Biofuels for Europe a sustainable option?

ifeu Institute for Energy and Environmental Research Heidelberg Biofuels for Europe a sustainable option? Nils Rettenmaier The Green Bug Lectures University of Hohenheim, 22 November 2011

Who we are - What we do IFEU - Institute for Energy and Environmental Research Heidelberg, since 1978 Independent scientific research institute organised as a private non profit company with currently about 40 employees Research / consulting on environmental aspects of - Energy (including Renewable Energy) - Transport - Waste Management - Life Cycle Analyses - Environmental Impact Assessment - Renewable Resources - Environmental Education

Who we are - What we do IFEU focuses regarding the topic of biomass Research / consulting on environmental aspects of - transport biofuels - biomass-based electricity and heat - biorefinery systems - biobased materials - agricultural goods and food - cultivation systems (conventional agriculture, organic farming, etc.) Potentials and future scenarios Technologies / technology comparisons CO 2 avoidance costs Sustainability aspects / valuation models

Who we are - What we do TREMOD: Transport Emission Model Modelling emissions of road vehicles, trains, ships and airplanes Official database of the German Ministries for emission reporting Life cycle analyses (LCA) and technology impact assessments since 1990: Biofuels (all biofuels, all applications) Alternative transportation modes Renewable Energy

Who we are - What we do IFEU - Institute for Energy and Environmental Research Heidelberg, since 1978 Our clients (on biomass studies) - World Bank - UNEP, FAO, UNFCCC, GTZ, etc. - European Commission - National and regional Ministries - Associations (industrial, scientific) - Local authorities - WWF, Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth etc. - Companies (Daimler, German Telecom, Shell etc.) - Foundations (German Foundation on Environment, etc.)

ifeu Institute for Energy and Environmental Research Heidelberg Biofuels for Europe a sustainable option? Nils Rettenmaier The Green Bug Lectures University of Hohenheim, 22 November 2011

Bioenergy: Energy from biomass Transport Energy Fuel Biomass Households

Biomass: Resource for biofuels Biomass Dedicated crops Biomass from: Forestry (woody biomass) Agriculture (woody and herbaceous biomass) Transport Fuel Residues Organic waste from: Households, industry and trade Residues from: Forestry and wood processing industry Agriculture and food processing industry

Liquid biofuels: Modern bioenergy Source: IPCC SRREN 2011

Global (bio-)energy use Global Primary Energy Use 10% 1% 6% 2% 27% 21% 33% Coal Oil Gas Nuclear Hydro Biomass & waste Other renewables Source: IEA WEO 2010 Source: IPCC SRREN 2011

Political targets for RES in Germany 40 35 30 Renewable energy sources as a share of energy supply in Germany minimum 35.0 1) 2000 2002 2004 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Targets: 2020 Share in [%] 25 20 15 10 Gross final energy consumption 10.9 18.0 1) 17.0 9.5 14.0 1) Transport sector 10.0 1,2) 9.4 5 0 3.8 Share of RES in total final energy consumption (electricity, heat, fuels) 6.4 Share of RES in total gross electricity consumption 3.9 Share of RES in total energy consumption for heat 0.4 5.8 Share of RES in fuel consumption for road traffic 2) 2.9 Share of RES in total primary energy 3) consumption 1) Sources: Targets of the German Government according to Energy Concept, Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG); Renewable Energy Sources Heat Act (EEWärmeG), EU-Directive 2009/28/EC; 2) Total consumption of engine fuels, excluding fuel in air traffic; 3) Calculated using efficiency method; Source: Working Group on Energy Balances e.v. (AGEB); RES: Renewable Energy Sources; Source: BMU-KI III 1 according to Working Group on Renewable Energy-Statistics (AGEE-Stat); image: BMU / Brigitte Hiss; as at: July 2011; all figures provisional Source: BMU 2011

Legal framework for biofuels Europe Germany Year Directive 2003/30/EC (8 May 2003) Total quota Diesel quota Petrol quota 2010 5,75% - - Year Directive 2009/28/EC (23 Apr 2009) Total quota Diesel quota Petrol quota 2020 10,00% - - Year Biofuels Quota Act (18 Dec 2006) Total quota Diesel quota Petrol quota 2007-4,40% 1,20% 2008-2,00% 2009 6,25% 5,25% 2,80% 2010 6,75% 6,25% 3,60% 2011 7,00% 2012 7,25% 2013 7,50% 2014 7,75% 2015 8,00% Note: % relates to energy content

