• Energy Research

Abstract Competitive international markets imply adjustments towards competitive spatial equilibrium in which excess from one market is transferred to another and prices are equilibrated except for remaining differences that can be assigned to transfer costs. The European market for wood pellets used in small-scale heating systems has been expanding significantly over the past decade. Small scale pellet heating is arguably a mature technology, but whether the market is mature is another question. In this paper we analyse recent data on trade flows and price developments between Italy, Austria, Germany and France to understand the developments of wood pellet market efficiency and to draw conclusions about market function. The objective of this study is to establish a framework to test the European residential wood pellet market for competitive spatial equilibrium using modern trade theory. We find mainly inefficiently integrated markets with remaining positive marginal profits and detectable arbitrageurs’ activity. Based on a thorough discussion of these findings and the underlying data we outline possible methodology advancements and list policy recommendations to secure access and affordability of this renewable heating commodity in the long run.

Cascading, or cascade use, is concept that has many different definitions, but a common theme is a sequential use of resources for different purposes. The cascading concept was first presented in the early 1990s but has become an intensively debated topic primarily in the most recent decade. In the available literature on cascading of wood, there are few studies that discuss policy implementation. As this is currently heavily debated, there is an important gap here that we aim to fill. In this paper, we (a) critically review the conceptual history of cascading and (b) highlight the complexities involved in its implementation in policy frameworks. Originally, cascading was discussed as a broad framework for how society better should manage natural resource flows. In more recent debates on woody biomass however, cascading is often presented as simply a hierarchy, wherein material use of wood should hold priority over energy use of wood. This is partly based on an idea that certain forms of wood utilization are inherently more valuable than others, an assumption that becomes problematic when implemented in policy. In reality, how and for what a certain wood resource is used varies with time and place and historical examples of implementation of hierarchical policy frameworks indicate a high risk of unwanted consequences, such as unstable policy structures and tendencies toward a negotiation economy. Cascading of woody biomass can have benefits from both an economical and environmental perspective. However, cascading systems should emerge bottom‐up, not be imposed top‐down through politically determined hierarchies. WIREs Energy Environ 2018, 7:e279. doi: 10.1002/wene.279This article is categorized under: Energy and Climate > Economics and Policy Energy Policy and Planning > Economics and Policy

Many factors may globally affect the trade pattern for industrial-grade wood pellets, with one such factor being the decision strategies by potential buyers and suppliers to optimize feedstock pric...

Abstract Farm operations in the USA and Europe have seen a radical change in the last decades: small sized farms are disappearing, and farm size and total livestock on larger farms are increasing. The resulting spatial density of animals causes several environmental impacts. Anaerobic digestion is one promising technical solution to alleviate most of these impacts while simultaneously providing a regional energy source. This analysis assesses the economic viability of using dairy-cow manure for either (i) the on-farm production and use of biogas to generate electricity and heat or (ii) the upgrading biogas to biomethane, a natural-gas substitute. A non-linear optimization model was developed to optimize plant capacity for anaerobic digestion and maximize the net present value for each option by farm size. In this study, we used Idaho‘s dairy farms as a case study. The analysis implies that at least 3000 cows per farm are required for an economically viable anaerobic-digestion plant operation. For farms with up to 3600 animals, the highest net present value was achieved for the on-farm use of biogas. Farms larger than that achieved their best economic results via the production of biomethane. In total about 45% of Idaho’s dairy manure could be utilized by economically feasible biogas and biomethane plants. A higher manure utilization rate could be achieved through joint, cooperative anaerobic digestion plants and manure transportation. The results can be transferred to other regions and countries, respectively, to reduce the negative impact of intensive livestock farming.

