Review of bioenergy projects implemented under …...Please cite this publication as: Howes P., Groves L. et al. (2016) Review of bioenergy projects implemented under Intelligent Energy

EUR 2016.6932 October 2016

Review of bioenergy projects implemented under IEE II

EASME/H2020/EE/2014/008

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME) Unit B1 H2020 Energy

Contact: Silvia Vivarelli

E-mail: [email protected]

European Commission B-1049 Brussels EUR 2016.6932

mailto:[email protected]


Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME) EASME/H2020/EE/2014/008


Final report



i

AUTHORS

Ricardo Energy & Environment: Pat Howes, Lisa Groves, Susan O’Brien, Kathryn Rushton, Arani Myvalganam, Marzena Chodor

RSE: Giovanni Ciceri

REVIEWED BY

Silvia Vivarelli (Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises – EASME), European Commission

Emilio Font de Mora (Innovation and Networks Executive Agency – INEA), European Commission

Please cite this publication as: Howes P., Groves L. et al. (2016) Review of bioenergy projects implemented

under Intelligent Energy Europe (IEE) II. Report prepared by Ricardo Energy & Environment for the Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME) under contract EASME/H2020/EE/2014/008. Brussels. 2016.

LEGAL NOTICE

This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu).

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2016

Print ISBN 978-92-9202-222-8 DOI:10.2826/20473 EA-01-16-958-EN-C

PDF ISBN 978-92-9202-221-1 DOI:10.2826/3314 EA-01-16-958-EN-N

© European Union, 2016 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

EUROPE DIRECT is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union

Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you)



ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The completion of this review could have not been possible without the participation and assistance

of so many people. Their contributions are sincerely appreciated and gratefully acknowledged.

Our thanks for agreeing to an on-site visit

Dr.Radosław Pomykała, AGH University of Science and Technology; Matthew Woodcock, Forestry Commission; Casimiro Andretta, Società Agricola Agrialleva; Bruno Tolfo, Cooperativa Agricola Livenza; Bert Huisman, Greendal Vergisting; Michele Corazzola and Roberto Corazzola, Cippo Legno; Antonio De Luca, De Luca Sas di De Luca Antonio & Co; Mr. Imerio Pellizzari, Trentino Rinnovabili; Benku Albert, Bertis Company; Farkas Csaba, Prod Com Dalia SRL; Vajda Lajos, Business Incubator

Sf. Gheorghe; Hrvoje Teo Oršanič, Kozjanski Park; Christos Karachristos, Rodopi Park; Stefan Hinterreiter, Biomassehof Achental; Orlando Paraiba, ENA.

Our thanks for participating in an Interview

Tytti Laitinen, Jyväskylä Innovation Ltd; Dr. Gerhard Schories, Verein zur Förderung des Technologietransfers an der Hochschule Bremerhaven e.V (TTZ); Ana Kojaković, Energy Institute Hrvoje Pozar; Andy Bull, Severn Wye Energy Agency Ltd; Pau Puigdollers, Innovació i Recerca Industrial i Sostenible; Matthias Edel, German Energy Agency; Dominik Rutz, WIP Renewable

Energies; Stefano Proietti, ISIS- Istituto di Studi per l'Integrazione dei Sistemi; Ilze Dzene, Ekodoma Ltd; Bettina Lancaster, STUDIA; Lies Bamelis, DLV (United Experts); Günther Bochmann, Universität für Bodenkultur Wien; Paz Gómez, AINIA; Ir. R.L Cornelissen, Cornelissen Consulting Services B.V; W.J. van den Berg, Province of Groningen; Dr. Reinhard Haas & Dr. Amela Ajanovic, Vienna University of Technology; John P.A. Neeft, Agentschap NL; Mr. Maurizio Trevisan, CETA Centre for Theoretical and Applied Ecology; Dr. Eng. Guido Mattei, European Consulting Brussels SPRL; Orlando

Paraíba, ENA; S. Krause, Fraunhofer UMSICHT; Alessandro Chiesa, CESTEC S.p.A; Maria Grazia