Future role of biofuels IPCC SRREN 2011 IEA 2011

Why biofuels? Legal frameworks: Promoting the use of biofuels [...] could create new opportunities for sustainable rural development in a more market-orientated common agriculture policy Greater use of biofuels for transport forms a part of the package of measures needed to comply with the Kyoto Protocol Increased use of biofuels for transport [...] is one of the tools by which the Community can reduce its dependence on imported energy and influence the fuel market for transport and hence the security of energy supply in the medium and long term.. Source: EU Directive 2003/30/EC

Why biofuels? 1. Goal: Sustainable rural development Excess food production Land set aside (taken out of production) After a few years, cultivation of energy and industrial crops on set-aside land was permitted Introduction of an energy crop premium Diversification needed: Farmers were dependent on food and feed production

Why biofuels? 2. Goal: Climate protection Transport sector should contribute to climate protection Multiple options, among others substitution of conventional fuels by more environmentally benign fuels (CNG, LPG or biofuels) Biofuels are considered to be environmentally friendly Liquid biofuels suitable for blending

Why biofuels? 3. Goal: Security of energy supply Germany / Europe dependent on imported energy Diversification: Transport sector dependent on crude oil

Outline Introduction Challenging two hypotheses behind biofuels Climate protection Life cycle assessment (LCA) Impact of land use changes on GHG balances Sustainability criteria, certification and the iluc problem Security of energy supply Land availability, biomass potentials & bioenergy trade Conclusions

Sustainable development Brundtland Commission of the United Nations (1987): Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Society Environment Economy

Environmental impacts of biofuels Environmental advantages and disadvantages: + CO 2 neutral Save energetic resources Organic waste reduction Less transport etc. Land use Eutrophication of surface water Water pollution by pesticides Energy intensive production etc. Total: positive or negative?

Life cycle assessment (LCA) ISO 14040 & 14044 Goal and scope definition Inventory analysis Interpretation Impact assessment

LCA: Life cycle comparison Fossil fuel Biofuel Credits Fertiliser Fuel Pesticides Resource extraction Raw material production Agriculture Fallow maintenance Transport Processing Co-products Equivalent products Utilisation

Life cycle assessment (LCA) ISO 14040 & 14044 Goal and scope definition Inventory analysis Interpretation Impact assessment

LCA: Inventory analysis Inputs Outputs e.g.: - natural gas - crude oil - brown coal - hard coal - uranium - water Fossil fuel Resource extraction Raw material production Transport Processing Utilisation Biofuel Fertiliser Fuel Pesticides Agriculture e.g.: - CO 2 - SO 2 - CH 4 - NO X - NH 3 - N 2 O - HCl - CO - C 6 H 6 - VOC Starting point: Mass and energy flows

Life cycle assessment (LCA) ISO 14040 & 14044 Goal and scope definition Inventory analysis Interpretation Impact assessment

LCA: Impact assessment Impact category Parameter Substances (LCI) Resource depletion Sum of depletable primary energy carriers Crude oil, natural gas, coal, uranium, Mineral resources Lime, clay, metal ores, salt, pyrite, Water Water Greenhouse effect CO 2 equivalents Carbon dioxide, dinitrogen monoxide, methane, different CFCs, methyl bromide, Ozone depletion CFC-11 equivalents CFC, halons, methyl bromide, dinitrogen monoxide Acidification SO 2 equivalents Sulphur dioxide, hydrogen chloride, nitrogen oxides, ammonia, Terrestrial & aquatic eutrophication PO 4 equivalents Nitrogen oxides, ammonia, phosphate, nitrate Summer smog C 2 H 4 equivalent Hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, chlorinated hydrocarbons,

Example 1: Rapeseed oil biodiesel Diesel fuel RME Credits Fertiliser Fuel Pesticides Fallow maintenance Crude oil extraction Rape seed cultivation Agricultural products conventional products Transport Oil pressing Rape seed meal Soy meal Refining Transesterification Glycerine Glycerine Utilisation Utilisation

