FINAL REPORT Biomass resource efficiency for the biobased … · 2016. 6. 3. · for biomass assessments in Europe has been in the framework of the Biomass Energy Europe (BEE)5 project

JRC- IES & Imperial College expert workshop on biomass resource efficiency

1

Biomass resource efficiency for the biobased industries Calliope Panoutsou (Imperial College London),

Simone Manfredi & Boyan Kavalov (JRC, Institute for Environment & Sustainability)

Notes from an expert workshop, in support to the JRC activities in the field of resource efficiency,

bioeconomy and set-up of an EU Bioeconomy Observatory; organised by

European Commission – Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability,

Sustainability Assessment Unit

and

Imperial College London, Centre for Energy Policy and Technology (in the framework of the IEE 12 835

Biomass Policies project)

JRC- Ispra, 17th

& 18th

October 2013

Legal Notice

Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for

the use which might be made of this publication.

CONTRIBUTIONS & PRESENTATIONS FROM

Constantin Ciupagea, Head of Sustainability Assessment Unit /SAU/ - JRC-IES

Damien Plan (BISO Coordinator, JRC headquarters, Brussels)

Boyan Kavalov (Workshop Co-Coordinator, JRC-IES-SAU)

Andreas Gumbert (DG AGRI)

Achim Boenke (DG Enterprise & Industry)

Calliope Panoutsou (Workshop Co-Coordinator, Imperial College London, Centre for Energy Policy and

Technology)

Matthias Dees (U. Freiburg – BEE project)

Dirk Carrez (BRIDGE, CleverConsult)

Markku Karlsson (EBTP, Finish Forest Industries)

Martijn Hackmann (Food & Biobased Research, Wageningen UR)

Harmen Willemse (Secretary of CEN/TC 411 “Bio-based products”)

Carlo Lavalle (JRC-IES-SAU)

Claudia Baranzelli (JRC-IES-SAU)

Carolina Perpiňa (JRC-IES-SAU)

David Pennington (JRC-IES-SAU)

Malgorzata Goralczyk (JRC-IES-SAU)


2

Contents Biomass resource efficiency for the biobased industries ....................................................................... 1

Aim of the workshop ........................................................................................................................... 3

Biomass resource efficiency in Europe ............................................................................................... 3

The efficient resource supply issue- how it can be integrated in existing supply- demand

modelling?........................................................................................................................................... 5

Definitions ........................................................................................................................................... 6

Theoretical potential ....................................................................................................................... 7

Technical potential .......................................................................................................................... 7

Economic potential ......................................................................................................................... 7

Implementation potential ............................................................................................................... 8

Sustainable implementation potential ........................................................................................... 8

Standardization on bio-based products: Current state ...................................................................... 9

Policies: Gaps and future frameworks .............................................................................................. 15

The policy related results within the Biomass Futures project .................................................... 15

On-going work within Biomass Policies and S2Biom projects ...................................................... 17

Recommendations for future work .............................................................................................. 21

JRC modelling capacities for the biobased products & the bioeconomy ......................................... 21

Land use modelling in JRC ............................................................................................................. 22

Environmental impact modelling .................................................................................................. 23

Annex I Background Note ................................................................................................................. 25

Setting the scene ........................................................................................................................... 25

The efficient resource supply issue ............................................................................................... 26

Research and policy development ................................................................................................ 28

Annex II Meeting Agenda .................................................................................................................. 29

Annex III Minutes .............................................................................................................................. 32


3

Aim of the workshop

The aim of this expert workshop was to set the scene for biomass resource efficiency in terms of

definitions for biomass and standardisation for biobased products; capacities in market volumes,

policy research and JRC modelling capabilities in the field of assessing various environmental

impacts.

The structure of the two-day workshop is presented in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1 Structure of the workshop

Biomass resource efficiency in Europe

The specific objective in Horizon 2020 is to develop a resource efficient economy that is resilient to

climate change, together with a supply of raw materials, in order to meet the needs of a growing

global population within the sustainable limits of the planet’s natural resources.

Horizon 2020 also defines sustainable development as an overarching objective and within that six

main social challenges to which research, development and innovation should respond.

Bio-based industries are strongly coherent with the overall goal of sustainable development because

bio-resources when properly managed are renewable and sustainable. Use of bio-resources and

conversion to useful products can contribute to some extent to each of the six grand challenges.

On the other hand, global population growth by 2050 is estimated to lead to a 70% increase in food

demand; as reported demand for food increases faster than population because of improved diet

and especially because more meat is eaten1. Improvements in agronomic science will help relieve

1 How to feed the world in 2050, FAO 2009


4

that stress, but security of food supply is already a serious concern in many different ways and it is

only likely to get more acute as the global population continues to grow, as climate change and

other environmental consequences continue to disrupt historic practices of husbandry and as

pressure on biological resources from other demands increases.

There is already an intensifying debate about the extent of the potential impact on food security of

the growing demand for renewable biological resources for materials and fuel and the impacts on

land use, but it is clear that there must be trade-offs among competing uses and these are likely to

develop with technological advance and innovation2.

At present the fragility of food security is most visible in developing countries3. However, concerns

about the long-term competition for a limited biomass / land resource that could emerge between

biofuels, biomaterials and conventional uses have been expressed for Europe, as well4.

More advanced biotechnological methods that allow the conversion of waste streams into valuable

products, such as food, feed, material and energy will favourably affect trade-offs between

competing demands and allow greater value to be extracted at lower environmental cost from the

same resource in Europe and world-wide. The potential for innovation is high because of the wide

range of sciences deployed along with several novel enabling and industrial technologies that create

much opportunity for multi-disciplinary breakthroughs.

Bio-based industries have much to offer in terms of minimizing / reducing environmental impacts ,

improving resource efficiency and raw materials utilisation, but the relationship is rather complex.

For example, biofuels are expected in most European Member States to be the principal means by

which they will meet the requirement to increase their share of renewable energy used in transport

by 2020. However, appropriate merits should be given to their sustainability, taking into account

their indirect impacts through, inter alia, the displacement of food production, including land use

impacts.

The recent debates focus mainly on the upstream and they are complex and controversial, but the

incremental environmental externalities from advanced large-scale biorefineries producing fuels,

materials and platform chemicals seem to be much lower compared to stand-alone facilities. It is

generally accepted by the international research community that to seize the opportunities of

sustainable growth through a greater use of biomass, research in the optimal configuration of future

biorefineries will be necessary.

Bio-industries create new possibilities to support the income of farmers and the forest community

by higher prices of commodities and sale of residues and to contribute thereby to inclusive,

innovative and secure growth. Second generation bio-industrial facilities are likely to be relatively

large in order to benefit from economies of scale and the feedstock requirements will be

considerable. To achieve this will require secure and efficient resource supply, rigorous quality

control and the management of multiple suppliers when the delivery of feedstock cannot be met by

a single one only. There are severe and novel logistic challenges in collection, transport, pre-

processing and inventory management that have an important technical, socio-economic and

2 Ex-ante impact assessment for the Biobased JTI, Dr Nigel Lucas.

3 Climate change, biofuels and land, FAO undated, ftp.fao.org/nr/HLCinfo/Land-Infosheet-En.pdf

4 Laying the foundations for greener transport, EEA Report 7/2011


5

environmental dimension and important implications on the energy balance and environmental

footprint, and will need to be researched.

The efficient resource supply issue- how it can be integrated in existing

supply- demand modelling?

If the market for bio-based products is to develop, the establishment of efficient, cost-effective

supply chains, providing raw materials of known and consistent quality will be essential.

Up to now, most of the recent harmonised biomass assessments have been driven by the high

demand of both policy and industrial actors in the bioenergy and biofuels sectors. As such, the key

assumptions and modelling functions used for the estimation of available biomass quantities, the

datasets produced and the respective units in which they have been expressed are strongly related

to energy.

One of the most recent attempts to harmonise assumptions and provide a coherent methodology

for biomass assessments in Europe has been in the framework of the Biomass Energy Europe (BEE)5

project. The project aimed to harmonise methodologies for biomass resource assessments for

energy purposes in Europe and its neighbouring countries in order to improve consistency, accuracy

and reliability as well as serve the future planning towards a transition to renewable energy in the

European Union.

The major focus of the work has been on methodological and dataset harmonisations for forestry,

energy crops and residues from traditional agriculture and wastes. The project was carried out

during 2008 - 2010.

As the biobased economy evolves to cover a wider range of markets and end products it is important

that future work should carefully examine the synergies/ conflicts and interdependencies among the

different feedstocks and develop coherent indicators.

In the field of optimisation for biomass deployment pathways, future work to model demand and

further integrate a ‘biomass allocation model’ that determines the amount of bioenergy feedstocks

going to the different sectors (energy and non energy) also requires intense data collection and

appropriate selection of value chains and respective efficiency factors across a variety of

geographical and temporal scales.

A harmonized cross sector comparison (but only within the energy market, so for heat, electricity

and transport) has been recently performed within the Biomass Futures project6 by deploying two

modeling options, namely RESolve7 and PRIMES Biomass

8. The estimations are available at

disaggregated level per Member State.

The RESolve model has been extended for the purpose of Biomass Futures by merging several sub-

models. RESolve serves as a ‘biomass allocation model’ determining the amount of bioenergy

feedstocks going to the different sectors ‘Renewable heat’, ‘Renewable electricity’ and ‘Transport’.

5 http://www.eu-bee.com/

6 www.biomassfutures.eu

7 RESolve-T is a cost minimisation model, whereas the sub-models for heat and electricity are simulation models. Resolve model. (2012).

Available at: http://www.ecn.nl/docs/library/report/2011/o11011.pdf 8 PRIMES model (2012). Available at:

http://www.e3mlab.ntua.gr/e3mlab/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=35&Itemid=80&lang=en


6

There is a sub-model for each of these three sectors, whereby RESolve-T, the transport model,

provides the overarching structure and actually integrates the sub-models for heat and electricity as

two additional demand segments.