Tommasini, CRPV Soc. coop. - Centro Ricerche Produzioni Vegetali; Calliope Panoutsou, Imperial College London; Michael Papapetrou, WIP Renewable Energies; John P.A. Neeft, RVO; Eise Spijker, Stichting Joint Implementation Network; David Sánchez, CENER; Matthew Woodcock, Forestry Commission England; Eija Alakangas, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland; Jyrki Raitila, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland; Christian Metschina, LK Stmk; Rene Cornelissen, CCS B.V; Andrew Rowson, University of Exeter; Dr.-Ing. Volker Lenz, DBFZ Deutsches

Biomasseforschungszentrum gemeinnützige GmbH; Ms. Pilar Zapata Aranda, BIOAZUL S.L; Jean-Marc Jossart, AEBIOM - European Biomass Association; Dr Nike Krajnc, Slovenian Forestry Institute; Cosette Khawaja, Rainer Janssen, WIP Renewable Energies; WIP Renewable Energies, AEBIOM - European Biomass Association; Mr Pasi Poikonen, Finnish Forest Research Institute; Ellen Corke, Environment Department, City of Malmö; Jean-Marc Jossart, AEBIOM - European Biomass Association; Diego Mattioli, Legambiente ONLUS; Rita Mergner, Dominik Rutz, WIP Renewable Energies; Eva López Hernández, CIRCE; Elisabeth McDonnell, DECC, UK; Kees Kwant, Netherlands

Enterprise Agency; Dr Åsa Forsum, Swedish Energy Agency; Mr Matthew Clancy, SEAI; Noel Gavigan, IrBEA Ltd; Volker Jaensch, Renewables Academy AG (RENAC); Andrew Welfie, Manchester

University; Isabela Butnar UCL; Marie Kirby, Harper Adams; Jan Willem Bijmagte, CCCS BV; Professor Remigio Berruto, University of Turin; Lisa Lundmark, Swedish Energy Agency.

Our thanks for completing the Online Survey

Ryszard Wnuk, The Polish National Energy Conservation Agency (KAPE); Santino Di Berardino,

LNEG; Maurizio Dal Ferro, Studio Dal Ferro; Michal Néemth, Slovak Innovation and Energy Agency; Alain De Vocht, PXL University College; Kees Kwant, Netherlands Entreprise Agency; Calliope Panoutsou, Imperial College London; Ellen Corke, City of Malmö; Marek Amrozy, Narodowa Agencja Poszanowania Energii S.A; Katrin Kayser, IBBK Fachgruppe Biogas GmbH; Kurt Hjort-Gregersen, Danish Technolical Institute; Edward Majewski, Warsaw University of Life Sciences; Declan O Sullivan, RGFI; Laurens Vandelannoote, Innovatiesteunpunt; Göran Gustavsson, Energikontor Sydost; MIndaugas Šilininkas, Euromediena; Frédéric Janssens, COPO; Patrick J. McCarthy,

Renewable Gas Forum-Irish Green Gas Ltd; Daniel Bisorca, ISPE – Institute for Studies and Power Engineering Bucharest; Pablo RODERO, Asociación Española de Valorización Energética de la

Biomasa; Daniel Dulcea, ISPE Romania; Ionel Ioana, Universitatea Politehnica Timisoara; Ana Kojakovic, Energy Institute Hrvoje Pozar; Léa Dieckhoff, EIFER; Paola Mazzucchelli, EUREC; Orlando Paraíba, ENA; Lorenzo Ceccherini, CEWEP; Zwier van der Vegte, Wageningen UR Livestock Research



iii

KTC De Marke; Katja Kurki-Suonio, Finnish Energy; William Richardson, Rural Development

Initiatives Limited; Pau Puigdollers, IRIS; Leire Iriarte, IINAS - International Institute for Sustainability Analysis and Strategy; Eva López Hernández, CICRE Foundation; Jørgen Hinge, DTI; Thomas Maidonis, WIP Renewable Energies; Regis Vankerkove, SRIW; Martin Leahy, The Heath Farm; Eija Alakangas, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Ltd; Tiit Maidre, Estonian Biofuel