Results: RME versus diesel fuel Resource depletion Credits Expenditures RME Diesel Contribution in favour of RME Contribution in favour of diesel Balance (RME minus diesel) -60-40 -20 0 20 40 60 [MJ CED / kg diesel or diesel eq.] RME Credits Diesel Machine work Reference system Production Material inputs Soy bean meal (agric.) Utilisation Oil pressing Soy bean meal (transp.) Transesterification Glycerine Utilisation Source: IFEU 2006

Results: RME versus diesel fuel Greenhouse effect Credits Expenditures RME Diesel Contribution in favour of RME Contribution in favour of diesel Balance (RME minus diesel) -4-2 0 2 4 [kg CO 2 eq. / kg diesel or diesel eq.] RME Credits Diesel Agricultural system Reference system Production Machine work Soy bean meal (agric.) Utilisation Material inputs Soy bean meal (transp.) Oil pressing Glycerine Transesterification Utilisation Source: IFEU 2006

Results: RME versus diesel fuel Nitrous oxide emissions Credits Expenditures RME Diesel Balance (RME minus diesel) Contribution in favour of RME Contribution in favour of diesel -4-2 0 2 4 6 8 10 [g N 2 O / kg diesel or diesel eq.] RME Agricultural system Machine work Material inputs Oil pressing Transesterification Utilisation Credits Reference system Soy bean meal (agric.) Soy bean meal (transp.) Glycerine Diesel Production Utilisation Source: IFEU 2006

Results: RME versus diesel fuel Advantages for biodiesel Advantages for diesel fuel Energy demand Greenhouse effect Acidification Eutrophication Photo smog Nitrous oxide * one parameter for ozone depletion * 1109-400 -200 0 200 400 600 inhabitant equivalents per 1000 ha Source: IFEU 2006

Life cycle assessment (LCA) ISO 14040 & 14044 Goal and scope definition Inventory analysis Interpretation Impact assessment

Results: Biofuels versus fossil fuels 1. Rapeseed oil biodiesel (RME) shows environmental advantages as well as disadvantages when compared to conventional diesel fuel. 2. RME shows advantages with regard to nonrenewable energy resources and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (as long as no land use change is occuring). 3. In contrast, RME shows disadvantages with regard to acidification, eutrophication and nitrous oxide emissions. 4. The results don t show clear tendencies with regard to summer smog.

Results: Biofuels versus fossil fuels 5. An objective decision for or against RME cannot be made. However, based on a subjective value system a decision is possible. 6. If, for example, energy saving and greenhouse effect is given the highest priority, RME performs better than conventional diesel fuel.

Example 2: Palm oil biodiesel (PME) Characteristics: Name: Oil palme (Elaeis guineensis) Family: Palms (Arecaceae) Fruit: Fresh Fruit Bunches (FFB) Yield: ca. 20 t FFB / (ha*a) and 4 t Palm oil / (ha*a), respectively Fibres Pulp: Palm oil Palm kernel: Palm kernel oil / Press cake

PME: Life cycle comparison Ancillary products Crude oil extraction and pre-treatment Oil palm plantation Palm kernel oil Alternative land use Tensides Extraction & refining Press cake Fibres & Shells Soy meal Power mix Palm oil Waste water Power mix Transport Transport Empty fruit bunches Mineral fertiliser Processing Transesterification Glycerine Chemicals Diesel fuel PME Product Process Reference system

Results: PME versus diesel fuel Environmental impacts Advant. Disadvantage Energy savings Greenhouse effect Eutrophication Acifidication Summer smog* Summer smog** PME Nitrous oxide -100-50 0 50 100 150 IE / 100 ha Impact on greenhouse effect can be negative, if land use changes are occuring Source: IFEU 2009

Land use change Definition: Transition from one land use category to another, e.g. forest land to cropland. Direct land use change (dluc): DIRECT INDUCTION OF FOREST LOGGING Europe: importing biomass or biofuel (1) tropical producer country: (certified) good practise production of biomass for export (2) replaces natural ecosystem, a natural forest Source: IFEU 2008