The model will also be expanded within the next two years to selected biobased sectors for non-

food lignocellulosic feedstocks with the ongoing S2Biom project.9

Definitions

Biomass can be defined as ‘the biodegradable fraction of products, waste and residues from

agriculture (including vegetal and animal substances), forestry and related industries, as well as the

biodegradable fraction of industrial and municipal waste’ (2001/77/EC 2001).

In the BEE handbook10

, the different biomass types are divided into four biomass categories:

• Forest biomass and forestry residues

• Energy crops

• Agricultural residues

• Organic waste.

• Cascading

• System boundaries

Table 1 Biomass types covered in the BEE handbook

Main type Sub-type Examples

Forestry Primary forest products Stemwood, thinnings.

Primary forestry residues Leftovers from harvesting activities: twigs,

branches, stumps, etc.

Secondary forestry residues Residues resulting from any processing step:

sawdust, bark, black liquor, etc.

Energy

crops

Oil, sugar and starch crops Jatropha, rapeseed, sunflower seed, sugar cane,

cereals (wheat, barley, etc.), maize, etc.

Energy grasses Miscanthus, switchgrass, etc.

Short rotation coppice Poplar, eucalyptus, etc.

Agricultural

residues

Primary or harvesting residues, by-product

of cultivation and harvesting activities

Wheat straw, etc.

Secondary processing residues of

agricultural products, e.g. for food or feed

production

Rice husks, peanut shells, oil cakes, etc.

Manure Pig manure, chicken manure, cow manure, etc.

Organic

waste

Tertiary residues, released after the use

phase of products

Biodegradable municipal waste, landfill gas,

demolition wood, sewage gas and sewage

sludge.

The type of biomass potential is an important parameter in biomass resource assessments, because

it determines to a large extend the approach and methodology and thereby also the data

requirements. Four types of biomass potentials are commonly distinguished:

- Theoretical potential

- Technical potential

9 www.s2biom.eu

10 M. Vis and M. Dees. Biomass Resource Assessment Handbook. 2011. ISBN: 978-3-639-29018-9


7

- Economic potential

- Implementation potential.

Moreover, the concept of a fifth type of potential, ‘the sustainable implementation potential’ is

introduced in this section.

Theoretical potential

The theoretical potential is the overall maximum amount of terrestrial biomass which can be

considered theoretically available for bioenergy production within fundamental bio-physical limits.

The theoretical potential is usually expressed in joule primary energy, i.e. the energy contained in

the raw, unprocessed biomass. Primary energy is converted into secondary energy, such as

electricity and liquid and gaseous fuels. In the case of biomass from crops and forests, the

theoretical potential represents the maximum productivity under theoretically optimal management

taking into account limitations that result from soil, temperature, solar radiation and rainfall. In the

case of residues and waste, the theoretical potentials equal the total amount that is produced

Technical potential

The technical potential is the fraction of the theoretical potential which is available under the

regarded techno-structural framework conditions with the current technological possibilities (such

as harvesting techniques, infrastructure and accessibility, processing techniques). It also takes into

account spatial confinements due to other land uses (food, feed and fibre production) as well as

ecological (e.g. nature reserves) and possibly other non-technical constraints. The technical potential

is usually expressed in joule primary energy, but sometimes also in secondary energy carriers.

Economic potential

The economic potential is the share of the technical potential which meets criteria of economic

rationale within the given framework conditions. The economic potential generally refers to

secondary bioenergy carriers, although sometimes also primary bioenergy is considered.


8

Figure 2 Illustration of the different biomass potentials

Implementation potential

The implementation potential is the fraction of the economic potential that can be implemented

within a certain time frame and under concrete socio-economic and regulatory framework

conditions, including economic, institutional and social constraints and policy incentives. Studies that

focus on the feasibility or the economic, environmental or social impacts of bioenergy policies are

also included in this type.

The classification in types of biomass potentials helps to understand what information is presented.

For instance, some biomass types show high technical potentials while their economic potential is

rather limited due to the high costs of extraction and transport. Therefore it is recommended that

the type of potential is explicitly mentioned in every biomass resource assessment. In existing

resource assessments, it is often difficult to distinguish between theoretical and technical potential

and between economic and implementation potential. The technical -theoretical potential and the

economic - implementation potentials form two pairs of potential types. However, even more

important than making this distinction between four types is the provision of insight into explicit

conditions and assumptions made in the assessment.

Sustainable implementation potential

In theory, a fifth type of potential can be distinguished, which is the sustainable implementation

potential. It is not a potential on its own but rather the result of integrating environmental,

economic and social sustainability criteria in biomass resource assessments. This means that

sustainability criteria act like a filter on the theoretical, technical, economic and implementation

potentials leading in the end to a sustainable implementation potential. Depending on the type of

potential, sustainability criteria can be applied to different extents. For example, for deriving the

technical potential, mainly environmental constraints and criteria are integrated that either limit the

Other materialsForestry policies

Biodiversity policies

Energy policyClimate change policy

Energy

Food

Conversion process

Wood (materials)

Population

Economy

Water

Climate

Potential primary bioenergy

Potential secondary bioenergy

GPP / NPP

Soil type

Agricultural policies

Land (bioenergy production)

Yield(bioenergy production)

Land (food and

woodproduction)

Yield(food and

woodproduction)

Biodiversity

Biodiversitypolicies

GHG emissions and climate change

Other limitations; social criteria, environmental criteira, institutional barriers, etc.

Management

TECHNIAL POTENTIAL THEORETICAL POTENTIALECONOMIC POTENTIAL

IMPLEMENTATION POTENTIAL

Other materialsForestry policies

Biodiversity policies

Energy policyClimate change policy

Energy

Food

Conversion process

Wood (materials)

Population

Economy

Water

Climate

Potential primary bioenergy

Potential secondary bioenergy

GPP / NPP

Soil type

Agricultural policies

Land (bioenergy production)

Yield(bioenergy production)

Land (food and

woodproduction)

Yield(food and

woodproduction)

Biodiversity

Biodiversitypolicies

GHG emissions and climate change

Other limitations; social criteria, environmental criteira, institutional barriers, etc.

Management

TECHNIAL POTENTIAL THEORETICAL POTENTIALECONOMIC POTENTIAL

IMPLEMENTATION POTENTIAL


9

area available and/or the yield that can be achieved. Applying economic constraints and criteria

leads to the economic potential and for the sustainable implementation potential, additional

environmental, economic and social criteria may be integrated (see Error! Reference source not

found.).

Figure 3 The integration of sustainability criteria in biomass potential assessments

There is a strong demand for inclusion of sustainability aspects in biomass potential. The concept of

sustainable biomass contains multiple environmental, economic and social aspects, though

integrating these aspects may be challenging.

The information, datasets, tools and approaches elaborated by the BEE project team can provide a

good base for working on future assessments for biomass potentials to support the biobased

industries.

Standardization on bio-based products: Current state

Current limited availability of statistical data on new bio-based products and processes11

and

differences in bio-based product definitions and statistical classification references12

make it still

difficult to comprehensively estimate their corresponding markets. Consequently, a more suitable

methodological approach would be to focus on the most promising (both economically and

environmentally) supply chains where bio-based products can substitute the traditional ones.

The European Commission, in the framework of the Lead Market Initiative13

, appointed an Ad-hoc

Advisory Group for Bio-based Products. It has elaborated new European product performance

standards, and issued, since 2008, the following mandates in the field of bio-based products:

• M/429 on the elaboration of a standardization programme for bio-based products

11

Zika, E., Papatryfon, I., Wolf, O., Gómez-Barbero, M., Stein, A.J and Bock, A.K. (2007), Consequences, Opportunities and Challenges of

Modern Biotechnology for Europe, JRC-IPTS, April 2007.

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/jrc/downloads/jrc_reference_report_200704_biotech.pdf 12

Use of NACE and PRODCOM codes proves to be inappropriate as they cover much more products that the bio-based ones (for a detailed

discussion, CSES (2011). 13

European Commission, DG Enterprise and Industry, Lead Market Initiative – Bio-based Products,

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/policy/lead-market-initiative/biobased- products/index_en.htm

Theoretical potential

Technical potential

Economic potential

Sustainable implementation

potential

Technical constraints &environmental constraints / sustainability

criteria

Economic constraints / sustainability

criteria

Socio-political constraints /

environmental, economic and

social sustainability

criteria


10

• M/430 on bio-polymers and bio-lubricants

• M/491 on bio-solvents and bio-surfactants

• M/492 for the development of horizontal standards for bio-based products

Several criteria and thresholds have been or are to be established for bio-lubricants bio-plastics/bio-

polymers, bio-surfactants, bio-solvents, chemical building blocks and enzymes (i.e. technical, food

and animal feed enzymes).

A specialized CEN working group, CEN/TC 411/WG 4, has been established for sustainability criteria

and life-cycle analysis14

. The group is developing standards for bio-based products covering also

horizontal aspects:

• consistent terminology

• certification tools

• bio-based content

• application of and correlation towards life cycle analysis

• sustainability criteria for biomass used & final products

The focus of the work is on bio-based products, other than food & feed and bio-mass for energy15

.

Further research is being conducted on issues such as harmonization of sustainability certification

systems for biomass production, conversion systems and trade16

, sustainability assessment of

technologies, including bio-refineries17

, and environmental performance of products18

.