Association; Mark Prior, Forestry Commission; Masja Pit, DCA; Peeter Volke, United Loggers; Reinhard Haas, Energy Economics Group; Biljana Kulisic, Energy Institute Hrvoje Pozar; Daniel O'Sullivan, Institute of Technology Carlow; Velimir Šegon, REGEA; Ilze Dzene, Ekodoma, Ltd; Christian Metschina, Lk Steiermark; Bettina Lancaster, STUDIA; M Dolores Curt, ADABE and Technical University of Madrid; Pasi Poikonen, Natural Resources Institute Finland; Eise Spijker, Joint Implementation Network; Lies Bamelis, DLV; Antonia Lorenzo, BIOAZUL SL; Nike Krajnc, Slovenian Forestry Institute; Helen McHenry, Western Development Commission; Willem Boeve, Inagro;

Francies Van Gijzeghem, ODE Bio-enerige platform; Conor McGovern; Matthew Woodcock, Forestry Commission; Katrin Heinsoo, Estonian University of Life Sciences; Elis Vollmer, Estonian University of Life Sciences; Reinhart Van Poucke, UGent; Kai Sipilä, VTT; Declan Kennedy, Biotricity; Vita

Tilvikiene, Lithuanian Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry; Francesco Fatone, University of Verona; Benjamin Blumenstein, Universität Kasssel; Silke Weyberg, Fachverband Biogas; Wolfgang Gabauer, Universität für Bodenkultur Wien; Thomas Dory, Bert Energy GmbH; Katharina Hartmann,

Renewables Academy (RENAC) AG; Stiftung Ökologie und Landbau, Stiftung; Christian Schlagitweit, proPellts Austria; Johann Mayr, ARGE Österreichischer Abfallwirtschaftsverbände; Dominik Rutz, WIP Renewable Energies; Dr. Anne Berghoff, ttz Bremerhaven; Franco Parola, Coldiretti; David Bolzonella, Università di Verona; Carla de Carolis, UNIVPM Università Politecnica delle Marche; Remigio Berruto, DISAFA - DEIAFA - University of Turin; Bonhomme Trame; Patrick de Jamblinne, 2ZK; Camille Poutrin, Services Coop de France; Bastin Almadius, SPRL; Herve Gorius, Chambre Régionale d'Agriculture de Bretagne; Ewa Kwapich, Wielkopolski Osrodek Doradztwa Rolniczego w

Poznaniu; Adam Piszczek, Kujawsko-Pomorski Ośrodek Doradztwa Rolniczego w Minikowie; Ryszard Adamiec, Śląski Ośrodek Doradztwa Rolniczego w Częstochowie; Bogusław Kiedrowski, LODR w Końskowoli; Janusz Jurkiewicz, WODR Poznań; Grzegorz Manowski, Pomorski Ośrodek Doradztwa Rolniczego w Gdańsku; Anna Grzybek, Instytut Technologiczno Przyrodniczy Polskie Towarzystwo, Biomasy; Marek Siuciak, LODR w Końskowoli; Krzysztof Wychowałek, Ośrodek Działań

Ekologicznych "Źródła"; Król Małgorzata, WIelkopolski Ośrodek Doradztwa Rolniczego; Pilar Zapata Aranda, Bioazul S.L; Paz Gómez, AINIA.

We also thank the European Commission Steering Committee for their valuable input and reviews.



iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report provides a review of the support for bioenergy delivered under the Intelligent Energy Europe II (IEE II) programme in terms of measurable outputs and impacts. The IEE II programme

was open to calls for proposals between 2007-2013 and has supported 47 bioenergy projects with €48.3m of funds:

18 projects for solid biomass (total funding: €17.5m);

14 projects for biogas (total funding €16m);

6 projects for liquid biofuels (total funding €5.2m);

9 projects for strategic initiatives (total funding €9.6m).

IEE’s role was to fund specific actions within the market place to overcome non-technological barriers to both the efficient use of energy and the greater use of new and renewable energy sources, with

the overall aim of contributing to the provision of secure, sustainable and competitively priced energy for Europe. The bioenergy projects aimed to increase the share of biomass used in the production of electricity, heat and cooling.

