Biobased EconomyaspartofSustainableDevelopment;ReconcilingCompetingClaims.
Conference:SustainableFirstandSecondGenerationBioethanolforEurope– Opportunitiesfor
People,Planet&Profit.Brussels - September26,2017
Prof.Dr.AndréP.C.FaaijAcademicDirector- EnergyAcademyEurope
DistinguishedProfessorEnergySystemAnalysis– UniversityofGroningen
IPCC:Energydemand,GHGemissionsandclimatechange…
2
Energysystemtransformation…
[GEA/vanVuuren etalCoSust,2012]
GlobalbiomassdeploymentinrelationtoGHGmitigation(IPCCAR5,2014)
Advancingmarkets…pushedbytechnologicalprogressandpulledbyhigh/volatileoil
prices• Advancedbiofuels…(strongeconomicperspective)
• Biorefining,biochemicals,biomaterials…
• Aviationandshipping…
[IEABiofuels Roadmap]
Bioethanol from lignocellulosic biomass
3C5H10O5->5C2H5OH+5CO2 (1)C6H12O6 ->2C2H5OH+2CO2 (2)
Hamelincketal.,Biomass&bioenergy,2005
Prepared Feedstock
ASU
Gasif ier Gas Cleanup
Power production
FT-liquids production
H2production
AGR
MeOH production
Urea production
CO2compression
Claus/SCOT
7
FT-fuels
MeOH
Urea
Liquid S
H2
O2
O2
N2
CO2
CO2H2S
S-compounds
Sour WGS
SweetWGS
An ultimate energy transition machine: flex-fuel IG/synfuel/power +CCS
Majorinvestments inChina.- Nooil for transport!- 50%biomass +CCS=net0CO2emission.
About50%ofcarbon!
[Meerman et al., RSER, 2012]
GHG emissions per km driven
[VanVliet etal.,2009]
No CCS CCS
But,BBEfaceskeyhurdles…• Negativeperceptiononbiomassuseforenergy(andmaterials)inkeymarkets(includingEC;REDtoEXCLUDEiLUC mitigation…).
• Policyarenaisdividedandfailstocombinekeypriorities(agri,energy,climate,development).
• UncertaininvestmentclimatestallsessentialtechnologicallearningofadvancedBBE-options.
• Toolimitedattentionforsynergy betweensustainableagriculture,forestry,landuseandbiomassproduction.
9
Bioenergy potentials[2050](colorsbasedonexpertopinion).(IPCC– AR5WGIII,2014)
Different scenario’s for:Energy, land use, agriculture…
(O’Neilletal.,2014)
Scenarios• SSP1:Optimisticworld(lowchallengestomitigationandadaptation)• SSP2:Middleoftheroad• SSP3:Pessimisticworld(highchallengestomitigationandadaptation)
VassilisDaioglou- Theroleofbiomassinclimatechangemitigation11
TheoreticalPotential:Drivenbyincreaseddemandofagriculture&forestryproducts
EcologicalPotential:Followssimilartrend,butlesspronounced
AvailablePotential:Oppositetrend,verysmalldifferences
Explanation:competingusesgrowsignificantlyfromSSP1 toSSP3.Differentdriversacrossscenarioscanceleachotherout.
Supply biomass Residues
SSP1
SSP2SSP3
VassilisDaioglou- Theroleofbiomassinclimatechangemitigation12
SSP1:LotsofnaturallandsareprotectedHighabandonementofproductivelands
potential futuresupplyofmodernbiomassfromresiduesandenergy cropsaccountingforthedrivers andconstraints inaspatially explicit manner (IMAGE)
Supply Energy crops
VassilisDaioglou- Theroleofbiomassinclimatechangemitigation13
SSP3: ExpansionoflandforfoodLowprotectionofnaturallands
Supply Energy crops
VassilisDaioglou- Theroleofbiomassinclimatechangemitigation14
Residuesupply-curvesconsistent
AvailabilityofhighqualitylandsinSSP1leadstoextremelyhighandlowcostavailabilityofbiomass
Supply Curves
VassilisDaioglou- Theroleofbiomassinclimatechangemitigation15
2100
Demand System
demand forbiomassfordifferentenergy andchemical purposesinadynamicenergysystemmodel(TIMER)
BaselineScenarios- Liquidbioenergyveryimportant,especiallyinSSP1- Alsosomesolidsandchemicals,especiallyinSSP3
MitigationScenarios- Increased(butnotexclusive)useofBECCS.H2 inSSP1→ increasedtechnologicaldevelopment
SSP1 SSP2 SSP3
Base Mitig Base Mitig Base Mitig
VassilisDaioglou- Theroleofbiomassinclimatechangemitigation
Emissions Integrated
overall greenhouse gas impact ofbiomassdeploymentforbioenergyandbiochemicals,takingthepotentialdynamicsoffuturelanduseandtheenergysysteminto account
SSP1 SSP2 SSP3Base Mitig Base Mitig Base Mitig
Availabilityofhighqualitylandsforbiomassandprotectionofcarbonstocks inSSP1 leadstohighbiomassdeploymendandlandbasedmitigation!