Impacts of land use changes Forests, wetlands Deforestation, carbon release Food & feed crops Protected & other high-nature value areas Energy crops/ plantations? unused land (marginal, degraded) Loss of biodiversity Source: Öko 2008 based on Girard 2005 Environment: loss of biodiversity; GHG emissions Socio-economy: displacement of indigenous people

LUC and loss of biodiversity Unused land Used land Areas of high natural conservation value (HNV) Degraded and idle land Protected area Cultivating bioenergy: no displacement, more organic C in soils but: risk for biodiversity if not properly mapped. Source: Öko 2008

LUC and life-cycle GHG emissions Housing 8% Industry 14% Others 7% Power generation 25% *LAND USE food, fodder+fibre : bioenergy = 40 : 1 Transport 14% Land use change including deforestation 18% Agriculture without land use change 14% Agriculture = 3 rd biggest emitter LULUC together 32%* Source: Öko 2008

LUC example: Palm oil biodiesel Ancillary products Crude oil extraction and pre-treatment Oil palm plantation Palm kernel oil Alternative land use Tensides Extraction & refining Press cake Fibres & Shells Soy meal Power mix Palm oil Waste water Power mix Transport Transport Empty fruit bunches Mineral fertiliser Processing Transesterification Glycerine Chemicals Diesel fuel PME Product Process Reference system

LUC example: Palm oil biodiesel Natural forest * Peat forest * Oil palm plantation Tropical fallow * Including use of hard wood

Oil palm plantation through cutting of tropical forests

Oil palm plantation on marginal degraded land

LUC: Carbon stock changes Carbon stock changes Duration 25, 100 or 500 a Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Carbon Case 1 Natural forest Plantation Continuous use Case 2 Degraded land Case 3 Devastation after use Case 4 Source: IFEU 2006

LUC: Impact on GHG balance Greenhouse effect Credits Expenditures Natural forest Peat forest Tropical fallow Diesel fuel Advantage Disadvantage Balances Natural forest Peat forest Tropical fallow -50-25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 tonnes CO 2 equiv. / (ha*yr) Expenditures PME: Credits PME: Diesel fuel: Cultivation Soy meal Production Land use change Tensides Utilisation All transports Chemicals POME CH4 Production Utilisation Negative GHG balances if natural forests are cleared Source: IFEU 2009

GHG balances of biofuels GJ primary energy / (ha*yr) -200-150 -100-50 0 50 100 150 200 Advantage Disadvantage for biofuel Temperate climate 107-122 65 Tropical climate (Sub)tropical climate Sunflower biodiesel Rapeseed biodiesel Canola biodiesel Oil palm biodiesel (natural forest) Oil palm biodiesel (peat forest) Oil palm biodiesel (tropical fallow) Soy bean biodiesel (natural forest) Soy bean biodiesel (fallow) Jatropha biodiesel (shrubland) Jatropha biodiesel (fallow) -20-15 -10-5 0 5 10 15 20 tonnes CO 2 equiv. / (ha*yr) Source: IFEU 2009

Criticism of Biofuels Sweet Danger for Wilderness Ethanol from Sugarcane Clear-cutting for diesel Forest theft for biofuels

Sustainability criteria / certification Criteria for a Sustainable Use of Bioenergy on a Global Scale Report commissioned by the Federal Environment Agency (UBA), Dessau, in cooperation with FSC Germany & K. Lanje IFEU Authors: Horst Fehrenbach, Jürgen Giegrich & Guido Reinhardt Final report: January 2008 To be continued by IFEU and Öko-Institute: Development of strategies and sustainability standards for certification of biomass for international trade

Sustainability criteria / certification Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources Ordinance on requirements for sustainable production of biofuels (Biokraft-NachV ) Europe: RE Directive Germany: Sustain. ordinance

Sustainability criteria / certification Criteria: The greenhouse gas emission saving from the use of biofuels and other bioliquids shall be 35% (50% from 2017) Biofuels and other bioliquids shall not be made from raw material obtained from land with high biodiversity value (e.g. primary forests), high carbon stock (e.g. wetlands) or peatlands. Agricultural raw materials cultivated in the Community and used for the production of biofuels and other bioliquids shall be obtained in accordance with the minimum requirements for good agricultural and environmental condition. Open issue: Inclusion of indirect land use change