As of May 2015, 34 of the 47 IEE II bioenergy projects were complete. At that point, in order to understand the potential impacts of IEE II bioenergy funding both today and in the future up to 2020, and to feed into European future support structures and approaches (such as Horizon 2020),

EASME commissioned this study to review all of the available evidence and provide expert opinion on the impacts claimed by the projects. A fundamental element of the review was to evaluate all available evidence on the basis of the reliability of the data. The methodology process used is shown in the figure below. The data was assessed as reliable (i.e. there was a clear reference source for the data), acceptable (i.e. using a clear methodology or estimate derived from reliable data) and potential (i.e. estimated from a related metric using a common conversion factor or from data potentially resulting from the project). Most data below is shown as reliable or reliable and

acceptable. Where total data is provided this includes all potential estimated impacts as well. By the completion of this review, 43 of the 47 projects were complete, and their final data were taken into account when possible.

Findings and Conclusions

The review has shown that IEE II bioenergy projects played an important role in assisting the development of bioenergy in Europe between 2007 and 2013 and continue to influence the sector

at present and into the foreseeable future. There is evidence that this programme accelerated the development of bioenergy in Europe, increasing the mobilisation of indigenous biomass, creating and reinforcing bioenergy supply chains and augmenting the final

Evidence Assessment

What evidence is available through Projects?

What other sources of information is available (e.g. from EASME, at regional/national level, trade associations)?

Evaluation of Impact

How was impact estimated in each project?

What assumptions were made by the projects?

Were these assumptions reasonable?

How confident are we in the impact estimate?

Stakeholder evidence

Information obtained from stakeholders in the programme through:

Telephone interviews with project co-ordinators and with stakeholders impacted by the projects

A survey of stakeholders

Field visits to stakeholders who developed plants asa result of the projects

Other evidence provided by stakeholders e.g. trade associations.

Enhancement of data

Estimation of impacts using assumptions and conversions of available data:

Conversion to standard units for comparison

Assumptions regarding mobilisation, investment and jobs

Checking summed data against total country and total EU projections



v

biomasss consumption for energy purposes. This has been made possible by; providing tools

for assessment of opportunities and risks for the development of bioenergy; providing users with confidence in the feedstocks and technology available; building awareness and understanding of bioenergy and capacity and skills needed to implement bioenergy, creating networks between stakeholders and developers, establishing bioenergy supply chains, promoting investments and

spreading best practice. Support to policy development and implementation at EU, national and regional level has also contributed to create a more favourable framework for bioenergy.

The headline impacts from the IEE II bioenergy projects were:

Metric Programme Achievement

Biomass mobilisation and production

The reliable short term (by the end of each project up to June 2016) biomass feedstocks mobilised was 0.49 Mtoe (million tonnes oil equivalent) (0.9 million tonnes), rising to 1.2 Mtoe (2.97 m tonnes)

if acceptable data was included, and 3.4 Mtoe (18.6 m tonnes) if potential data was included. The reliable and acceptable estimate included 1 Mtoe of forest wood, and 0.12 Mtoe of Used Cooking Oil.

In the long term (by 2020) the biomass feedstocks mobilised could be 6.58 Mtoe (29.1m tonnes), comprising 0.39 Mtoe (2.9m tonnes), from reliable and acceptable data and 6.18 Mtoe (26.3m tonnes) from potential data.

The reliable short term bioenergy carriers produced were 1.34 Mtoe and a further 0.37 Mtoe arose from acceptable data, rising to a potential of 2.09 Mtoe if all data was included.

In the long term there is potential for over 8 Mtoe of bioenergy carriers to be produced, including 5.5 Mtoe of wood pellets, 0.7 Mtoe of woodchips, and 1 Mtoe biogas/biomethane.

Renewable Energy The reliable and acceptable short term renewable energy production was 1.65 Mtoe (0.24 Mtoe reliable and 1.41 Mtoe acceptable), rising

to a potential of 2.6 Mtoe if potential data was included. This comprised: 1.43 Mtoe heat, 0.05 Mtoe electricity, 0.03 Mtoe of biomethane injection to the grid, 0.11 Mtoe for CHP (0.1 for heat, 0.01 Mtoe for electricity) and 0.01 Mtoe for biofuels.

The reliable long term renewable energy production was 4.4 Mtoe, acceptable data added another 6.8 Mtoe, rising to 15.00 Mtoe if potential data is also included. These figures are higher than biomass

mobilised because there was less data available for biomass mobilised.