Table 2 CEN publications for bio-based products

Title Mandate TC Publication Date

CEN/TR 16208:2011 Biobased products- Overview of

standards

M/429 ___ 2011-05-04

CEN/TR 15932: 2010 Plastics - Recommendation for

terminology and characterisation of biopolymers and

bioplastics

___ CEN/TC 249 2010-03-24

CEN/TS 16137:2011 Plastics - Determination of bio-based

carbon content

M/430 CEN/TC 249 2011-04-27

CEN/TS 16398 Plastics - Template for reporting and

communication of bio-based carbon content and recovery

options of biopolymers and bioplastics- Data sheet

M/430 CEN/TC 249 2012-10-31

CEN/TR 16227 Liquid petroleum products – Bio-lubricants

– Recommendation for terminology and characterisation

of bio-lubricants and bio-based lubricants

M/430 CEN/TC 19 2011-08-10

In order to monitor the technological and commercial market developments related to the most

innovative and competitive bio-products (e.g. bio-based plastics, bio-lubricants, bio-base solvents,

14

European Committee for Standardization, Technical Committee 411, Bio-based products -

http://www.cen.eu/cen/Sectors/TechnicalCommitteesWorkshops/CENTechnicalCommittees/Pages/TCStruc.aspx?param=874780&title=Bi

o-based%20products 15

www.biobasedeconomy.eu; www.cen.eu/cen/Sectors/Sectors/Biobased 16

Global-Bio-Pact research project, http://www.globalbiopact.eu/ 17

PROSUITE research project, www.prosuite.org 18

“LCA to go” research project, http://www.lca2go.eu/


11

bio-based surfactants, bio-composites and bio-based platform and fine chemicals), new technical

standards (e.g. carbon content derived from renewable raw materials) and separate statistical codes

should be assigned to them, in addition to the existing ones19

in official goods classification (i.e. the

CN and PRODCOM) and trade statistics. DG Enterprise has already proposed CN codes for several

products (i.e. bio-based lubricants, succinic acid and 1,4-butandiol), together with the technical

verification methods for bio-based renewable content.

Production and Market development status

The current market share for biobased products in EU27 is still low but presents a fast growing

trend, a result to increased consumer awareness and product availability in the European markets.

Europe has a few small companies specialised in bio-based products and several major chemical

companies developing bio-based applications20

.

At this point it is worthwhile to mention that in 2010 the European chemical industry is estimated to

use 8-10% renewable raw materials to produce various chemical substances21

Adding to this, the bioenergy and biofuels sector presents a dynamic growth during the last twelve

years. In the year 2000, the share of biofuels in transport market was 0.2%, in 2005 it increased to

1.1%, whilst it is anticipated to reach 7.4% by 2020 and 9.5% by 2030 (EC, 2007). Market

penetration for 2010 reached up to 4.7%, which has been a little more than one percentage point

short of the 2003 biofuel directive target for a 5.75% incorporation rate in 2010 (Observer, 201122

).

Table 3 Current volumes and future market prospects for several bio-based products in Europe

Bio-product

category

Bio-products Market volume

"Bio" 2010 23

Projected market

volume "Bio" 2020 24

Bio-based plastics

(European

Bioplastics)

Short-life/ disposable applications

(PLA, PHA, Starch Blends, Cellulosics)

110.000

1.280.000

Durable applications 150.000

Engineering Polymers 740.000

Modified PLA, Cellulosics

Polyolefines (2012) 530.000

19

The already existing CN and PRODCOM codes are: bio-based glycerol; enzymes; ethanol; polylactic acid; natural polymers and modified

natural polymers in primary form; ethanol; other butanols; butan-1-ol; polyacetals including other polyethers and epoxy resins, in primary

forms, polycarbonates, alkyl resins, polyallyl esters and other polyesters, in primary forms-others, others; other plates, sheets, film, foil

and strip, of plastics, non-cellular and not reinforced, laminated, supported or similarly combined with other materials, -of cellulose or its

chemical derivatives, -of regenerated cellulose; other – acyclic polycarboxcylic acid, their anhydrides, halides, peroxides, peroxyacids and

their halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives; wholesale of solid, liquid and gaseous fuels and related products -

wholesale of fuels, greases, lubricants, oils. 20

EC Enterprise and Industry (2009): Taking Bio-based from Promise to Market – Measures to promote the market introduction of

innovative bio-based products 21

The Commission report “A lead market initiative for Europe - Explanatory Paper on the European Lead MarketApproach: Methodology

and Rationale”, pages 63-64. An estimate from FNR is 8% in2003. A McKinsey report estimated the share to 10% in 2010. 22

B IOFUEL’S BAROMETER – EUROBSERV’ER – JULY 2011 23

In tons 24

In tons; All figures for 2020 are based on estimations


12

Starch based alloys Not marketed 260.000

TOTAL 260.000 2.810.000

Biodegradable and

bio-based plastics

(BASF SE)

Waste & shopping bags 30.000 260.000

Tableware 3.000 33.000

Bio mulch for agriculture 2.000 40.000

TOTAL 35.000 333.000

Bio-lubricants (2008)

(Fuchs Petrolub AG)

Hydraulic Fluids 68.000 230.000

Chainsaw Lubricants 29.000 40.000

Mould Release Agents 9.000 30.000

Other oils 31.000 120.000

TOTAL 137.000 420.000

Bio-composites

(nova-Institut, 2012)

Compression moulding:

- with natural fibres 40.000 120.000

- with cotton fibres 100.000 100.000

- with wood fibres 50.000 150.000

Extrusion and injection moulding

Wood Plastic Composites: 167.000 450.000

- with natural fibres 5.000 100.000

TOTAL 372.000 920.000

Bio-solvents25

(2012) 630.000 26

Bio-surfactants 12

(2012) 1.520.000 13

Biofuels total (2011) 12.414.000 27

Source: Busch & Wittmeyer, Current market situation 2010 and market forecast 2020.

25

Figures by Industries & Agro-Ressources IAR 26

To be estimated by respective CEFIC sector groups 27

http://www.sustainablebiofuelsforum.eu/images/ESBF_Biofuels_Production_in_the_EU_MetricTonnes.pdf


13

Table 4 describes the requirements and performance of each industry in relation to the targets set for 2030.

Industry Current state of market 2030 target Investment required Estimated turnover Jobs

Chemicals:

EU sector

represents

21% of the world’s

chemicals, employs

1.2 million workers

and contributes

€491 billion to the

EU economy.

in 2010 the European chemical

industry is estimated to use 8-10%

renewable raw materials to

produce various chemical

substances 28

Based on a McKinsey report

biotechnology account for €30

billion in value in the EU in 2010

30% of overall

chemical

production is

biobased.

- If the 2010 figures

are almost tripled,

then the

biotechnology

could account for

more that €82.4

billion in value in

the EU in 2030

The McKinsey report estimates that

the share of biotechnology in the

employment of the chemicals

sector would 190.000 jobs in 2011

(with an average 10% of biobased

share), so the 2030 figures could

reach up to 600.000 jobs ie. a 50%

of total employment figures in

2011.

Transport In the biofuels sector,

EurObserv’Er29

estimates an

aggregated cumulated

employment level for the EU-27

close to 151.200 and a turnover of

around €13.3 billion for 2010.

This is the result of a 4.7% of

transport fuel in the respective

year.

25% of Europe’s

transport energy

needs are

supplied by

biofuels, with

advanced fuels

To meet 25% of the EU-27

transport energy needs

with second generation

biofuels, an average of 80

million litres of fuel is

required. Using an

indicator of €1.22 per litre

of annual capacity30

the

total investment required

reaches up to € 98 million.

Based on the 2010

figures, a five-fold

increase in

turnover could

reach up to €67

billion for 2010.

Based on the 2010 figures, a five-

fold increase in jobs can be

projected reaching up to 750.000

jobs for 2030

28

The Commission report “A lead market initiative for Europe - Explanatory Paper on the European Lead MarketApproach: Methodology and Rationale”, pages 63-64. An estimate from Fachagentur Nachwachsende

Rohstoffe is 8% in2003. A McKinsey report estimated the share to 10% in 2010. 29

http://www.eurobserv-er.org/pdf/barobilan11.pdf 30

Bloomberg New Energy Finance, “ Moving towards a next generation ethanol economy”, 2012


14

Industry 2010 status 2030 target Investment required Estimated turnover Jobs

Paper and pulp € 75 billion turnover31

in

2012 and 185.000 jobs (60%

of direct & indirect jobs in

rural areas”) €15 billion value

added to EU GDP (2012)

Traditional fibre

products such as paper

remain 100% biobased

Approx. 100 billion €32

.

That equates to 6 billion

€/ year, compared to

recent investment levels

of 5.5 billion €/year.

- -

Heat & Electricity The turnover of the EU

energy sector (covering

electricity,

gas, steam and hot water

supply) was €940 billion in

2007.

There were more than

26,800 companies in the

sector, employing

some 12.2 million people,

and the industry contributed

€200 billion of value added.

30% of Europe’s heat

and power generation is

from biomass.

Based on the WEO 2009

reference scenario, the

total heat & electricity

capacity will increase

1.2% annually, growing

from 804 GW in 2007 to

1,067 GW in 2030.

Using an indicator of € 3

million/ MW, the total

investment required 356

GW (30%) amounts to

almost € 1 trillion

356 GW installed

capacity can

generate

approximately 2,9

million GWh. With

an average selling

price of €

80/MWh33

, the

estimated annual

turnover can be

over € 200

billion/year.

Using an indicator of 2 direct jobs

per MW34

the total direct jobs for

2030 can reach up to more than

700.000. If the indirect jobs from

the supply chain are added to this

figure then the number can reach

up to 1 million jobs by 2030

31

Dr Markku Karllson; Presentation 17th

October 2013. 32

http://www.unfoldthefuture.eu/uploads/CEPI-2050-Roadmap-to-a-low-carbon-bio-economy.pdf 33

http://2011annualreport.edprenovaveis.pt/creating-value/financial-performance/europe/ 34

Domac J, Richards K. Final results from IEA bioenergy task 29: socio-economic aspects of bioenergy systems. In: Proceedings from 12th European conference on biomass for energy and climate protection,

Amsterdam: The Netherlands; 2002. p. 1200–04.


