Sustainable Biomass

1
Environmental Issues of Biofuels
Uwe R. Fritsche Coordinator, Energy Climate
Division Öko-Institut e.V. (Institute for applied
Ecology), Darmstadt Office
presented at the Joint IEA Bioenergy ExCo/Nordic
Energy Workshop Biofuels for Transport Part of
A Sustainable Future?Oslo, May 14, 2008
2
Öko-Institut
Research Divisions
Governance Environmental Law
Energy Climate
Industry Infrastructure
Nuclear Plant Safety
Products Material Flows
private, non-profit environmental research,
founded in 1977 staff gt 100 in 2006 local to
global scope of (net)work
3
Sustainable Energy
Source IEA (2007), IPCC (2007), UNPD (2004) and
WBGU (2003)
4
Sustainable Bioenergy
Source IEA (2007), and Best et al. (2008)
5
Environmental Issues

• Bioenergy could have positive impacts
• GHG reduction (through fossil-fuel substition)
• more agrobiodiversity soil carbon increase, less
  erosion
• But impacts could also be negative
• GHG from cultivation, soil carbon, life-cycle,
  direct indirect land-use changes
• Loss of biodiversity from land-use changes, water
  use, agrochemicals, erosion

6
Consider all Bioenergy Flows
7
Biodiversity Climate Change
Source www.eea.europa.eu
8
Global Biomass Potential
Source IIASA, Kraxner 2007, Rokiyanskiy et al.
2006
9
Global Biodiversity
Source UNEP IMAPS
10
Global Loss of Forests
Source FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment
11
Endangered Biodiversity
Countries with highest number of globally
threatened birds
Source Lambertini 2006
12
Biodiversity Agriculture
Number of Species
New agro policies
13
Biodiversity and HNV Farming
Examples of HNV farming which could become
extinct due to direct or indirect
intensificationDehesas/Montados in
Portugal/Spain
Source JRC/EEA 2006 (Proceedings Sust. Bioenergy
in the Mediterranean)
14
Land Use and Biodiversity
Used land
Unused land
Potential for biomass no competition with food,
no displacement, increase organic C in soils,
but risk for biodiversity if not properly mapped
15
Map key biodiversity areas
Protected Areas (PA)
HNCV Areas (not yet PA)
Forests and wetlands

• GIS data based on LCCS, update available in March
  2008 (FAO, 300 m resolution)
• National land cover mapping (high resolution)
• Change detection possible for monitoring

Global and national land cover maps
Screening with criteria
PAHNV areas are no-go ? other areas might be
suitable for biomass development, depending of
further qualification (water, social
issues) satellite monitoring possible
16
Water and Soil

• Water Use of (Bioenergy) Farming Systems
• Model and data research ongoing
• Spatial data are key, but (yet) unclear
• Soil Impacts
• Mapping of biophysical soil properties
• Qualitative Impact Definition (for farming
  systems/AEZ)
• Quantification?
• ? More from FAO BIAS Project (mid-2008)

17
Which Standards?
Land Use/Biodiversity GHG reduction have global
scope global conventions ? WTO compatible ?
EU currently implements these standards in
mandatory certification schemes for biofuels
18
Standards EU

• RES FQ Directive proposals establish mandatory
  sustainability requirements for production of
  biofuels
• Minimum GHG reduction, incl. CO2 from direct
  land-use change
• Protection of natural habitats
• No relevant reduction of biological/ecosystem
  diversity

19
GHG Defaults incl. direct LUC
322 kg CO2-Eq./GJ
direct land use change
production of biomass
200
transport of biomass
conversion step I
humid savannah
180
transport betw. conv. steps
tropicalrainforest
160
conversion step II
transport to admixture
140
fossil reference gasoline 85 kg/GJ diesel
86.2 kg/GJ
120
kg CO2-eq. per GJ biofuel
100
grassland
grassland
80
35 reduction
60
40
20
0
sugar cane
rapeseed oil
soy bean oil
palm oil
corn
wheat
FAME from
Ethanol from
20
Indirect LUC
Forests, wetlands
Deforestation, carbon release
Protected
Food feed crops
other
high-nature value areas
?
Energy crops/ plantations
unused land (marginal, degraded)
Source based on Girard (GEF-STAP Biofuels
Workshop, New Delhi 2005)
21
GHG from indirect LUC

• Displacement generic problem of restricted
  system boundaries
• Accounting problem of partial analysis (just
  biofuels, no explicite modelling of agro
  forestry sectors)
• All incremental land-uses imply indirect effects
• Analytical and political implications
• Analysis which displacement when where?
• Policy which instruments? Partial certification
  schemes do not help, but have spill-over effects

22
Indirect GHG iLUC Factor
Accounting for CO2 from indirect land-use change
using the iLUC factor (aka risk adder) in
GHG balances of biofuels
By-product allocation using lower heating
value iLUC factor is zero for residues/wastes
and for biocrops from unused/degraded lands
23
GHG from LUC Default vs. real
24
Conclusions

• GHG emissions become key issue in biofuels trade
  certification needed up from 2010 for EU market
  access will become linked to CDM
• GHG must include (real) direct land-use changes,
  and GHG from indirect LUC need risk hedging
• Methods for verification of GHG from direct LUC
  need elaboration and harmonization
• GHG limits for biofuels also reduce (but not
  avoid) risk of negative biodiversity impacts
  mapping of HNV areas (also in degraded lands)
  needed
• Soil/water restrictions need more attention, but
  bioenergy also opportunity

25
Conclusions (2)

• So far, only few developing countries deal with
  life-cycle GHG emissions of biofuels, and
  biodiversity social issues (BR, MZ)
• Need to actively support countries in dealing
  with sustainability standards, and certification
  role UNEP/GBEP Task Forces
• Biogas/biomethane have low GHG profile, but often
  ignored ? need more attention

26
Sustainable Biomass
Good practice Agroforestry in Southern Ruanda
food, fiber and fuel from integrated systems
27
More than Jatropha
Source JRC/EEA 2006 (Proceedings Sust. Bioenergy
in the Mediterranean)
28
More Information
www.oeko.de/service/bio