Contribution to EU projections1

In 2016 the completed projects made a contribution of 0.2 Mtoe to EU bioenergy projections, assessed from reliable data. Acceptable data added 1.4 Mtoe to this and potentially the projects contributed a further 0.95 Mtoe. The total reliable and acceptable contribution

was 1.6 Mtoe, or 1.18% of the 2015 EU Primes modelling projections (136 Mtoe).

In the long term the projects will make a reliable contribution of at least 4.4 Mtoe to the 2020 bioenergy targets. Acceptable data adds 6.9 Mtoe to this and there is a potential to contribute a further 3.7 Mtoe, totalling 15.0 Mtoe. The total reliable and acceptable

contribution was 11.3 Mtoe, or 7.5% of the 2020 projection for bioenergy (150.7 Mtoe).

Investment Triggered

In the short term the reliable and acceptable investment triggered was EUR 913 million of which 14% was from reliable investment data (EUR 258 million). Potential data added a further EUR 905 million.

The total long term the reliable and acceptable investment triggered

was EUR 6 372 million, of which 9% was from reliable estimates (EUR 1 138 million). Potential data added a further EUR 5 848 million.

1 The EU projections used here were taken from DG ENERGY Primes modelling (reference scenarios)



vi

Leverage effect (per

EUR 1 million EU funding)

Short term potential investment leveraged: EUR 18.9 million per EUR

million of EU funding, based on reliable and acceptable estimates. This increases to EUR 37.5 million per EUR million of EU funding when potential data is included. The highest proportion of this comes from

solid biomass (56%), with biogas/biomethane and strategic initiatives projects each contributing 27%.

Long term investment leveraged: EUR 132 million per EUR million EU funding, based on reliable and acceptable estimates. The highest proportion of this comes from solid biomass (81%) with biogas/biomethane projects contributing 13%, and strategic initiatives projects contributing 6%.

Short term renewable energy leveraged: 0.035 Mtoe was generated per EUR million EU funding using reliable and acceptable energy production data. The highest energy triggered in reliable and acceptable projects is for solid biomass, followed by strategic

projects. Long term renewable energy leveraged using reliable and acceptable

generation data was: 0.23 Mtoe was generated per EUR million EU funding. These results are influenced by two projects that have high estimates for Mtoe triggered.

Greenhouse gas emission savings

The reliable short term GHG emission savings were 0.5 Mt CO2e/y, rising to 5.6 Mt CO2e/y for reliable and acceptable data, and a potential of 6.9 Mt CO2e/y if all data was included. The reliable long

term GHG emission savings were 1.6 Mt CO2e/y, rising to 25.7 Mt CO2e/y for reliable and acceptable data, and a potential of 30.3 Mt CO2e/y if all data was included.

Reduction in GHG coming from biomass heat is the main source of predicted reduction (67%), with electricity comprising the smallest contribution (0.003%). There were over 6.6 Mt CO2e/year (in the long term data) that were unspecified by the projects as to the source.

Dissemination of information

Around 2.8 million stakeholders have been informed about bioenergy as a result of the dissemination activities supported in the programme.

1.86 Million stakeholders accessed websites hosted by the projects, including 0.24 million downloads and just over 1 100 online scans

using online tools. More than 2 200 one to one meetings, 2 400 workshops and 316 study

tours were held. In addition projects organised training sessions, demonstrations, forums and information days.

These events attracted just over 200 000 stakeholders, including almost 70 000 at workshops, over 122 000 at conferences, over 8 600 stakeholders at one to one meetings and around 6 000 at study

tours/site visits. Handbooks or guides to bioenergy were distributed to over 23 000

stakeholders; leaflets were distributed to over 600 000 stakeholders. These events reached over 200 stakeholders in almost each EU

Member State, but attracted over 1 000 stakeholders from each of the following countries: Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Greece, Finland,

France, Germany, Italy, Ireland, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Slovakia and the UK.

Contact with key stakeholders

Farmers (13 300), foresters (19 150), agro-food sector (300), SMEs (18 100), local and regional officials and policy makers (7 100), decision makers (15 200, including policy makers and financiers) and experts, auditors, standards and nature organisations and NGOs (7

700).

