Analysis of Existing Biomass Resource Assessments

1. Analysis of Existing Biomass Resource Assessments Edward Smeets, Utrecht University, Copernicus Institute International Symposium and Workshop on Biomass Assessment Methods 15 April, Brussels, Belgium BEE project is funded by the European Commission under the Framework Programme 7 FP7 GRANT AGREEMENT N˚: 213417

2. Objectives Key objectives: • To give an overview of methodologies and datasets used in existing biomass assessments • To analyse similarities and synergies of different methodologies and datasets • To identify knowledge gaps and future research priorities

3. ECONOMIC POTENTIAL TECHNIAL POTENTIAL THEORETICAL POTENTIAL Agricultural policies Food Land (food and wood production) Yield (food and wood production) Water Climate Soil type Management GPP / NPP Potential primary bioenergy Population Economy Energy Land (bioenergy production) Yield (bioenergy production) Biodiversity Biodiversity policies Energy policy Climate change policy Conversion process Other limitations; social criteria, environmental criteira, institutional barriers, etc. Potential secondary bioenergy Wood (materials) GHG emissions and climate change Other materials Forestry policies Biodiversity policies IMPLEMENTATION POTENTIAL The complexity of biomass potential assessments Key elements in biomass resource assessments

4. General approach and methodology • More than 250biomass potential assessments are identified and analysed and compared with respect to approach, methodology and data • Five generalised methods are identified and described

5. General approach and methodology • Statistical analysis • Spatially explicit methods • Cost-supply analysis • Advantages: simple, transparent, cheap, data are easily available, soil-climate/biodiversity issues are partially covered • Disadvantages: technical potentials / no economics, no integration between sectors, no consistent scenarios, crude assumptions • Advantages: as above, production costs are included • Disadvantages: no competion

6. General approach and methodology • Economic equilibrium models. The ideal study: • Includes fundamentals of energy demand • Calculates least-cost options • Includes all energy-related sectors and applications of feedstock • Uses dynamic and interrelated cost-supply curves • Uses coherent scenarios • Includes technological learning • Includes sensitivity analysis • Includes trade • Includes detailed GHG balances • Advantages: competion / economic mechanisms are included • Disadvantages: land use competition not explicitly modeled, not spatially explicit, i.e. no validation based on climate, soil characteristics, untransparent

7. General approach and methodology • Integrated assessment models. The ideal study combines economic modelling methods with tools and models, e.g. to: • Estimate direct and indirect land use changes • Evaluate GHG emission impacts • Evaluate total NET biodiversity impacts • Evaluate total NET impacts on water • Assess impacts on food security • Assess other socio-economic impacts • Advantages: consistent scenarios, economic mechanisms are included, spatially explicit, sustainability issues • Disadvantages: complex, untransparent, expensive, results are difficult to interpret, models are user unfriendly, level of detail is limited

8. Conclusions / recommendations • Each method gives specific insights • Key issues, gaps in data and uncertainties are: • Water • (Marginal) and degraded soils • Direct and indirect land use change • Trade • GHG emissions and biodiversity impacts • Technological learning • Food insecurity • Integrated assessment / linked models seem especifically valuable for integrating sustainability in potential assessments • Review of EU potentials

9. Thank you! Edward Smeets Utrecht University Tel. ++31 030 253 76 88 E-mail E.M.W.Smeets@uu.nl BEE project is funded by the European Commission under the Framework Programme 7 FP7 GRANT AGREEMENT N˚: 213417