Global Renewable Energy Policies and Measures Database’, Samantha Ölz on ‘Renewables and Energy Security’, Carrie Pottinger on ‘Raising Awareness/IAs’ and Peter Tulej on ‘Role of CERT/REWP’, ‘IA on Renewable Energy Technology Deployment (RETD)’ and ‘IEA’s Global Renewable Energy Markets and Policies Programme’.
Nobuyuki Hara of the Renewable Energy Technology Unit (REU) made a presentation ‘Renewable Energy RD&D Priorities’. He said the priority RD&D areas for biomass were: availability of cheap feedstock; conversion efficiency of basic processes through material development; the bio-refinery concept and dedicated crops; ethanol from lignocellulosics; bioenergy in a hydrogen economy and social and environmental issues. The key messages were that renewable energy RD&D represents less than 8% of total IEA energy RD&D and has not increased for the past 20 years; renewable energy RD&D spending and markets are concentrated in few countries; RD&D has to complement market deployment policies to realise renewable energy potential; cost reduction is still needed to achieve further market penetration and RD&D should address both technical and nontechnical barriers to deployment.
Dr Antonio Pflüger, Head of Energy Technology Collaboration Division, spoke about IEA’s NEET (Networks of Expertise in Energy Technology) Initiative. This is IEA’s response to a request from the G8 Leaders at their Gleneagles meeting in 2005. The aim is to activate dynamic worldwide networks for energy technology R&D, as part of their pledge of concerted action to secure a ‘clean, clever, and competitive energy future’.
Ralph Sims also of the REU spoke on biofuels. Bioethanol is currently 2% of the world gasoline market and biodiesel is 0.2% of the world diesel market. He said engine manufacturers were generally supportive of the move to increased production of biofuels but trade barriers needed to be removed. Semi-tropical energy crops (e.g., sugar cane, palm oil) are generally more cost-effective feedstocks than temperate crops, which need subsidies and carbon credits to be competitive. He displayed an interesting graph of biofuels vs. oil price. On the future potential of biofuels he said national target levels by 2010-12 equate to 2.8% of current transport fuel demand. The World Energy Outlook for 2004 suggests biofuels will have 4% market share by 2030; others suggest 2025% by 2050.
Peter Tulej also made a presentation titled ‘Bioenergy IA/IEA Collaboration Opportunities’. He outlined some of the things that could be improved e.g., visibility at HQ level, better marketing of products, participation in REU projects, proposing new joint projects and the ability to respond quickly to emerging issues. He also detailed a number of current collaboration opportunities including the World Energy Outlook, policy analysis, statistics, biofuels and the NEET (G8) initiative. The meeting ended with a wide ranging discussion, including opportunities for information sharing and collaboration on projects of mutual interest. J. Peter Hall, on behalf of IEA Bioenergy, agreed that the Implementing Agreement should assist with these and especially asked for a more interactive environment in which this could take place. Peter Tulej had raised the concern that IAs including IEA Bioenergy needed to be able to respond quickly with input to emerging technology and market issues. ExCo Members were appreciative of this and there was general agreement that IEA Bioenergy should position itself to provide timely responses - possibly through the use of the 10% held back funds.
Biomass and Bioenergy
International Energy Agency
IEA Bioenergy
Bioenergy in France Jean-Christophe Pouet, ADEME, France. The energy consumed in France comes mainly from non-renewable fossil resources. Despite a commitment under the Kyoto Protocol to stabilise its greenhouse gas emissions in 2010 at the same level as in 1990, current trends suggest France’s emissions will exceed this target by more than 50 million tonnes CO2 equivalent. Using biomass for energy and raw materials is one of the pathways to achieve the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Woodfuel represents about 10 MTOE annually, or 4% of primary energy consumption in France. The Woodfuel Programme 2000-2006 includes activities in the residential (over 80% of fuelwood consumption), industrial and collective/tertiary sectors. In the residential sector, the aim is to improve the energy and environmental performance of household appliances by supporting fuel standards and appliance labelling. The recommended energy and environmental performance criteria were approved by the Finance Ministry for a 40% tax credit effective 1 January 2005, and initial results show a clear market trend towards high-performance devices and increased sales volume. As a result, emissions should fall and the use of fuelwood for heating should rise. The objective for boilers in industrial and collective facilities is to displace 300,000 TOE of fossil fuels over the period 2000-2006, avoiding 750,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions. The development of this market remains dependent on a sure and steady supply of high-quality fuelwood. Intermediate results are very encouraging because consumption of wood chips in this sector was 14 times higher in 2005 than in 2000. Furthermore, today there are over 60 major fuelwood suppliers throughout the country. The increase in oil prices has been favourable to the development of renewable energies and resources, and France has set a number of objectives in its Energy Policy law enacted in July 2005.