Supply chain support 443 business plans and 1 536 feasibility studies were developed. This resulted in the development of over 400 plants across the EU, representing over 165MW (there were 279 heat and CHP plants, 9



vii

PVO plants, 46 biogas/biomethane plants and 91 biogas plants2). In

addition to this 6 upgrading plants for biomethane were installed, 68 filling stations or filling points for biomethane or biofuels were installed and almost 3 300 vehicles were purchased.

236 supply chains were developed.

Policy intervention Direct contact with over 560 policy makers. In addition many projects reported policy maker attendance at events.

76 biomass action plans, roadmaps or implementation plans were developed by 18 projects. 59 of these were aimed at specific regions that had been involved in the projects; five provided plans of

relevance at EU level; and 12 were aimed at national level. These resulted in 39 plans or project recommendations implemented at the regional level and 17 at national level. In addition there were 372 letters of intent from policy makers to take project results into account.

Specific policy achievements are described in the section of this report

examining success stories (section 6.3) and in the conclusions.

Development of models/tools to assist bioenergy development

28 projects developed tools and methodologies to enable evaluation of the potential of bioenergy and its uptake and the impact on reduction of GHG emissions at regional, EU Member State and Europe level and tools that allow policy makers understand the impact of various policy measures. Projects recorded that over 15 000

stakeholders downloaded, used or were trained to use these tools.

The conclusions we can draw from the review (taking account of the activities and their impacts) are:

A core strength of IEE II is that it strongly contributed to capacity building and provided

an important framework of support for stakeholders (particularly SMEs and at regional and

local level who did not otherwise have the capacities or resources to undertaken such activities themselves) to accelerate the development of bioenergy in Europe by:

1. Supporting policy development and implementation, providing policy recommendations and market feedback to policy makers at both European and national level, and assisting local and regional policy-makers to develop and implement local strategies and action plans.

2. Providing information and tools for assessing opportunities in the bioenergy sector, such as

assessment of biomass feedstock resource availability (now and potential, including assessment of competition for the resource on a regional, national and EU basis) and bioenergy potential.

3. Enhancing stakeholders’ confidence in biomass feestocks and in the technologies available, including the development and implementation of standards and certification systems.

4. Building capacity and skills through training, workshops, information and development tools, guidelines, etc. and by spreading best practice.

5. Creating networks between stakeholders to enable development of bioenergy and the establishment of bioenergy supply chains.

6. Promoting investment, performing feasibility studies, developing business plans, providing expert advice and supporting tendering procedures and contracting.

IEE II has successfully transferred knowledge and best practice from countries and regions experienced in bioenergy to countries/regions where bioenergy opportunities were less developed.

The programme has a wide geographical range and is demonstrably inclusive. Large scale dissemination has clearly introduced bioenergy concepts to a wide audience, and it is clear that a number of projects have also successfully funnelled stakeholders towards development of biomass, by targeting small scale workshops, study tours and one to one meetings with stakeholders that would most benefit from this assistance. Stakeholders targeted have included local authorities and

2 Biogas/Biomethane plants are those plants developed to use biogas/biomethane as a vehicle fuel or to upgrade biogas to biomethane for injection into the grid. Biogas plants are anaerobic digestion plants that are used for heat or heat and power.



viii

regional policy makers, financiers, plant developers, energy companies and the forestry, agricultural

and agro-industry sector.

IEE II has successfully increased bioenergy planning and implementation. Figures to support this are provided in the summary table above. The type of actions supported under IEE II (such as dissemination, capacity building, development of bioenergy supply chains and policy

implementation) take time to produce concrete results. Furthermore, many IEE II bioenergy projects focused on small-scale thermal energy systems, which do not give immediate high figures in terms of bioenergy produced, but have high replication potential. These small-scale systems are also difficult to identify and their impact difficult to capture by project teams. Therefore it is likely that higher impacts have been achieved by IEE II bioenergy projects than reported here. Furthermore, the impacts of some activities such as standardisation, certification, dissemination, policy development and implementation are difficult to quantify. If those could also be taken into account

the impacts achieved would be much higher.