15

Policies: Gaps and future frameworks

During the last ten years, R&D and policy formation for biomass has seen very active development in

the bioenergy and biofuels fields, starting from the basic targets of the RED and paths towards their

achievement from the Member States in their National Renewable Energy Action Plans and the

subsequent reporting periods, and following with several other initiatives for sustainability and

market support at Member State level.

Figure 4 EU main policy mechanisms and their time of implementation35

The policy related results within the Biomass Futures project

Biomass feedstock-related results from Biomass Futures can be an important contribution to policies

for agriculture, forestry and wastes, as illustrated by the Figure below.

A central issue for policy makers is to achieve efficient use of resources. Understanding of resource

potentials at EU27, Member State and regional levels, allows policy makers to make explicit, well-

founded decisions to categorise land and prioritise different uses. These decisions can be made

taking into account competing land uses including food crops as well as biodiversity and ecosystem

services.

In the case of residues and waste feedstock types, supply will remain a regional issue which requires

regulatory, analytical and practical implementation frameworks.

35

Panoutsou et al., 2013. Policy regimes and funding schemes to support investment for next generation biofuels. In Biofuels, Bioprod.

Bioref. 7:000–000 (2013); DOI: 10.1002/bbb


16

Figure 5 Relevance of biomass supply results to key policies

In the case of cropped biomass, better quality data allows informed decision-making by policy

makers. For example, perennial crops may be well suited to cultivation on relatively low quality land,

reducing iLUC, and thereby actually helping to reduce seasonality burden in a region. Cropped

biomass can add value to local economies. Indigenous biomass may have better sustainability

characteristics than imported biomass.

Biomass demand results from Biomass Futures can be an important contribution to energy related

policies, as illustrated by the fugure below.

Figure 6 Relevance of biomass demand results to key policies


17

The key policy issues related to biomass demand include:

• Improved understanding of efficient and cost effective pathways and the policies and measures

that can promote and stimulate uptake of these pathways.

• Improved knowledge of industrial trends and future demands, enabling development or tailoring

of policies and measures to create and develop markets including attracting investment in

Europe

• Improved appreciation of market opportunities, enabling a move away from sectoral demands

(which is the typical starting point for current policies) towards efficient scale-technology

combinations.

With regards to national policy formation, Biomass Futures results can make an important

contribution in two areas, namely:

• Validation of national sustainable supply data for NREAPs

• Selection of promising (in terms of cost supply and GHG emission reduction potentials)

indigenous biomass value chains for energy and fuels

Biomass Futures results can offer significant contribution to national level debates and decision-

making on upstream (feedstock supply) and downstream (technological combinations), enabling

optimal choices for Member States’ indigenous feedstocks and market conditions / requirements.

Biomass Futures outputs can also play an important role in enabling national decision makers to

benchmark their progress / forecasts / planned instruments with Member States that already have

relevant experience in the relevant supply and demand market segments.

On-going work within Biomass Policies and S2Biom projects

Most of the National Renewable Energy Action Plans (NREAPs36

) were prepared without fully

recognizing market dynamics including: the ETS; delayed deployment of 2nd generation biofuels;

implications of sustainability criteria on supply (particularly the indirect Land Use Change- ILUC37

);

competition with other biomass using sectors; cooperation mechanisms included in the RED

Directive; and the appreciation of longer-term resource efficiency and environmental policies.

Furthermore, opportunities of the bioeconomy such as cascading use of biomass, and the linking of

electricity, heat, transport fuel and bio-based markets seems to not have been sufficiently reflected

in the NREAPs and the broader EU policy at a coordinated level.

Several on-going initiatives are currently putting effort on policy formation for the biobased

industries and the European bioeconomy. Two of them have been discussed during the workshop:

1. Biomass Policies (www.biomasspolicies.eu )

36

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Renewable_Energy_Action_Plan 37

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indirect_land_use_change_impacts_of_biofuels


18

The project will build up a consistent knowledge base both for the efficient resource mobilisation

(sustainability criteria; costs, logistics, availability) and for the assessment of resource efficient

biomass value chains (with a set of consistent technical indicators) based on recent information from

three recent studies (Biobench; Biomass Futures38

and the recent EEA study39

).

How will the Biomass Policies project support policy makers at national level?

Recent results from the Biomass Futures project estimated that the EU biomass potential ranges

between 375 to 429 MTOE depending on the sustainability criteria applied. This could in theory

cover at least 2.5 times the amount that is needed to realize the total bioenergy demand as set in

the NREAPs for 2020. However, in the demand analysis performed by the project with the RESolve40

model it is predicted that only a part (37%) of domestic biomass supply could actually be exploited

by 2020 due to primarily lack of clearly focused policies and support measures at local/ national level

that can promote efficient resource mobilisation. Practically given current incentives and wider cost-

benefit ratios for bioenergy production, no use is made of agricultural residues (e.g. straw, cuttings

and prunings, manure) and additionally harvestable roundwood potentials.

a. One question that immediately arises from the above analysis on biomass supply is how can EU

Member States themselves accurately define and characterise their indigenous feedstock

options in terms of cost-supply and logistical aspects of their deployment as well as sustainability

risks.

The Biomass policies project will build on information from Biomass Futures, the EEA study and

Biobench and develop practical guidelines for data collection and a clear simplified approach to

estimate and monitor sustainable biomass supply at national level.

b. A second question from the demand supply analysis performed in the Biomass Futures project is

whether there is a mismatch between supply and demand and how to best address this in the

future monitoring process of NREAPs along with prioritising efficient and sustainable value

chains.

The Biomass Policies project will also develop guidelines on how to select & prioritise sustainable-

resource efficient bioenergy value chains.

c. A high number of Member States, given their specific biomass policy- related features (i.e.

NREAP reporting targets, incentives, support schemes, etc.) are expected to miss their

anticipated 2020 targets.

A major element of the Biomass Polices project is to work alongside with national administrations to

develop integrated biomass policy and support frameworks at the national level, tailored to meet

their requirements and support the resource efficient mobilization of indigenous biomass value

chains.

In short, the work in Biomass Policies, starting from data and information generated in the Biomass

Futures and Biobench projects, will build up a concise knowledge base both for the efficient resource

38

www.biomassfutures.eu 39

EU bioenergy potential from a resource‑efficiency perspective. EEA Report No 6/2013. ISSN 1725-9177.

http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/eu-bioenergy-potential 40

The RESolve model is an optimization model developed by ECN*. The model fulfills given demands for biofuels for transport, electricity

and heating using biomass in a least cost manner with respect to fossil references.


19

mobilisation (sustainability criteria; costs, logistics, availability) and for the assessment of resource

efficient biomass value chains (with a set of consistent technical indicators). This will be further used

to develop “tailored” policy options and support frameworks at EU28 and national level for a set of

highly relevant biomass value chains for eleven Member States that will inform the following policy

related issues:

• How to manage with competition for the biomass feedstocks?

• How to optimise with various national sustainability rules?

• How to support mobilization of important indigenous biomass resources, for which

value chains and how to address resource efficiency in policy, through co-generation,

cascading use of biomass, biorefinery approaches?

• How to address different scales of biomass applications in policy?

• How to engage cooperation mechanisms (particularly the joint projects) to mobilise

relatively lower cost indigenous biomass resources and contribute towards achieving the

RES targets cost-effectively?

• How to find a level- playing field way to promote advanced biofuels?

• How might the future support schemes look like?

2. S2Biom: Sustainable supply and delivery of non - food biomass to support a “resource-

efficient” Bioeconomy in Europe (www.s2biom.eu )

The project will support the sustainable delivery of non-food biomass feedstock at local, regional

and pan European level through developing Strategies, and Roadmaps that will be informed by a

“computerized and easy to use” planning toolset (and respective databases) with up to date

harmonized datasets for EU28, western Balkans, Turkey, Moldova and Ukraine. The spatial level of

analysis both for the toolset and the databases will be NUTS1 (country), NUTS2 (regional) and NUTS3

(local level).

How will the S2Biom project support policy makers?

The biobased economy is considered as one of the key elements to achieve a smart and green

Europe (EU 2020 Strategy; Bioeconomy Strategy to 2030, etc.). To develop a bioeconomy for energy,

fuels and biobased products a number of challenges need to be addressed, e.g. the competing uses

of biomass, and securing a reliable and sustainable supply of biomass feedstock. Over the last

decade, various policies and economic frameworks have been put in place to tackle some of these

challenges. But we also have to consider that various policies on EU, national and regional level exist

(e.g. in relation to agriculture, forestry, waste, environment, energy, trade) and are playing a role in

the bioeconomy. Some may be contradictory and cause confusion and market barriers, thereby

prohibiting the efficient development of the bioeconomy.

The sustainability of bioenergy has been legally addressed in the EU Renewable Energy Directive

2009/28/EC (RED)41 and Fuel Quality Directive (FQD)42

by establishing mandatory criteria, especially

41

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. 42

Directive 2009/30/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 amending Directive 98/70/EC as regards the

specification of petrol, diesel and gas-oil and introducing a mechanism to monitor and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and amending

Council Directive 1999/32/EC as regards the specification of fuel used by inland waterway vessels and repealing Directive 93/12/EEC.


20

for GHG emissions and carbon stocks, but these regulations are restricted to biofuels and liquid

bioenergy carriers43

.

Regarding to the non EU countries under study in this project, it is worth mentioning that in October

2012, Energy Community contracting parties44

adopted the obligation to implement RED Directive.

However, Contracting Parties did not develop specific policies or targets for biomass yet, and there

are no specific policies on sustainability of production and use of biomass as well.

S2Biom contribution to policy for the bioeconomy: Within the EU28 Member States there is a clear

need to give a structured overview of which regulatory and economic frameworks exist at different

levels, to benchmark the effectiveness of different approaches and develop coherent policy

guidelines to support the sustainable development of the biobased economy.

