Elbersen, B.S.

Petersen, J.E.

English

Name not available

EU Biomass Potential and Environmental Constraints

NARCIS 

Wageningen Yield 

28
EU Biomass Potential and Environmental Constraints 
Berien Elbersen* and Jan-Erik Petersen** 
* Alterra, Wageningen, The Netherlands 
** European Environment Agency
Increasing the use of bioenergy offers significant opportunities for Europe to reduce 
greenhouse gas emissions and improve the security of its energy supply. However, the 
substantial rise in the use of biomass from agriculture and other sectors for producing 
transport fuels and energy can put significant environmental pressures on farmland or forest 
biodiversity as well as on soil and water resources. Consequently, it may counteract current 
and potential future environmental policies and objectives, such as improving the quality of 
ground and surface waters or biodiversity protection. These issues are addressed in the EEA 
report No 7/2006 on ‘How much bioenergy can Europe produce without harming the 
environment?’ and the approach and results are presented in this presentation. 
The scenario analysis presented here pinpoints the environmental aspects that should be 
looked at when increasing bioenergy production on farmland. The model also gives an 
indication of how much agricultural biomass is potentially available without harming the 
environment and without counteracting current and potential future EU environmental 
policies and objectives.  
The key scenario assumptions for estimating the environmentally compatible bioenergy 
production potential on farmland are:  
a) Assumptions for the maintenance or further development of an ‘environmentally 
orientated farming’ in the EU: the present share of ‘environmentally orientated’ 
farming would need to increase to about 30% of the Utilised Agricultural Area in most 
Member States by 2030; at least 3% of present intensively used farmland should be 
set-aside by 2030 for nature conservation purposes;  no conversion of permanent 
grassland, agro-forestry areas (Dehesas and Montados) and olive groves through 
ploughing for targeted biomass crops. 
b)  Further technological development and research would allow a diversification of 
energy crops and conversion pathways for different types of biomass (2nd generation 
conversion pathways, biogas, efficient bioenergy combinations). 
c)  The selection of energy crops and their management at farm level would follow 
environmental guidance (adaptation to bio-physical constraints and ecological values 
of a region, appropriate crop mixes and rotations, low use of inputs, double cropping 
practices etc.).  
The environmentally-compatible bioenergy potential from agriculture could reach up to 142 
MtOE by 2030, compared to 47 MtOE in 2010. Approximately 85 % of the potential will come 
from only seven Member States (Spain, France, Germany, Italy, UK, Lithuania and Poland). 
This potential is contingent upon assumptions regarding the farmland area available for energy 
crop production in each Member State, the competition with food and export markets, the 
impact of environmental constraints and the yield of the assumed bioenergy crops. 
29
In addition, four major caveats have to be highlighted for interpreting the results of the study: 
a) The model assumptions had to be restricted to environmental impacts in Europe given 
available resources, data and limited knowledge about effects in other regions of the 
world. The price rises in world food markets and recent studies indicate that the 
indirect effects of European bioenergy production, even if it builds on land that is 
assumed surplus to European food requirements, clearly outweigh the potential 
environmental effects within Europe itself, in particular with regard to life cycle GHG 
balances of bioenergy pathways (Searchinger et al., 2008; Fargione et al., 2008). 
b) The study only estimates the technically available biomass potential but does not make 
any predictions about the potential that can realistically be exploited under economic 
and logistic constraints. The latter is likely to be significantly lower than the estimates 
given in the EEA study, in particular since some of the assumed technological 
pathways are at least currently considerably more expensive than mainstream biofuel 
pathways (at least excluding indirect environmental costs). 
c) The study does not analyse the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that can be 
avoided through the exploitation of the environmentally-compatible potential within 
the EU-25. This strongly depends on the way in which biomass is converted into heat, 
electricity, and transport fuels and which fossil fuels are replaced. A detailed analysis 
of the avoided greenhouse gas emissions at EU level would be useful in completing 
the environmental assessment of different bioenergy production options.  
d) Further analysis would also be needed for exploring the potential impacts of climate 
change on the cultivation and yield of energy crops as this aspect was beyond the 
scope of the study. 
Policies are needed for supporting environmentally-friendly farming in general and the 
environmentally-compatible production of energy crops in particular. At the same time there 
are many research needs to support the quick introduction of new biomass crops with low 
environmental pressures, the so-called low input-high output crops.   
Further research needs 
o The identification of the most suitable biomass crops is a complicated issue and still needs 
a lot of RTD also in relation to the practical implementation in existing farming systems.   
o Great yield differences between experimental fields and practical applications by farmers 
at either small or larger scale. It is not only high yields but also energy content and energy 
balance that need to be considered in both experimental and practical applications.  
o There is also still a lot of RTD needed on plant breeding, selection of crops, varieties and 
crop genetics which may improve characteristics of crops suitable for biomass production 
under different climatic circumstances (certainly arid  conditions.  
o Until now only very limited work on exploring the available bioenery options has 
highlighted some potential ’win-win’ solutions from energy cropping. However more 
research efforts and practical applications are needed.  
30
o There is still a lot of RTD requirements needed on finding measures to improve the 
efficiency in relation to the input-output ratio in the cropping phase and the energy 
efficiency in the full chain, including the part from converting biomass to energy. 
o At this moment biomass subsidies are not linked to a “sustainability” standard” (climate 
effect, biodiversity, security of supply, rural economy, etc): More research should 
therefore be done on answering the questions: What is sustainable? How do you measure 
it? How do you certify that? 
Opportunities for EC-US cooperation 
There should be opportunities to collaborate on all identified research questions given above. 
Literature: 
EEA (2007), Estimating the environmentally compatible biomass potential from agriculture, 
Technical report no. 12/ 2007. Copenhagen. (December, 2007). 
Fargione, J.; Hill, J.; Tilman, D.; Polasky, S. & Hawthorne, P. (2008), Land clearing and 
biofuel carbon debt. Scienceexpress, 7 February 2008.  
Searchinger, T.; Heimlich, R.; Houghton, R.; Dong, F.; Elobeid, A.; Fabiosa, J.; Tokgoz, S.; 
Hayes, D. & Yu, T. (2008), Use of US cropland for biofuels increases greenhouse gases 
through emissions from land use change. Scienceexpress. 7 February 2008.  


EU Biomass Potential and Environmental Constraints

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Name not available

NARCIS

Wageningen Yield