IEE II represents a small proportion (4%) of the EU funding budget for bioenergy in the 2007-13 period. Its success in implementing bioenergy demonstrates their power in accelerating bioenergy development and the need for these activities to continue. The leverage per EUR investment is high, demonstrating the underlying importance of the actions undertaken. However, many of these actions contribute to the early stages of biomass development, so the leverage may

not be due completely to IEE II alone.

There is a need for common terminology for outputs and impacts, so that projects report in standard units and use standard conversions. The high quality of outputs and impacts could be improved further by making their definition more prescriptive and methodology driven. This would enable spot checks on the programme against targets and allow impacts to be assessed as the programme develops. It would also make it easier to audit and evaluate the projects. In particular there is a need for clear reporting of biomass feedstocks used and the type of energy generated.

The intended impact of IEE II funding for bioenergy was an increased uptake of bioenergy in

Europe, beyond that that would have been achieved by EU and national Member State policy alone. It is our conclusion that the data and analysis carried out in this review supports this impact being achieved.



ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................... 1

The Intelligent Energy - Europe II (IEE II) Programme ...................................... 3

EU Bioenergy Policy Background..................................................................... 7

2. IEE II BIOENERGY PROJECTS: AN OVERVIEW .......................................................... 11

Solid Biomass IEE II projects ........................................................................ 11

Biogas & Biomethane IEE II projects .............................................................. 17

Liquid Biofuels IEE II projects ....................................................................... 21

Strategic initiative IEE II projects .................................................................. 23

3. METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... 26

IEE II reporting requirements and available data ............................................. 27

Challenges present in the baseline data ......................................................... 28

Impact Review Methodology ......................................................................... 30

Site visits (providing detail for success stories) ............................................... 34

Assessment of reliability ............................................................................... 37

Challenges encountered during our assessments ............................................. 38

Conversions and enhancement of the data ..................................................... 39

4. PERFORMANCE OF IEE-II BIOENERGY PROJECTS AGAINST COMMON PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ........................................................................................................ 43

Biomass feedstock mobilised and bioenergy carriers produced .......................... 44

Final renewable energy production ................................................................ 64

Contribution to the Renewable Energy Directive (2009/28/EC) overall target ...... 73

Contribution to the Renewable Energy Directive (2009/28/EC) sectoral targets ... 76

Reduction of GHG emissions ......................................................................... 78

Investments ............................................................................................... 82

Multiplication (Leverage) effect ..................................................................... 85

Potential employment impacts ...................................................................... 94

5. ADDITIONAL METRICS OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE .................................................. 98

Analysis of outputs .................................................................................... 100

6. SPECIFIC ACHIEVEMENTS AND SUCCESS STORIES ................................................ 145

Introduction.............................................................................................. 145

Success stories ......................................................................................... 181

7. SURVEY RESULTS ............................................................................................... 194

Sample Selection & Approach ..................................................................... 194

Summary of survey results ......................................................................... 194

Survey responses analysis .......................................................................... 195

8. BIOENERGY RELATED PROJECTS SUPPORTED UNDER OTHER EU PROGRAMMES ......... 210

Introduction.............................................................................................. 210

Methodology ............................................................................................. 210

High level findings ..................................................................................... 210

European Territorial Co-operation (ETC) Energy Projects ................................ 215

LIFE+ ...................................................................................................... 216

NER300 .................................................................................................... 217

Seventh Framework Programme for research and technological development (FP7) ....................................................................................................... 218

Rural Development Programmes (RDPS) funded under EAFRD ........................ 219



x

European Industrial Bioenergy Initiative (EIBI) ............................................. 219

Awareness of IEE II amongst other EU programmes ...................................... 220

Discussion ................................................................................................ 221

9. CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................... 224

Conclusions on outputs .............................................................................. 224

Conclusions on impacts .............................................................................. 226

Conclusions on stakeholder input and comments ........................................... 228

Conclusions on other EU support ................................................................. 229

Suggestions for future improvement ............................................................ 229

Summary ................................................................................................. 230

10. ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................ 231

11. REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... 233

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 List of evidence reviewed for each IEE II project

Appendix 2 Conversion methodology

Appendix 3 Stakeholder survey questions

Appendix 4 Bioenergy projects funded under other European programmes

Appendix 5 Data for stakeholder participation by country and stakeholder type.