In SSP2,about10%ofmitigationisduetobiomassuse,largestcontributionfromBECCS- HigherinSSP1(lowerLUC,betterbioenergytechnologies)- LowerinSSP3
VassilisDaioglou- Theroleofbiomassinclimatechangemitigation17
Further investigations yield gaps…
Maize Rice SoybeanWheat Sugarcane Beef and milk
Legend:Countries assessed in this studyCountries assessed by De Wit et al. [1]
Zambia & Zimbabwe
Brazil
USA
India
Australia
China
[Gerssen-Gondelach,etal.,Food&EnergySecurity,2015]
-
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Yield(t/(ha.yr))
Maize
-
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Yield(t/(ha.yr))
Rice,paddy
-
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Yield(t/(ha.yr))
Wheat
-
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Yield(t/(ha.yr))
Sugarcane
-
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010Yield(t/(ha.yr))
SoybeansAustralia
Brazil
China
India
UnitedStatesofAmerica
Zambia
Zimbabwe
LivestockfootprintperunitofmeatofmilkmayImproveafactor2-20+dependingonsetting
Keyoptionssuchasintercropping,agro-forestryandmultipleharvestspoorlyincluded(e.g Camelina).
Potentialbiomassproductiononsalinesoils.
[Wicke etal,Energy&EnvironmentalScience,2011]
0123456789
10
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
Yie
ld [t
on/h
a]
Source FAOSTAT
Observed historic yields
YieldprojectionsEuropeObservedyield
CEECandWEC
Linearextrapolationof
historictrendsWideningyieldgap
AppliedscenariosLow,baselineandhigh 0
123456789
10
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
Yie
ld [t
on/h
a]
Source FAOSTAT
Observed historic yields Projections
0123456789
10
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
Yie
ld [t
on/h
a]
Source FAOSTAT
Observed historic yields Projections
[Wit&Faaij,Biomass &Bioenergy,2010]
Results- spatialproductionpotentialArablelandavailablefordedicatedbio-energycropsdividedbythetotalland
Countries
Low potential
High potential
Moderate potential
< 6,5%
NL, BE, LU, AT, CH, NO, SE and FI
Potential
6,5% - 17%
FR, ES, PT, GE, UK, DK, IE, IT and GR
> 17% PL, LT, LV, HU, SL, SK, CZ, EST, RO, BU and UKR
[Wit&Faaij,Biomass &Bioenergy,2010]
Results- spatialcostdistributionProductioncost(€GJ-1)forGrassycrops
PL, PT, CZ, LT, LV, UK, RO, BU, HU, SL, SK, EST, UKR
FR, ES, GE, IT, SE, FI, NO, IE
NL, BE, LU, UK, GR, DK, CH, AT
< 2,00 Low Cost
Moderate Cost
2,00 – 3,20
> 3,20 High Cost
Potential Countries
[Wit&Faaij,Biomass &Bioenergy,2010]
Totalenergypotentialunderthreedifferentcropschemes.
‘Low yielding crops’: all arable land
available plantedwith oil crops. ‘High yielding
crops’: all availableland planted with
grass crops.
[Wit&Faaij,Biomass &Bioenergy,2010]
Example: GHG balance of combined agricultural intensification + bioenergyproduction in Europe + Ukraine
[Wit et al., BioFPR, 2014]
Confrontationbottom-upvs.topdowniLUC modelling
KeystepsiLUCmodellingefforts:
• CGE;historicdatabasis• Modelshock,short
term,BAU,currenttechnology.