At the same time, for Western Balkans, Ukraine, Moldova and Turkey it is very important to develop

a biomass and biofuels policy that is aiming at fulfilling the EU requirements and more importantly,

to provide the emerging bioenergy sector with regulations required for their sustainable growth and

performance.

The project will:

• provide a structured overview of all elements of economic and regulatory frameworks that

relate to the sustainable delivery of non-food biomass at different levels of governance across

Europe (i.e. local, regional and pan-European), and

• develop coherent policy guidelines (with a set of indicators) that will allow policy makers from

the respective levels of policy determination to quickly appreciate the support frameworks that

exist and the most efficient ways to apply them for the future use of biomass in a sustainable

manner.

Developing a Vision, strategies, implementation plans and an R&D roadmap

The setting up of a Vision for the uptake of biomass in EU has primarily taken place within the

respective Technology Platforms (European Biofuels Technology Platform/ EBTP, Renewable Heating

and Cooling Platform/ RHCP) and the most recent E Bioeconomy Strategy and Action Plan (2012)

(http://ec.europa.eu/research/bioeconomy /pdf/201202_ innovating_sustainable_growth.pdf ) and

industrial initiatives for the Biobased economy (http://www.cepi.org/node/653 )

Though the abovementioned initiatives have successfully set the path towards suggesting indicative

shares for energy, fuels and biobased products in Europe up to 2030, it is widely understood that the

wide variety of supply & logistics value chains, the complex interactions of the key market sectors

involved - especially expanding from bioenergy and biofuels to the bio-based economy- and the

expectations from the advanced pathways, which when fully commercial will facilitate the success of

achieving the policy targets, fully justifies the development of a new, coherent and technically

substantiated Vision.

43

See footnote Error! Bookmark not defined.. 44

Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Croatia, FYROM, Moldova, Montenegro, Serbia, UNMIK, Ukraine/ Turkey is an observer.


21

S2Biom contribution to strategy and implementation plans: The project will build on the above

initiatives; and develop coherent and technically substantiated Vision with a respective R&D

roadmap for the delivery of non-food sustainable biomass supply in Europe to meet demand for

2030.

To do this the work will also capitalise on the substantial involvement of a number of partners in the

Technology Platforms (EBTP; RHCP), the contribution of Central European Institute (CEI)45

and JRC-

IES46

as strategic institutional capacities for Southeast Europe and the European Commission

respectively and the PPP for Biobased industry47

.

Finally, to ensure appropriate regional coverage in terms of strategies and policy formation, the

project website will have a link at the Energy Community website48

and a Member from the Energy

Community Secretariat will participate in the projects Policy and Industry Advisory Committee.

Recommendations for future work

A key issue for further analysis is to build up a concise knowledge base of the available capacities

(modelling tools, research projects, industrial/ market requirements) for the:

a) efficient resource mobilisation (sustainability criteria; costs, logistics, availability),

b) production of more and/or different types of biomass e.g. by increasing agricultural

productivity49

, using and hitherto unutilized land, expanding production of specific biomass

crops, and

c) assessment of the resource efficiency element in biomass value chains (with a set of

consistent techno-economic, sustainability and policy related indicators including the overall

energy balance of the process).

The Bioeconomy Observatory could provide a good forum for the discussions and elaboration of the

required documentation.

JRC modelling capacities for the biobased products & the bioeconomy

Due to the large number of sectors covered by the bio-economy (i.e. agriculture, forestry, fisheries,

food and pulp and paper production, chemistry, etc.), a preliminary sectoral analysis can be helpful

in the first instance. Already JRC-Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS) successfully

used this approach for monitoring agri-food sectors and some other sector linked to them, and

released the report “An approach to describe the agri-food and other bio-based sectors in the

European Union” in September 2012 (Cardenete et al., 201250

). The analytical methods used in this

report are suitable for analyzing several aggregated bio-economy sectors (such as agriculture and

food industry and other closely related sectors - e.g. pulp and paper, energy, etc.). The input-output

45

http://www.cei.int/ 46

JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE- Institute for Environment and Sustainability- Sustainability Assessment Unit – INTESA 47

biconsortium.eu 48

http://www.energy-community.org/portal/page/portal/ENC_HOME 49

The challenge is to do it with less fossil energy and other non-renewable input than the production increase can replace. 50

Cardenete, M. A., Boulanger, P., Delgado, M.C., Ferrari, E. and M'Barek, R. (2012), An approach to describe the agri-food and other bio-

based sectors in the European. Focus on Spain, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies.


22

tables, disaggregated AgriSAMs51

were able to estimate the contribution and potential of these

sectors in terms of value added and job creation, as well as their economic linkages.

As far as its relevance to the bio-economy is concerned, what turns out to be insufficient in this

study is the treatment of several sectors such as chemistry, rubber and plastic products, energy and

biotechnology. More specifically, as no method of discriminating between the traditional industrial

and energy products and the bio-based ones is put forward, the contribution and potential of the

bio-based share of these sectors remains undefined. Moreover, the disaggregated sectoral approach

seems capable of capturing and assessing the primary production-conversion-use chains of biological

resources in the traditional sectors only, above all in the food industry. However, the contribution of

the agri-food and other traditional bio-based sectors (i.e. conventional and non-food crops,

agricultural waste residues and organic waste) to energy and industrial feedstock remains

unresolved. Thus, this sectoral approach needs further disaggregation and also to be complemented

with other methodologies.

First, in order to identify the bio-based products and monitor the evolution of their value chains and

trade flows, separate and disaggregated product-level statistics (e.g. CN52

and PRODCOM53

) are

needed. In this direction, the introduction of new PRODCOM and CN codes for bio-based products

will be essential.

Second, in order to support the process of gathering data and information (for example: company’

share of bio-based production and potential; R&D, biotechnology, production facilities, and other

investments directed to bio-based activities; biological resource use, etc.), additional product- and

company-level research is needed.

Third, due to the importance of environmental sustainability criteria that are applicable to bio-based

products, special emphasis should be placed to the development and application of life-cycle-based

methods. Towards this end, life-cycle data inventory, resource-efficiency and life-cycle indicators

already developed by the JRC Institute for Environment and Sustainability (IES) can be useful.

Land use modelling in JRC

The changes in the cover and use of the surface of the earth depend on natural processes, and are –

at the same time - shaped by demographic, economic, cultural, political and technological drivers. A

land-use/cover model helps in understanding and interpreting the interactions between the bio-

physical and human systems which are at the basis of the territorial dynamics. It can support

explaining the consequences of “where” and “when” in addition to “what” and “how much”:

• Evaluate direct and indirect effects of policies over time;

• Determine the critical factors;

• Correlate and interconnect sectors;

• Compare and evaluate alternative scenarios (options);

• Locate impacts and effects (multi-scale analysis)

51

AgriSAM stands for “Social Accounting Matrix with a Disaggregated Agricultural Sector”. 52

The Combined Nomenclature (CN) provides the rules for the classification of imported and exported goods to an eight-digit level. 53

Eurostat’s PRODCOM database provides statistics on the production of manufactured goods to an eight-digit level. Most product codes

correspond to one or more Combined Nomenclature (CN) codes, but some (mostly industrial services) do not.

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/prodcom/introduction


23

The Land Use Modelling Platform (LUMP) has been developed by the Institute for Environment and

Sustainability of the European Commission Joint Research Center (JRC-IES) to support the policy

needs of different services of the European Commission, such as exploration of future policies and

impact assessment of specific proposals.

Figure 7 Configuration of LUMP for the Energy-Climate Reference Scenario – Components and Workflow

Environmental impact modelling

In response to policy needs of the Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe (EC, 2011)54

, JRC-IES has

developed a set of life-cycle based resource efficiency indicators, with the aim to quantify the overall

environmental impact potential of production and consumption in the EU-27 (taking into account

internationally traded commodities). This indicator set provides an overall indicator of potential

environmental impacts, by normalizing and weighting across multiple environmental criteria such as

climate change, acidification, toxicity and energy resource depletion potentials.

The methodology builds on pilot case studies recently developed by JRC for life cycle indicators (EC,

2012a and 2012b) and will combine territorial emissions and resource extractions for each of the

Member States and the EU27 in total with those related to imported and exported products,

consistently to the requirements of the International Reference Life Cycle Data system (ILCD) (EC,

2010 and 2012c). This framework will also allow to cover the environmental impacts related to

import and export activities, allowing to capture the environmental impact occurring outside the

territory of the EU.

54

European Commission (2011), Roadmap to a Resource efficient Europe, COM(2011) 571.

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/resource_efficiency/pdf/com2011_571.pdf


24

The project outcomes will allow monitoring over time of overall consumption-related environmental

impacts. The results will represent the actual pressures on the natural environment, human health

and the availability of material, biomass, energy, water and land resources exerted by the European

society.

Life cycle resource indicators

To monitor environmental aspect of sustainable development the European Union policies will

benefit from life cycle based indicators. Life cycle based indicators feature:

- Life cycle perspective

- Consumption, production and waste

- Quantified environmental impacts

- International trade

- Flexibility in the level of information detail

The Environmental sustainability assessment module within the bioeconomy observatory could

include activities such as:

1. Developing relevant key environmental indicators concerning biomass production, logistics and

use.

2. Comparative life-cycle based assessment of example bio-based products and their supply chains,

from the primary production of biological resources to end-of-life processes.

3. Sustainability assessment:

- Designing minimum sustainability criteria for biomass production, mobilization and its industrial

applications (e.g. in terms of resource efficiency, GHG emissions, land use change, forest

exploitation, etc.);

- Elaboration/integration of comprehensive, multi-criteria sustainability assessment tools for both

existing and emerging bio-products’ (e.g. bio-based chemicals, bio-based plastics, enzymes, bio-

based materials, biofuels)13 performance, in terms of price, value-added, technical feasibility,

utility and environmental impact;

- Developing methodological tools for tracing the bio-products’ sustainability criteria compliance

across the whole supply chain;

- Coping with the competing use options of both biomass and land in a multi-sector/multi-region

approach

- Developing methodological tools for sustainability assessment of the existing and prospective

technologies55

.

