voorblad

1
voorblad
Energy from biomass threat or
opportunity? Brussels, April 24, 2008
Council for the Rural Area Independent Advisory
Council in the Netherlands for Agriculture,
Nature and Food Quality
2
Energy from biomass threat or opportunity?
Brussels, April 24, 2008

• Energy from Biomass
• Threat or Opportunity?
• Huib Silvis
• Council for the Rural Area (Netherlands)

3
Heated debate in the Netherlands

• It is better to produce for the mouth
• than for the motor
• Gerda Verburg, minister of ANF, April 2008
• In the past we warned against too much optimism,
  now we see the threat of too much pessimism.
• Energy Advisory Council, April 2008

4
Structure of this presentation

• Biofuel policies and feed/food prices in the
  world
• Criteria development in the Netherlands for
  imports of biomass for energy
• Bio-energy from domestic sources regional
  opportunities

5
World production biofuels (billion liter)
6
Biofuels (mio t) in the EU, 2003-2007
7
Agricultural, Food and Petrol Prices, constant
USD (1990100)
8
Green Gold and Friends of the Earth

•  
•  
•  

9
Towards a framework for sustainable biomass

• Which criteria for subsidies blending
  requirements?
• Project group led by prof. Jacqueline Cramer
• Members
• governments
• business (Shell, Cargill, energy companies)
• NGOs (environment development)

10
Report Testing framework (April 2007)
Final report project group Sustainable
production of biomass
11
Framework for sustainable biomass

• Nine sustainability principles,each with
• Criteria
• Indicators and/ or
• Reporting requirements
• Framework to be tested between 2007 and 2010

12
Nine principles of the framework

• Green House Gas balance reduction
• Carbon sinks preservation
• Food supply/local applications not endanger
• Soil quality retain/increase
• Water quality retain/increase
• Air quality retain/increase
• Biodiversity protect
• Local prosperity contribute
• Social well-being contribute

13
Additional testing framework at regional/national
level

• Land use changes cannot be established at company
  level
• At macro level monitoring of
• Land prices
• Food prices
• Ownership land
• Availability of food
• Relocation of production
• Deforestation loss of nature reserves
• Changes in vegetation type

14
Some difficulties / limitations

• Not all criteria can be evaluated at company
  level
• International coordination required
• Larger involvement producing countries is
  necessary
• Several criteria / indicators not quantitative
  in many cases no yardstick available / only
  reporting requirement
• Several requirements/criteria limited by trade
  rules of WTO and EU

15
Lessons learned

• Not all negative effects can be avoided by
  certification
• Tracking and tracing and inspections are
  necessary complex, costly and time consuming
• Large number of actors should participate in
  setting up a scheme
• Certification can only work if there is enough
  production that meets the criteria
• Supply of proven sustainable and certified
  biomass can only be increased step-by-step

16
Certification only part of the solution

• Alternatives to be explored
• Generic legislation for sustainable land use
• Bilateral and multilateral cooperation with
  exporting countries (including Capacity building)
• Strengthening private initiatives of Round Tables
  (Palm Oil, Soya, Biofuel)

17
Energy from biomass in the Netherlands

• Some facts
• Share of biomass in electricity/heating 2.5
• 50 of biomass used for energy in NL is from
  domestic sources
• Imports are mainly palm oil, wood pellets and
  residues
• Raw material for biofuels is mainly imported.
  Area of crops for biofuels 10.000 ha.
• Large number of initiatives in all kind of
  directions

18
Objectives of Dutch Biomass Policy

• 2020
• Expectation 20 energy use from sustainable
  sources, of which 50 biomass (70 import
  expected)
• Reduction GHG emission 30 (EU 20)
• 2050
• Complete sustainable energy supply in 2050

19
The road Energy Transition

• Characteristics long term orientation, short
  term actions, cooperation between government and
  actors in society
• Programme direction with 6 departments / 7
  Platforms (including Green Feedstock) with
  representatives of market parties, NGOs,
  universities and government
• Little attention for domestically produced energy
• Estimates 20 biomass share in energy3-4 from
  domestic sources

20
Biomass in Dutch countryside

• Share biomass in total energy small, but not
  negligible (3-4)
• Three main sources
• agricultural and other residues, incl. manure
• crops
• material from nature areas
• But potentially large impact on rural areas

21
Potentials for future

• Examples
• Energy crops agricultural area 2 mln ha
• 2006 10.000 ha energy crops.
• 2020 est. 100.000 ha. Monofunctional
• But potentially more biorefinery (only low value
  parts for energy, or multifunctional use
• Manure digestion only starting (100 installations
  against 5.000 in Germany) but booming
  expectations high

22
Recommendations

• A lot of confusion has risen around objectives
  search for the non-existing ideal. Biomass is not
  THE solution, only part of sustainable energy
  mix.
• Recent discussions about food, biomass and hunger
  have resulted in confusion and mixing of facts
  and emotions. The road towards sustainable energy
  is a learning process. Risks cannot and should
  not be avoided.

23
Recommendations

• Many parties are involved in promoting biomass
  for energy governments at different levels and
  many different private parties. Exchange of
  knowledge and information is extremely important.
• 4. Worries about sustainability of (esp. large
  scale) imports for bio-energy are understandable.
  Sustainable domestic production may reduce
  imports and contribute towards a vital
  countryside.