Indirect land use change (iluc) Europe: importing biomass or biofuel (1) (2) tropical producer country: replaces previously given (certified) good practise cultivation on the same production of biomass acreage for export INDIRECT INDUCTION OF FOREST LOGGING (4) the area somewhere else is likely to be forest (3) the previous cropping is displaced to an area somewhere else Source: IFEU 2008

Indirect land use change (iluc) Europe: expanding domestic biomass production for biofuel (1) (2) (certified) good practise replaces previously given production of biomass cultivation on the same acreage, e.g. animal food INDIRECT INDUCTION OF FOREST LOGGING (4) the required area for animal food production is likely to be forest (3) animal food will be imported increasingly, e.g. from tropical countries Source: IFEU 2008

Certification: Challenges Traditional uses: Palm oil: cooking oil, margarine, soap, candles Palm kernel oil: frying fat, confectionery, detergents, cosmetics Press cake: animal feed Future uses: Palm oil: liquid biofuel (PPO or biodiesel) Energy use: Only 5% up to now, but huge potential! Threat: Certified green palm oil in our cars but unsustainable palm oil in our margarine or detergent!

Certification: Challenges Displacement = generic problem of restricted system boundaries Accounting problem of partial analysis ( just biofuels, no explicit modeling of agro + forestry sectors) All incremental land-uses imply indirect effects Analytical and political implications Analysis: which displacement when & where? Policy: which instruments? Partial certification schemes do not help, but have spill-over effects Future global GHG regime with cap for all sectors & countries: no leakage = no indirect effects! Any agricultural land use, i.e. also food and feed production, must be included in a certification scheme! Source: Öko 2008

Biomass: Renewable and versatile Humans Food Animals Feed Transport Energy Fuel Biomass Households Industry Fibre

Land a limited resource Only 12% of the earth s surface is used as arable land Another 13% potentially suitable (quality?) Source: IFEU 2008

Increased demand for land Intensified production on existing agricultural land, e.g. to the detriment of agro-environmental programs Re-utilisation of set-aside land, which had been taken out of use for nature quality reasons (among others) Expansion of agricultural land through conversion of natural ecosystems (e.g. grasslands or forests) Land use change Reclamation of idle or degraded land, which possibly needs high input, e.g. intensive irrigation of semi-arid regions. Increased land use competition and conflicts

Biomass potentials: Parameters Source: IPCC SRREN 2011

Global biomass potentials Source: IPCC SRREN 2011

European biomass potentials 90 80 70 Energy demand 60 EJ / yr 50 40 30 20 10 Biomass potential 0 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 IEA Current policies IEA New policies IEA 450 BEE 2010 Source: BEE 2011

Global bioenergy trade Source: IPCC SRREN 2011

Conclusions 1. LCA is a suitable tool for the assessment of a product s environmental impacts. Energy and GHG balances only show part of the picture, i.e. other impacts have to be considered, too. 2. LCA results show that biofuels are associated with both positive and negative environmental impacts, i.e. the use of biomass is not environmentally friendly per se, simply because biomass is a renewable resource 3. Biofuels usually show advantages with regard to non-renewable energy resources and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (as long as no land use change is occurring).

Conclusions 4. Direct and indirect land use changes have a significant impact on GHG balances which can even turn out negative, i.e. biofuels would cause more GHG emissions than fossil fuels. The contribution to climate protection is questionable. 5. Sustainability criteria and certification are a step into the right direction, but have to be extended to solid and gaseous biofuels or at best to all kinds of biomass uses. 6. Indirect effects have to be addressed, not only in terms of GHG balance but also regarding biodiversity and food security

Conclusions 7. Land availability and biomass potentials are constrained, i.e. different land uses and biomass uses are competing 8. Strategies for an optimal allocation of biomass to different sectors have to be developed (including bio-based materials etc.) 9. Due to limited biomass potentials in Europe, a significant import of biomass will be necessary. Security of energy supply might be increased due to larger number of suppliers, however, seasonal/ annual variability might increase risk. 10. The largest unexploited resource is energy efficiency which needs to be prioritised over simple substitution.

Thank you for your attention! Nils Rettenmaier Contact: nils.rettenmaier@ifeu.de + 49-6221 - 4767-0 / - 24 Downloads: www.ifeu.de