55

E.g. building upon PROSUITE project - www.prosuite.org .


25

Annex I Background Note

London & Ispra, 8th

July 2013

Calliope Panoutsou (Imperial College London) &

Boyan Kavalov (EC-JRC, Institute for Environment & Sustainability)

Setting the scene

The specific objective in Horizon 2020 is to develop a resource efficient economy that is resilient to

climate change, together with a supply of raw materials, in order to meet the needs of a growing

global population within the sustainable limits of the planet’s natural resources.

Horizon 2020 also defines sustainable development as an overarching objective and within that six

main social challenges to which research, development and innovation should respond.

Bio-based industries are strongly coherent with the overall goal of sustainable development because

bio-resources when properly managed are renewable and, if used within the production capacity of

land, can also be sustainable. Use of bio-resources and conversion to useful products can contribute

to some extent to each of the six grand challenges.

On the other hand, global population growth by 2050 is estimated to lead to a 70% increase in food

demand; as reported demand for food increases faster than population because of improved diet

and especially because more meat is eaten56

. Improvements in agronomic science will help relieve

that stress, but security of food supply is already a serious concern in many different ways and it is

only likely to get more acute as the global population continues to grow, as climate change and

other environmental consequences continue to disrupt historic practices of husbandry and as

pressure on biological resources from other demands increases.

There is already an intensifying debate about the extent of the potential impact on food security of

the growing demand for renewable biological resources for materials and fuel and the impacts on

land use, but it is clear that there must be trade-offs among competing uses and these are likely to

develop with technological advance and innovation57

.

At present the fragility of food security is most visible in developing countries58

. In this form the

conflict is a combination of political deficiency and physical constraint, but concerns about the long-

term competition for a limited biomass / land resource that could emerge between biofuels,

biomaterials and conventional uses have been expressed for Europe, too59

.

More advanced biotechnological methods that allow the conversion of waste streams into valuable

products, such as food, feed, material and energy will favourably affect trade-offs between

competing demands and allow greater value to be extracted at lower environmental cost from the

same resource in Europe and world-wide. The potential for innovation is high because of the wide

range of sciences deployed along with several novel enabling and industrial technologies that create

much opportunity for multi-disciplinary breakthroughs.

56 How to feed the world in 2050, FAO 2009 57 Ex-ante impact assessment for the Biobased JTI, Dr Nigel Lucas. 58 Climate change, biofuels and land, FAO undated, ftp.fao.org/nr/HLCinfo/Land-Infosheet-En.pdf 59 Laying the foundations for greener transport, EEA Report 7/2011


26

Bio-based industries have much to offer in terms of minimizing / reducing environmental impacts ,

improving resource efficiency and raw materials utilisation, but the relationship is rather complex.

For example, biofuels are expected in most European Member States to be the principal means by

which they will meet the requirement to increase their share of renewable energy used in transport

by 2020. However, appropriate merits should be given to their sustainability, taking into account

their indirect impacts through, inter alia, the displacement of food production, including Land Use

impacts.

The recent debates focus mainly on the upstream and they are complex and controversial, but the

incremental environmental externalities from advanced large-scale biorefineries producing fuels,

materials and platform chemicals seem to be much lower compared to stand-alone facilities. It is

generally accepted by the international research community that to seize the opportunities of

sustainable growth through a greater use of biomass, research in the optimal configuration of future

biorefineries will be necessary.

Bio-industries create new possibilities to support the income of farmers by higher prices of

commodities and sale of residues and to contribute thereby to inclusive, innovative and secure

growth. Second generation bio-industrial facilities are likely to be relatively large in order to benefit

from economies of scale and the feedstock requirements will be considerable (up to 600 000 t/yr)60

.

To achieve this will require secure and efficient resource supply, rigorous quality control and the

management of multiple suppliers when the delivery of feedstock cannot be met by a single

supplier. There are severe and novel logistic challenges in collection, transport, pre-processing and

inventory management that have an important technical and socio-economic dimension, and

important implications on the energy balance, and will need to be researched.

The efficient resource supply issue

If the market for bio-based products is to develop, the establishment of efficient, cost-effective

supply chains, providing raw materials of known and consistent quality will be essential.

Up to now, most of the recent work on biomass availability and supply has been driven by the high

demand of both policy and industrial actors in the bioenergy and biofuels sectors. As such, the key

assumptions used for the estimation of available biomass quantities, the datasets produced and the

respective units in which they have been expressed are strongly related to energy.

Improving and securing access to renewable raw materials for industrial use has been suggested as

the first requirement of an integrated strategy for a bio-based economy61

. Much of the

conventional and competing chemical industry is based on hydrocarbon feedstock; hydrocarbons in

the ground are very variable, from gas to highly viscous material that will not flow unless heated.

Decades of incremental innovation and huge investments in extraction, refining and upgrading have

created an industry that can deliver standardised products anywhere in the world at short notice.

Biomass supplies are relatively homogenous compared to raw hydrocarbons, but no value chain

exists at present that can match the reliable delivery of standardised products of the petro-chemical

60 Sustainable Production of Second-Generation Biofuels, OECD/IEA 2010 61 Building a Bio-based Economy for Europe in 2020, EuropaBio,


27

industry. Affordable and reliable supplies of feedstock have also been noted by the OECD as a

general problem62

and a survey of US industry bears this out63

.

In the case of the petro-chemical industry, the challenge is largely social (public opinion) and

environmental (concerns especially as regards the topical issues of shale oil and gas, deep-water and

Arctic deposits, etc.); for the bio-based industries there are also social concerns, however, given the

already substantial impact bioenergy has had on food prices and the considerable debate about the

implications of bioenergy, despite the fact that it delivers but a tiny fraction of the energy provided

by fossil hydrocarbons. But there are even more techno-economic and environmental challenges to

be met. Much research (and investment) will be needed in creating value chains, defining standards,

working out logistics and specifying workable arrangements for pre-processing that can come near

to the performance of the petro-chemical industry. These issues will be serious where value chains

are to be created (for example the collection and pre-treatment of cereal straw); in other cases, for

example in the paper and pulp industry, the producer value chains are already in place. The risks are

not all to one side; diversification of feedstocks away from fossil fuels will help to manage some of

the uncertainty attached to the prices and availability of fossil fuels and the policies that

governments may adopt to mitigate environmental penalties that may also bear unpredictably on

use of hydrocarbons.

Many other factors will influence on the success or failure of standardised and timely deliveries of

biomass. The list includes: coherent support mechanisms for the competing uses of biomass; EU

agricultural and farm policies to promote the production of renewable raw materials for industrial

uses; investments in local and regional infrastructures and logistical facilities.

The structure of the European biomass supply industry is a partial problem driver for the relative

insecurity of biomass supply in terms of availability, quality and cost. The potential for biomass

supply in Europe is substantial; in most of the EU-27 member states climate, water and soil

conditions are favourable for cultivation and the yields for wheat in Central Europe are some of the

highest in the world64

. However, this production is used to feed the European and world population,

it comes at a substantial cost of fossil energy (machines, fertilisers, chemicals), causes a number of

unsustainable environmental impacts (soil erosion, water pollution and depletion) and there is little

potential to increase arable land. The diversity of feedstock types and ownership causes logistic

problems in transport, handling and pre-treatment. A prerequisite for working with a diverse raw

material base is harmonised standards based on biomass material attributes (physical/ chemical

properties) and quality specifications for end products. All of these matters require important,

coherent and coordinated actions in the research field.

Another point for consideration in respect of feedstock supply is that so far the support policies at

EU and Member States level have been mostly developed around biofuels and bioenergy, while

other possible uses of biomass with potentially higher value-added have enjoyed less of attention.

62 Future prospects for industrial biotechnology, OECD, 2011 63 Industrial Biotechnology: Development and Adoption by the U.S. Chemical and Biofuel Industries. Investigation No. 332—481, U.S. International Trade Commission, 2008 64 Biomass Futures: an integrated approach for estimating the future contribution of biomass value chains to the European energy system and inform future policy formation, In Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining. Panoutsou, C., et al., 2012


28

Research and policy development

During the last ten years, R&D and policy formation for biomass has seen very active development in

the bioenergy and biofuels fields, starting from the basic targets of the RED and paths towards their

achievement from the Member States in their National Renewable Energy Action Plans and the

subsequent reporting periods, and following with several other initiatives for sustainability and

market support at Member State level.

However, most NREAPs were prepared without fully recognizing market dynamics including: the ETS;

delayed deployment of 2nd generation biofuels; implications of sustainability criteria on supply;

competition with other biomass using sectors; cooperation mechanisms included in the RED

Directive; and the later practical implementation of longer-term resource efficiency and

environmental policies at MS level.

Furthermore, opportunities of the bioeconomy such as cascading use of biomass, and the linking of

electricity, heat, transport fuel and bio-material markets seems to not have been sufficiently

reflected in the NREAPs and the broader EU policy making at a coordinated level.

A key issue for further analysis is to build up a concise knowledge base of the available capacities

(modelling tools, research projects, industrial/ market requirements) for the:

a) efficient resource mobilisation (sustainability criteria; costs, logistics, availability),

b) production of more and/or different types of biomass e.g. by improving production

processes , and assessment of the resource efficiency element in biomass value chains (with

a set of consistent techno-economic, sustainability and policy related indicators, including

the overall energy balance of the process).

This can be best achieved through a centrally coordinated activity at the Commission level and the

Bioeconomy Observatory provides a good forum for the discussions and elaboration of the required

documentation.