• Boost the share of renewable electricity to 21%, from 14% in 2003. • Increase the share of thermal renewable energy from 10 to 15 MTOE. • Expand the use of biofuels for transport to 5.75% by 2010, compared to less than 1% today. In light of these ambitious objectives, biomass is poised to play a crucial role. France possesses abundant forestry and agricultural resources,
Biomass and Bioenergy
International Energy Agency including 15 million hectares of wooded land in which more than 40% of the annual forest growth is not exploited. Over 5 million hectares of agricultural land is used for export crops or set-aside land, some of which could be devoted to energy crops. Experts estimate there are 40 MTOE biomass resources that could be used for energy, of which only 10 MTOE are used today. Choices must be made between different biomass uses - heating, electricity, fuels - to make the most of this contribution. With current technology, electricity generation alone is a waste of resources, because conversion efficiencies of combustion and steam turbine are around 20%. Even if gasification technologies achieve 40% efficiency in the near future, cogeneration is a better option for getting the most value from a limited resource. Heating systems must first be modernised, particularly in singlefamily homes where the same heating output could be obtained with 25% to 30% less biomass (for 6 million homes fully or partly heated with fuelwood).The use of fuelwood for industrial and collective facilities must be developed, in particular via district heating, preferably using cogeneration. The most valuable use of biomass, partly because there are no other realistic options for substitution in the short and medium term, is to replace fossil fuels used for transport. This should be France’s priority if the promise of lignocellulosic biofuels is confirmed. To respond to the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect the environment, we must frame our action today in terms of sustainable development for our country. Forestry, agriculture and energy crops, and energy production facilities will enable us to increase our energy independence, conserve fossil resources, develop local and world economies, and shape our countryside by maintaining rural areas. For more information contact Jean-Christophe Pouet, Woodfuel Project Manager at ADEME. Email: [email protected]
IEA Bioenergy Task 38/Task 40 Joint Workshop A report from the Task 38/Task 40 Workshop ‘Greenhouse Gas Credits Trade Versus Biomass Trade: weighing the benefits’ held in Trondheim, Norway in April 2006. Trade in biomass fuels, electricity from renewable resources, renewable certificates and CO2 credits provide options for business and policy makers to use biomass available in other parts of the globe to reduce GHG emissions, increase renewable energy and meet increasing energy demands. The main objective of this workshop was to address the advantages and disadvantages of biomass trading possibilities, and to assess the necessary accounting rules and criteria to select the most efficient mechanisms under varying circumstances. It provided a forum to exchange and gain information on the status of the various trading markets. Session one on international biomass trade and greenhouse gas accounting covered examples of developing and established trading markets. One case study revealed exporting wood pellets from beetle-damaged forests in Canada to the Netherlands for electricity production could result in net GHG emission reductions of over 200 ktonnes of CO2 Eq per year. In Belgium and the Netherlands, the sustainability of the biomass import schemes are of increasing importance, in particular the overall GHG and energy balances of (imported) biomass and use. Furthermore, two studies were presented evaluating physical trade of biomass from Brazil, Mozambique and Sweden to the Netherlands. Main findings were that transport distances are of minor importance, but that reference systems in both exporting and importing countries have a major impact on the apparent benefits of physical trade vs. trade in CO2 certificates. Also land use change
Biomass and Bioenergy
International Energy Agency accounting rules and the timeframe considered have influence on the results. Session two focused on the use of biomass under emission trading and certificate trading schemes. In Finland the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) has increased the average price of fuel and the amount of biomass available for bioenergy. The increase in price has meant that board manufacturers have reduced production and price may also impact on the pulp and paper industry indicating it is important to look at national policy to avoid such occurrences. Norway has a green certificate system whereby a unit of renewable energy (hydro, wind or biomass) generates a separate green certificate, which can be sold independently of the electricity. Biomass is more complicated to certify than other renewable energies due to the use of renewable and nonrenewable primary energy. To facilitate international trade, internationally harmonised systems are required. CDM was the focus of a number of presentations from a range of perspectives. An overview of CDM projects was presented and indicated that biomass energy projects were the most common CDM projects among renewables, with an expected installed capacity of 2511 MW, largely from cogeneration of bagasse and agricultural waste. A common theme running through presentations was the need for biomass CDM projects to contribute to local sustainable development and other local objectives e.g., job creation, and also have a monitoring or certification system that proves the sustainability of the biomass resource for local use or international trade. International trade in biomass may be in competition with the local use of biomass. The workshop concluded that the various trading options for biomass and emission credits produced by biomass have various pros and cons for buyers and sellers, depending on the potentials, markets and timeframes considered. Nevertheless, trading
IEA Bioenergy options strongly enhance the use of biomass altogether, because supply and demand for energy, CO2 emission reduction and other benefits of biomass can be matched where this was previously not the case. Furthermore, the development of proper and workable GHG accounting systems and overall sustainability evaluations (e.g., for biofuel production and trade) is needed, but could be developed in conjunction with the lessons (being) learned for CDM bio energy projects. This is a very important field for market parties, policy makers and the teams of Tasks 38 and 40 that will certainly be addressed in future work. For further information, please visit www.joanneum.at/iea-bioenergytask38/workshops/ trondheim06/ and www.bioenergytrade.org/