Suchergebnisse

Increased inclusion of biomass in energy strategies all over the world means that greater mobilisation of biomass resources will be required to meet demand. Strategies of many EU countries assume the future use of non-EU sourced biomass. An increasing number of studies call for the UK to consider alternative options, principally to better utilise indigenous resources. This research identifies the indigenous biomass resources that demonstrate the greatest promise for the UK bioenergy sector and evaluates the extent that different supply chain drivers influence resource availability. The analysis finds that the UK's resources with greatest primary bioenergy potential are household wastes (>115 TWh by 2050), energy crops (>100 TWh by 2050) and agricultural residues (>80 TWh by 2050). The availability of biomass waste resources was found to demonstrate great promise for the bioenergy sector, although are highly susceptible to influences, most notably by the focus of adopted waste management strategies. Biomass residue resources were found to be the resource category least susceptible to influence, with relatively high near-term availability that is forecast to increase – therefore representing a potentially robust resource for the bioenergy sector. The near-term availability of UK energy crops was found to be much less significant compared to other resource categories. Energy crops represent long-term potential for the bioenergy sector, although achieving higher limits of availability will be dependent on the successful management of key influencing drivers. The research highlights that the availability of indigenous resources is largely influenced by a few key drivers, this contradicting areas of consensus of current UK bioenergy policy.

Cover -- Title Page -- Copyright -- Contents -- List of Contributors -- Foreword -- Preface -- List of Abbreviations/Acronyms -- Part I BECCS Technologies -- Chapter 1 Understanding Negative Emissions From BECCS -- 1.1 Introduction -- 1.2 Climate-Change Mitigation -- 1.3 Negative Emissions Technologies -- 1.4 Why BECCS? -- 1.5 Structure of the Book -- 1.5.1 Part I: BECCS Technologies -- 1.5.2 Part II: BECCS System Assessments -- 1.5.3 Part III: BECCS in the Energy System -- 1.5.4 Part IV: Summary and Conclusions -- References -- Chapter 2 The Supply of Biomass for Bioenergy Systems -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 Biomass Resource Demand -- 2.3 Resource Demand for BECCS Technologies -- 2.4 Forecasting the Availability of Biomass Resources -- 2.4.1 Modelling Non-Renewable Resources -- 2.4.2 Modelling Renewable Resources -- 2.4.2.1 Biomass Resource Modelling -- 2.4.3 Modelling Approaches - Bottom-Up versus Top-Down -- 2.5 Methods for Forecasting the Availability of Energy Crop Resources -- 2.6 Forecasting the Availability of Wastes and Residues From Ongoing Processes -- 2.7 Forecasting the Availability of Forestry Resources -- 2.8 Forecasting the Availability of Waste Resources -- 2.9 Biomass Resource Availability -- 2.10 Variability in Biomass Resource Forecasts -- 2.11 Biomass Supply and Demand Regions, and Key Trade Flows -- 2.11.1 Trade Hub Europe -- 2.11.2 Bioethanol - Key Global Trade Flows -- 2.11.3 Biodiesel - Key Global Trade Flows -- 2.11.4 Wood Pellets - Key Global Trade Flows -- 2.11.5 Wood Chip - Key Global Trade Flows -- 2.12 Global Biomass Trade Limitations and Uncertainty -- 2.12.1 Technical Barriers -- 2.12.2 Economic and Trade Barriers -- 2.12.3 Logistical Barriers -- 2.12.4 Regulatory Barriers -- 2.12.5 Geopolitical Barriers -- 2.13 Sustainability of Global Biomass Resource Production -- 2.13.1 Potential Land-Use Change Impacts

This paper uses both quantitative and qualitative analyses to evaluate the effectiveness of government policy and support mechanisms in the UK, Sweden, Denmark and Finland in promoting bioenergy – a key technology fundamental to each country's decarbonisation strategies. It is crucial that countries develop effective policies and support mechanisms to grow sustainable bioenergy sectors. This paper analyses the success of bioenergy policies within each country and evaluates the importance of wider independent variables that collectively characterise the background to energy sector, economic and environmental dynamics. Statistical correlation and regression analyses are applied to identify if the policy landscape has had an identifiable impact on actual bioenergy development. Furthermore, the outputs from a stakeholder workshop and expert interviews are analysed to identify drivers and barriers to bioenergy. The result is a comprehensive analysis of the successes and challenges in bioenergy development, and possible lessons that can be drawn for future promotion of the sector. The research finds that the UK and Nordic countries have had different yet equally successful approaches to promoting bio-power and bio-heat respectively. However, the influence of wider factors within different countries is found to have a potentially greater collective impact on bioenergy than any single policy mechanism. Thus there is credence in learning lessons from what does and does not work in different countries, but countries also need to develop their own brands of policy interventions that suit their country's unique challenges. ; Peer reviewed

This paper uses both quantitative and qualitative analyses to evaluate the effectiveness of government policy and support mechanisms in the UK, Sweden, Denmark and Finland in promoting bioenergy – a key technology fundamental to each country's decarbonisation strategies. It is crucial that countries develop effective policies and support mechanisms to grow sustainable bioenergy sectors. This paper analyses the success of bioenergy policies within each country and evaluates the importance of wider independent variables that collectively characterise the background to energy sector, economic and environmental dynamics. Statistical correlation and regression analyses are applied to identify if the policy landscape has had an identifiable impact on actual bioenergy development. Furthermore, the outputs from a stakeholder workshop and expert interviews are analysed to identify drivers and barriers to bioenergy. The result is a comprehensive analysis of the successes and challenges in bioenergy development, and possible lessons that can be drawn for future promotion of the sector. The research finds that the UK and Nordic countries have had different yet equally successful approaches to promoting bio-power and bio-heat respectively. However, the influence of wider factors within different countries is found to have a potentially greater collective impact on bioenergy than any single policy mechanism. Thus there is credence in learning lessons from what does and does not work in different countries, but countries also need to develop their own brands of policy interventions that suit their country's unique challenges.

This study introduces a new approach to estimate biomethane market potential by analysing biogas markets and their relative environmental and economic advantages. This potential is then combined with greenhouse gas emission values for different feedstock shares (farm-fed and waste-fed systems) and different application share to determine the possible contribution of biomethane to national greenhouse gas emission saving goals. Markets that are considered are Germany and the UK being the biggest emitters of CO2eq in the European Union. The current use was compared with the scenarios (i) market projection, derived from literature study and (ii) reasonable potential, derived from environmental and economic calculations. The current market status is presented to show the past market development until the present date and associated greenhouse gas savings. Additionally the potential of biomethane to contribute to greenhouse gas emission savings is extensively described. Results indicate that the share of application in Germany is more environmental beneficial than the one in the UK achieving higher greenhouse gas savings at comparable feed-in level. In contrast, the UK has a higher share of waste-fed systems to produce biomethane. The use of biomethane in CHP plants achieves the highest GHG emission savings and if organic waste is used as feedstock the possible savings are even higher. With an increase of biomethane used in CHP plants and a decrease of biomethane used for direct heating the savings in the UK could increase up to 52%. Current savings of 2446 kt CO2eq (Germany) and 606 kt CO2eq (UK) can be extended to 4483 kt CO2eq (Germany) and 1443 kt CO2eq (UK) respectively. Scenario results were determined based on the environmental and economic advantageousness development of the existing biogas market. In this way positive future market development as well as improved shares of feedstock and application can contribute to further greenhouse gas emission savings of Germany and the UK.