29

Annex II Meeting Agenda

"RESOURCE EFFICIENCY OF EU BIOBASED

INDUSTRIES"

An Expert Workshop, in support to the JRC activities in the field of resource efficiency, bioeconomy and set-up of an EU Bioeconomy

Observatory

organised by

European Commission – Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability,

Sustainability Assessment Unit

and

And Imperial College London, Centre for Energy Policy and Technology

17-18 OCTOBER 2013 JRC INSTITUTE FOR ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY,

VIA E. FERMI 2749, 21027 ISPRA (VA) ITALY

Meeting Room Raffaello, building 26A

FINAL AGENDA


30

Thursday, 17 October 2013

12:30-14:00 Delegates check-in

14:00-14:10 Welcome - C. Ciupagea, Head of Sustainability Assessment Unit /SAU/ - JRC-IES

14:10-14:30 Scope of the Workshop – P. Panoutsou (Workshop Co-

Coordinator, Imperial College London, Centre for Energy Policy and Technology)

14:30-14:45 Bioenergy and Biomass aspects in the Common Agricultural

Policy – A. Gumbert (DG AGRI) 14:45-14:55 Set up of an EU Bioeconomy Observatory /BISO Project/– D.

Plan (BISO Coordinator, JRC headquarters, Brussels) 14:55-15:05 Environmental sustainability assessment in the framework

of EU Bioeconomy Observatory – B. Kavalov (Workshop Co-Coordinator, JRC-IES-SAU)

15:05-15:40 Definitions:

- Matthias Dees (U. Freiburg – BEE project) • Biomass and biogenic raw materials, renewable resources and

biogenic residues

• Cascading

• System boundaries

Discussion

15:40-16:00 Coffee break & discussion

16:00-16:50 Sector mapping: - Dirk Carrez (BRIDGE, CleverConsult) - Calliope Panoutsou (EBTP, Imperial College) - Markku Karlsson (EBTP, Finish Forest Industries) - Martijn Hackmann (Food & Biobased Research, Wageningen UR) • Key players & capacities

• Current market shares and future targets: Market prospects to

2030.

• Indicators

Discussion

16:50-17:20 Quality requirements

- Harmen Willemse (Secretary of CEN/TC 411 “Bio-based products”)

• Standardization

• Techniques for determining quality and specific properties of

biomass/ biobased products

• Indicators

Discussion 17:20-17:30 Logistics arrangements & End of Day 1


31

Friday, 18 October 2013

09:00-09:30 Delegates check-in

09:30-09:35 Opening of the second day 09:35-10:30 Analytical and Modelling Tools

- Carlo Lavalle (JRC-IES-SAU) - Claudia Baranzelli (JRC-IES-SAU) - Carolina Perpiňa (JRC-IES-SAU) - David Pennington (JRC-IES-SAU) • Land Use Modelling

• Life-Cycle Assessment

Discussion 10:30-11:10 Policies: Gaps and future frameworks

- Calliope Panoutsou (Imperial College) • New policy frameworks (incl. sustainability) with emphasis on

environment and society.

• Indicators

Discussion

11:10-11:30 Coffee break and discussion

11:30-12:20 Resource efficiency indicators - Calliope Panoutsou (Imperial College) - Malgorzata Goralczyk (JRC-IES-SAU) • Indicators

• Market

• Quality

• Modeling (techno-economics and sustainability)

• Policy Discussion

12:20-12:30 Closing remarks - Boyan Kavalov (JRC-IES-SAU) - Calliope Panoutsou (Imperial College) 12:30 End of Day 2


32

Annex III Minutes

Resource Efficiency of EU Bio-based Industries: Expert Workshop in support to the JRC activities in

the field of resource efficiency, bio-economy and set-up of an EU Bio-economy Observatory

17-18 OCTOBER 2013

JRC, INSTITUTE FOR ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY (IES) - VIA E. FERMI 2749, 21027 ISPRA (VA) ITALY

- MINUTES –

DAY 1

TIME SPEAKER SUMMARY OF CONTENT & HIGHLIGHTS

14.00 –

14.05

B. Kavalov

(workshop co-

coordinator)

Opening statement and welcome

14.05 –

14.15

C. Ciupagea

(JRC-IES-SAU Head of

Unit)

Welcome and introduction to JRC/IES/H08

• Intro to JRC: role within the EC, mission, 7 main competence

areas.

• Intro to JRC-IES: involved in 5 research area (out of the JRC 7

competence areas).

• Intro to H08 - who we are and what we do: Land Use Modelling

Platform (LUMP), European Platform for LCA (EPLCA), Product

Environmental Footprint (PEF) / Organization Environmental

Footprint (OEF), Bio-economy Observatory (BISO), Integrated

Impact Assessment of EU policy, resource efficiency, life cycle

indicators, eco-design, etc.

14.15 –

14.30

C. Panoutsou

(workshop co-

coordinator)

Resource efficiency for EU bio-based industries: Scope of the

workshop

• Intro: Biomass value chains; Resource efficient Europe towards a

bio-based economy; Sustainable resource management: forests

and agricultural residues.

• Background and relevant ongoing initiatives: e.g., NREAP,

Biomass policies, BIOTEAM, BASIS, BISO, S2BIOM.

• Goals of workshop: set the scene for resource efficiency in terms

of capacities, market, research and policy, required modelling

and indicators.

• Structure: forthcoming presentation will be focused on the

following key aspects in relation to bio-based industries: market,

quality (e.g. standardization), modelling, and policy.

• Key issues for consideration: efficient resource mobilization,

production of more / more types of biomass, assessment of

resource efficient element in biomass value chains.

14.30 –

14.50

A. Gumbert

(DG AGRI)

Bioenergy and biomass aspects in the Common Agricultural Policy

• EU climate and energy package: 20-20-20 targets, Renewable

Energy Directive (RED), fuel quality directive, ILUC proposal.

• Agriculture and forestry provide most of the available biomass


33

• Economic advantages of sustainable use of biomasses.

• Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform: policy objectives,

economic/environmental/territorial challenges, pillar I (direct

support), pillar II (rural development).

• Payment for agricultural practices is beneficial for the climate and

the environment.

• Ecological Focus Areas: areas were specific restrictions apply on

the way to use the land and its embodied resources.

• 6 strategic priorities for rural development policy.

• EU Innovation Partnership: aim is to bring together

heterogeneous groups to establish a network to support

innovation.

• Renewable energy and raw material production is given a lot of

attention in the CAP, although CAP does not set either production

targets, or direct support. Innovation is also given high attention.

14.50 –

15.10

D. Plan

(BISO coordinator)

Set up of an EU Bio-economy Observatory /BISO Project

• Policy context: EU Bio-economy Communication COM(2012)60,

which supports development of a bio-economy observatory.

• March 2013: BISO (bio-economy information system observatory)

project kick-off DG R&I and JRC.

• Key milestones: 11/2013 stakeholders meeting; 02/2014 pilot BISO

website including first dataset; Q1 2016 fully operational BISO.

• BISO, the 3 pillars: research (quantitative data on bio-economy

research, use of existing data and statistics, data supplier are EC

and Member States), policy (qualitative info on bio-economy

policy initiatives, interaction with EU bio-economy policy makers in

various bio-economy areas), market (JRC IPTS: quantify size of bio-

economy markets based on biomass supply and existing bio-based

production options; JRC IES performs the environmental

sustainability assessment of bio-economy).

• BISO core object: quantify size of EU bio-economy (e.g. size of

biomass supply, residues, waste) and quantify its outputs (3 bio-

based outputs: food/feed, energy, material).

• BISO partners: EC, Member States, International Organizations

(e.g. OECD, FAO), selected non-EU countries, stakeholders

(academia, industries, etc.).

15.10 –

15.15

B. Kavalov

(workshop co-

coordinator)

Environmental sustainability assessment in the framework of EU Bio-

economy Observatory (BISO)

• General info on the set up of the BISO.

• Intended work on environmental sustainability assessment in the

BISO framework: LCA will be used to compare alternative bio-

based systems and supply chains; designing minimum

sustainability criteria for bio-based supply chains, etc.; to build

upon SET Plan Information System template; tree-based approach

for representing bioenergy chains.

15.15 –

15.45

M. Dees

(BEE project)

Definitions

• Definitions of – Biomass and biogenic raw materials, biomass

potential (theoretical, technical, and economic potential),

renewable resources and biogenic residues – in different sources:

e.g. IPCCC glossary, renewable energy directive.

• Major types of biomass by origin: forest, agricultural residues,

organic waste, energy crops, aquatic biomass.

Major restriction of biomass supply: biodiversity, soil protection,


34

competitions issues, etc.

• Overview of BEE comparative analyses of methodological

approaches, advantages and disadvantages of each approach – in

order to choose which set of approaches are more relevant for use

in the S2BIOM project.

• Overview of EU27 energy potentials from different biomass

sources.

• Overview of NREAP biomass targets at EU27 level and comparison

with other potential studies.

• Cascading biomass uses: concept and applications.

• System boundaries.

• S2BIOM: overview, timing, structure, themes, WPs, coverage

(Eu27, Western Balkans, etc.)

15.45 –

15.55

Discussion – key points of discussion were: actual availability of datasets, opportunities/risks of

combination of datasets, time coverage of available statistics, quality of the data, types of data

(i.e. what do they tell?), high uncertainty of available data, lack of alignment of different

methodologies, data/results/model are often of limited utility because they do not look at the

complete picture but they just focus on few specific aspects.

15.55 –

16.15 - Coffee break -

16.15 –

16.30

D. Carrez

(BRIDGE,

CleverConsult)

Sector Mapping (I): Bio-based products

• Bio-based industries consortium.

• Bio-based economy – key components are: biopolymers,

chemicals, consumers’ goods, fuels, other bio-based products.

• Key markets for bio-based chemicals: ethanol, lactic acid, etc.

• Major bio/investments 2010-2015: North America, EU, Asia, Brazil

• Major trends in bio-based chemicals and products: e.g. huge

growth of drop-in bio-plastics, platform chemicals (i.e. chemicals

that can be used for multiple applications); ethanol; bio-diesel

production.