• QuantifyLUC• QuantifyGHG
implications(carbonstocks)
Bottom-upinsights:
• CoverageofBBEoptions,advancementsinagriculture,verificationofchanges(land,production)
• Gradual,sustainabilitydriven,longerterm,technologicalchange(BBE,Agriculture
• LUCdependsonzoning,productivity,socio-economicdrivers
• Governingofforest,agriculture,identificationof‘’best’’lands.
[IEA&otherworkshops,2011-2013;Wicke etal,GCB-Bioenergy 2014]
Example:CornethanolResultsfromPE&CGEmodels
[Wicke etal.,Biofuels,2012]
-100 -50 0 50 100
Searchingeretal.[3]CARB[13]EPA[18]
Herteletal.[14]Tyneretal.[15]– Group1Tyneretal.[15]– Group2Tyneretal.[15]– Group3
Al-Riffaietal.[16]Laborde[17]
Lywoodetal.[25]Tipperetal.[2]– marginalTipperetal.[2]– average
LUC-relatedGHGemissions(gCO2e/MJ)
Corn
B:Ethanol
GeneralapproachiLUC mitigation Fromeconomicmodels
–Baseline:developmentsinfood,feedandfibres
–Biomasstarget:theamountrequiredtomeettargetssuchasRED.
27
[Brinkman,etal.,2015]
TOTALANDNETANNUALGHGEMISSIONSFOR2010ANDTHEBASELINEAND ILUCMITIGATIONSCENARIOSIN2020.EMISSIONSFROMTHEMISCANTHUS-ETHANOLVALUECHAIN.THEEQUILIBRIUMTIMEFORSOILCARBONSTOCKCHANGESIS20YEARS.ILUCPREVENTIONSCENARIOS:L,LOW;M,MEDIUM;H,HIGH.INTENSIFICATIONPATHWAYS:CI,CONVENTIONALINTENSIFICATION;II,INTERMEDIATESUSTAINABLEINTENSIFICATION;SI,SUSTAINABLEINTENSIFICATION.
[Gerssen-Gondelach etal.,GCBBioenergy,2016]
Fullimpactanalysis
[IPCC-SRREN,2011]
Summary• BBEdeployment~300EJrequiredpost2050(mixofadvancedfuels,power,heat,biomaterials+bio-CCS)foressentialGHGmitigationeffort(BBEmaytakeupto40%).
• Potentials (technical,economic,sustainable)sufficewhencombinedwithmodernizationofagricultureandgoodlandmanagement.
• Realizethesynergies withmoreresilientfoodproduction,moreefficientuseofnaturalresources,increasedcarbonstocks.
• …andruraldevelopment+(shiftoffossilfuelexpenditurestoruralareascanamountseveraltrillionU$/yr).
• Logicalandefficientpathwaysandgradualdevelopmentof(biomass)markets,infrastructureandtechnologies;intersectoral approaches.
Notimetowaste(tociteGreenpeace)&Thankyouverymuchforyourattention
[email protected] / [email protected]/scopus/google scholarwww.rug.nlwww.energyacademy.org
BBE Strategies
Whatisthefutureroleofbiomass,bioenergyandbiochemicalsinvariousclimatechangemitigationscenarioswhenaccountingforthelandandenergy-systemsinanintegratedmanner?
Biomasshasanimportantrole- Residues:lowcostsource,similaracrossscenarios- Energycrops(lignocellulosic),importantathigherdemandlevels
Conditionsforitseffectiveuse- LandusescenariosandProtectionofcarbonstocks
Highbiomassproductionwithmitigationvs.
LowbiomassproductioninhighLUC- Multipleenergyandnon-energyuses
- Highestmitigation:transportandpower- Advancedtechnologiesamust:2nd gen.Biofuels,BECCS- Competinguses:Improveefficiencyandalternatetechnologies
VassilisDaioglou- Theroleofbiomassinclimatechangemitigation33
The role of biomass Strategies
- SupplyRegions:- Residues:
- Asia- OECD- ...
- Energycrops:- LatinAmerica- OECD- Asia- Africa- ...
MitigationscenariosSSP12.6 SSP22.6 SSP33.4
2100
PrimaryProduction(EJPrim/yr)Residues 74 75 76Energy Crops 192 144 119Total 266 220 197
LandUse(MHa)451 359 302SecondaryBioenergy(EJSec/yr)
w/o CCS 94 90 80w CCS 61 33 29
%TotalFinalConsumption35% 25% 21%
VassilisDaioglou- Theroleofbiomassinclimatechangemitigation34