Abstract Past research on identifying potentially negative impacts of forest management activities has primarily focused on traditional forest operations. The increased use of forest biomass for energy in recent years, spurred predominantly by policy incentives for the reduction of fossil fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions, and by efforts from the forestry sector to diversify products and increase value from the forests, has again brought much attention to this issue. The implications of such practices continue to be controversially debated; predominantly the adverse impacts on soil productivity and biodiversity, and the climate change mitigation potential of forest bioenergy. Current decision making processes require comprehensive, differentiated assessments of the known and unknown factors and risk levels of potentially adverse environmental effects. This paper provides such an analysis and differentiates between the feedstock of harvesting residues, roundwood, and salvage wood. It concludes that the risks related to biomass for energy outtake are feedstock specific and vary in terms of scientific certainty. Short-term soil productivity risks are higher for residue removal. There is however little field evidence of negative long-term impacts of biomass removal on productivity in the scale predicted by modeling. Risks regarding an alteration of biodiversity are relatively equally distributed across the feedstocks. The risk of limited or absent short-term carbon benefits is highest for roundwood, but negligible for residues and salvage wood. Salvage operation impacts on soil productivity and biodiversity are a key knowledge gap. Future research should also focus on deriving regionally specific, quantitative thresholds for sustainable biomass removal.

AbstractCurrent biomass production and trade volumes for energy and new materials and bio‐chemicals are only a small fraction to achieve the bioenergy levels suggested by many global energy and climate change mitigation scenarios for 2050. However, comprehensive sustainability of large scale biomass production and trading has yet to be secured, and governance of developing biomass markets is a critical issue. Fundamental choices need to be made on how to develop sustainable biomass supply chains and govern sustainable international biomass markets. The aim of this paper is to provide a vision of how widespread trade and deployment of biomass for energy purposes can be integrated with the wider (bio)economy. It provides an overview of past and current trade flows of the main bioenergy products, and discusses the most important drivers and barriers for bioenergy in general, and more specifically the further development of bioenergy trade over the coming years. It discusses the role of bioenergy as part of the bioeconomy and other potential roles; and how it can help to achieve the sustainable development goals. The paper concludes that it is critical to demonstrate innovative and integrated value chains for biofuels, bioproducts, and biopower that can respond with agility to market factors while providing economic, environmental, and societal benefits to international trade and market. Furthermore, flexible biogenic carbon supply nets based on broad feedstock portfolios and multiple energy and material utilization pathways will reduce risks for involved stakeholder and foster the market entry and uptake of various densified biogenic carbon carriers. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

AbstractThe scientific literature contains contrasting findings about the climate effects of forest bioenergy, partly due to the wide diversity of bioenergy systems and associated contexts, but also due to differences in assessment methods. The climate effects of bioenergy must be accurately assessed to inform policy‐making, but the complexity of bioenergy systems and associated land, industry and energy systems raises challenges for assessment. We examine misconceptions about climate effects of forest bioenergy and discuss important considerations in assessing these effects and devising measures to incentivize sustainable bioenergy as a component of climate policy. The temporal and spatial system boundary and the reference (counterfactual) scenarios are key methodology choices that strongly influence results. Focussing on carbon balances of individual forest stands and comparing emissions at the point of combustion neglect system‐level interactions that influence the climate effects of forest bioenergy. We highlight the need for a systems approach, in assessing options and developing policy for forest bioenergy that: (1) considers the whole life cycle of bioenergy systems, including effects of the associated forest management and harvesting on landscape carbon balances; (2) identifies how forest bioenergy can best be deployed to support energy system transformation required to achieve climate goals; and (3) incentivizes those forest bioenergy systems that augment the mitigation value of the forest sector as a whole. Emphasis on short‐term emissions reduction targets can lead to decisions that make medium‐ to long‐term climate goals more difficult to achieve. The most important climate change mitigation measure is the transformation of energy, industry and transport systems so that fossil carbon remains underground. Narrow perspectives obscure the significant role that bioenergy can play by displacing fossil fuels now, and supporting energy system transition. Greater transparency and consistency is needed in greenhouse gas reporting and accounting related to bioenergy.

An analysis by Sterman et al (2018 Environ. Res. Lett. 13 015007) suggests that use of wood for bioenergy production results in a worse climate outcome than from using coal. However, many of the assumptions on which their primary wood bioenergy scenario is based are not realistic and therefore are not informative. Assumptions of uncharacteristically long rotations for southern pine plantations, no utilization of wood for longer-duration products, and a single harvest over 100 years understate the carbon performance of current forest management practices. We provide references that support realistic modeling of forest carbon dynamics that are reflective of current practice and therefore more informative.