• Industrial biotech market: growth of about 20% per year between

2010 and 2020! Bio-plastic markets: highest yearly growth in the

years to come.

• Biomass-derived building blocks: expected high growth of this

area.

16.30-16.45

M. Karlsson

(EBTP, Finnish Forest

Industries)

Sector Mapping (II): Forest-based sector, enabler of the bio-based

society

• Intro EU Forestry industry: turnover 75 billion euros.

• Value-added from integrated bio-refineries: integrated virgin bio-

refinery, integrated urban bio-refinery – several bio-based outputs

can be created within a single installation.

• Forest Technology Platform.

• World of innovation: new bio-based technologies, new bio-based

materials, etc.

• EU forest industry sector: Growth is decoupled from emissions.

• Wood biomass use in energy: overview.

• Main challenge is to find bio-concepts with the sufficient techno-

economic feasibility and where raw material sourcing is organised

in a sustainable manner.

16.45 –

16.55

M. Hackmann

(Food & Bio-based

Sector Mapping (III): From biomass availability to industry demand

• EU 27 biomass potential, an overview: lots of biomass has to be


35

Research, UR) made available, quality of biomass is often not sufficient,

increasing interest in green building blocks.

• World plastic production: 285 Mt per year, but only 5% of all

chemicals is bio-based at present.

• Key bio-based plastics polymers: vinylpolymers, polyesters,

polyamides, polyeurethanes.

16.55 –

17.15

H. Willemse

(CEN/TC 411

secretary)

Quality requirements: standardisation on bio-based products – status

report

• Intro to CEN, its structure, and to the general concept of

standardisation

• CEN definition of bio-based: derived from biomass.

• CEN definition of bio-based products: products entirely or partly

derived from biomass.

• Request from EC to develop standards or feasibility study on bio-

based products, on bio-based polymers and bio-lubricant, bio-

surfactants.

• Many available CEN standards on bio-based products, including

template for reporting and communication.

• CEN/TC 411-Bio-Based Products.

• 5 CEN Working Groups (WG) dealing with bio-based products.

• Overview of CEN forthcoming standards on bio-based products

and technology.

• Bio-based carbon content: a technical summary is available, based

on the quantity of C14 to establish what proportion of the overall

carbon is of fossil or biogenic nature.

17.15-17.25

Discussion – key points of discussion were: Mass-balance approach to determine the bio-based

content: virtual allocation of bio-content versus flow/inspection-based approach; need for a

robust but cheap methodology for determining the bio-based content; screening method versus

isotope method.

17.25 - End of day 1 -

DAY 2

09.30 - Opening of day 2: welcome and logistic -

9.35 –

10.15

C. Baranzelli

(JRC-IES-SAU, INTESA

action)

Analytical and modelling tools (I): Biomass and land use modelling

• Introduction to land use modelling and the newly developed Land

Use Modelling Platform (LUMP): able to take into account

competition between different sectors, allows accounting for

specific policies with special consequences.

• Main output: projected land use change (also at levels of local

dynamics) and projected population densities.

• Reference scenario: policies with both direct and indirect

repercussions on EU landscape are integrated into LUMP

modelling framework.

• Land requirements (EU28) + Population requirements (EU28) are

being integrated into LUMP.

• Environmental consequences of land dynamics: identified

through indicators such as green infrastructures, critical habitats,

habitat conservation status.

• LUMP use for modelling the supply of biomass available for

energy purposes: biomass from new energy crops (NECR, also

allocated on degraded land), biomass from primary agricultural


36

residues (ARES), biomass from forest land.

• AFO-CC projects: develop EU methodology to link biomass

availability and potential users, based on biomass production

costs and logistics.

QUESTIONS/DISCUSSION: flexibility of the LUMP modelling framework

in terms of accounting for additional factors and parameters; to

accommodate different geographical areas (local versus general);

parameter optimization to reach a certain goal/requirement. Possibility

to integrate in the LUMP information about each crop type; double

cropping; multiple cropping. Issue of scares and low quality

statistics/data availability.

10.15 –

11.00

D. Pennington

(JRC-IES-SAU, ENSURE

Action Leader)

Analytical and modelling tools (II): Sustainability advantage of life

cycle of bio-based goods and services: a selection of EC support

activities

• Intro to Life Cycle Thinking (LCT) and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA):

looking upstream and downstream to all phases across the life

cycle and trying to understand the environmental / resource

related consequences. LCT is conceptual framework. LCA is the

quantitative methods.

• ISO 14044 on LCA: framework and standard.

• Business and policy rationale examples: improved economic

performance, lower environmental burdens, increased producer

End of Life (EoL) responsibility, reduced security of supply risk,

fair basis for comparison, hotspot identification, market

advantage, etc.

• Needs of business and policy: methodological guidelines (e.g.

Product Environmental Footprint –PEF and Organisation

Environmental Footprint – OEF, Product Environmental Footprint

Category Rules – PEFCR, Organization Environmental Footprint

Sector Rules – OEFSR), Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) data for resource

consumption, emissions, impact assessment data, etc.

• Policy: Integrated Product Policy (IPP, 2003), A resource efficient

Europe (2011), Bioeconomy for Europe (2012), Building the single

market for green products (2013 – explicitly recommending use

of PEF and OEF methodologies).

• Available methodological standards and guides: ISO, EU Platform

for LCA, ILCD Handbook, ELCD database, PEF/OEF guidelines,

PEFCR/OEFSR (sectorial applications of PEF/OEF guides).

• Eco-Design – REAPro indexes developed by IES-SAU: RRR

(reusability / recoverability / reusability), RRR benefits, recycled

content, durability, use of hazardous substances.

• Life Cycle Indicators developed by IES-SAU: resource efficiency

indicators, basket of products indicators, waste management

indicators.

QUESTIONS/DISCUSSION: integration of indirect effects (e.g. indirect

land use change, carbon storage) and externalities in the LCA

modelling framework; link between LCA and standardisation, e.g. the

existing CEN standards; accounting of carbon pools and wood products

in LCA modelling framework; forthcoming CEN standards on

quantification of bio-based content in products; needs for mandatory

links between LCA modelling and existing CEN standards; need for

developing a wide range of PCRs/PEFCRs in order to increase specificity


37

of the general PEF methodology; use of PCRs/PEFCRs for product

optimisation towards increased sustainability; useful to increase

coherence between LCA modelling framework and systematic

accounting of Carbon content.

11.00 –

11.25 - Coffee break -

11.25 –

11.50

C. Panoutsou

(workshop co-

coordinator)

Policies, gaps and future frameworks

• EU main policy mechanisms and their time of implementation:

there is quite high consistency between policy objective and

existing implementing mechanisms.

• RED, NREAP, ETS represent a very strong policy framework for

biomass related aspects. But there are gaps, e.g. about fostering

the mobilization potential of biomass.

• A main issue is the non-coherent way of reporting on biomass

availability and use from Member States.

• Policy issues: target resource efficiency, residual waste feedstock

types, cropped biomass, need for policy providing for higher

categorization and prioritization of land.

• Biomass/policy futures: need for more market analysis, for

addressing conflicts between sectors, more stimulation towards

the most efficient and cost effective biomass pathways, matching

the industrial demand to attract investment in Europe.

• Biomass future for Member States (MS): overview.

• Key outputs for MS: Guidelines and protocols for data collection ,

for selecting the most efficient value chains; map of feedstock

related policy landscapes; outlook of spatial biomass value chains

at EU27 level and per MS, with updated cost-supply curves and

selection of most promising feedstock for biomass per region and

per MS.

• S2Biom: the focus is on producing user friendly software toolset

to support sustainable delivery of non-food biomass through

developing strategies and roadmaps. Research will cover the

whole biomass delivery chain from primary biomass to end-use of

non-food products, including pre-treatment and conversion

technologies. Harmonized sustainability requirements for bio-

economy value chains. A database will be developed for the

entire EU and selected important non-EU countries.

11.50 –

12.15

M. Goralczyk

(JRC-IES-SAU, INTESA

action)

Life cycle resource indicators: supporting resource-efficient Europe

• Policy context supporting the development of lifecycle based

indicators: overview.

• Resource indicators, basket of products indicators, waste

management indicators.

• Approach to development of resource efficiency indicators: focus

is on EU consumption, i.e. emissions from products consumed

within the EU territory – thus, emissions from EU imports are

included, while emissions from EU exports are subtracted. This

will lead to the quantification of the overall impact from EU

apparent consumption, which result will also be used to develop

Normalisation Factors for use in LCA applications.

• Impact assessment is based on 15 mid-point impact categories,

but aggregation to end-point areas of protection is also possible.

• Modelling approach for import/export: selection of a

representative samples of imported/exported products, up-


38

scaling to 100% of the mass imported/exported. Very flexible

modelling approach that can be refined as newer, more, better

data will be available.

• Results: The EU is progressively shifting abroad impacts from use

of resources.

• Current situation: indicators for EU-27 and Germany (as regards

MS level) are developed; Perspectives: indicators for each MS will

be developed.

QUESTIONS/DISCUSSION: issue of integrating/linking the current

framework for modelling indicators with financial crisis / GDP data;

integration within the boundary of the evaluation for imported

products of emissions from manufacturing and transports; issue of

using GDP as representative parameter for growth of an economy,

which may not well represent the issue of e.g. unemployment, job

development, etc.; issue of integration of social issues on top of

environmental and economic dimensions.

12.25 –

12.35

Closing remarks:

thanks to participant / presentations to be made available / additional information / future

perspectives

12.35 - End of day 2 -

- END OF WORKSHOP -

Documents

FINAL REPORT Biomass resource efficiency for the biobased … · 2016. 6. 3. · for biomass assessments in Europe has been in the framework of the Biomass Energy Europe (BEE)5 project