1

1. INTRODUCTION

This review was undertaken for the Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises

(EASME) between May 2015 and June 2016. It was aimed at evaluating the impacts and achievements of bioenergy projects supported under Intelligent Energy - Europe II (IEE II) between 2007 and 2013. In total 47 IEE II bioenergy projects were supported in this time period. These are shown in Figure 1-1.

The evaluation examined the impact of all 47 projects. It was undertaken in two stages. The first determined common metrics and other factors that could be aggregated into programme-level achievements. This was supplemented with specific key examples of success.

The final impacts were categorised by category of bioenergy project (i.e. transport biofuel, biogas/biomethane, solid biomass and strategic initiatives), bioenergy carrier and country using the following metrics and factors:

Bioenergy produced/mobilised; o Tonnes (t) and tonnes of oil equivalent (toe) of solid biomass mobilised o Cubic metres (m3) and toe of biogas produced,

o Cubic metres and toe biomethane produced, o Tonnes and toe of liquid biofuels produced (by type, e.g. biodiesel and bioethanol),

Final renewable energy production; o Million tonnes of oil equivalent (Mtoe) in total, o (GigaWatt hours/ year (GWh/year) for electricity, Mtoe for heat and Mtoe for

transport fuels), Investments (million Euro, €) triggered by project, by country and by topic/application;

Leverage effect, per project and in total, in terms of; o € triggered per Million € EU funding, o GWh/year or Mtoe triggered per Million € EU funding,

o Differentiating per end use (thermal energy, electricity and transport fuel), Contribution to the Renewable Energy Directive (2009/28/EC) overall target: share of

country gross final energy consumption (GFEC); Contribution to the Renewable Energy Directive (2009/28/EC) sectorial targets: share of

energy/electricity/transport sectorial GFEC; Reduction of GHG emissions (tonne CO2-eq/year).

A key part of this review was to identify the key programme-level indicators and specific examples that allow production of a reliable evidence base on which to base any statements around the importance of market support intervention funding. Therefore in evaluating the projects we also considered how the results were reported and what factors were most important in showing the

market impact of the funding.



2

Figure 1-1 The 47 projects supported by IEE II, by date of project and colour coded for sector. The red line indicates the timing of the mid-term review. The green line indicates the time scale of this review. The number beside the project acronym indicates the EU contribution.



3

The Intelligent Energy - Europe II (IEE II) Programme

1.1.1 Background

The IEE programme3, which was a pillar of the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework

Programme (CIP), ran from 2003-2013 in two phases, the second running from 2007-2013 (IEE II). Although it still funds a number of ongoing projects, since 2014 IEE II has not held any further open Calls for proposals. Support to market uptake in bioenergy is included in the Horizon 2020 programme.

IEE’s role was to fund specific actions within the market place to overcome non-technological barriers to both the efficient use of energy and the greater use of new and renewable energy sources, with the overall aim of contributing to the provision of secure, sustainable and competitively priced energy

for Europe.

The IEE II programme had a budget of EUR 730 million to fund projects4. These were mostly

disbursed in the form of grants and tenders to public and private organisations committed to collaborating towards a cleaner, more competitive and more secure energy future. The IEE II programme was intended to form a bridge between research and innovation to mass market uptake. The main areas covered5 were:

Energy efficiency and the rational use of energy (SAVE).

o Targeted the improvement of energy efficiency and the rational use of resources in

the industry, products and building sectors.

New and renewable resources (ALTENER).

o Aimed to increase the share of renewables in the production of electricity, heat and

cooling, and to integrate them in the local energy systems.

Energy in transport (STEER).

o Focused on energy savings and energy efficiency in the transport sector, including

stimulation of demand for alternative fuels and clean and energy-efficient vehicles.

Other integrated initiatives.

o These projects covered several economic sectors or several of the main areas of

energy efficiency, new and renewable resources and energy in transport at the same

time. Projects supporting educating children, tomorrow's energy savers and

consumers, were covered by this part of the programme.

Additionally the European Commission (EC) launched a number of special initiatives6 under IEE II to

create momentum and accelerate progress in particular areas. These include the BUILD UP Skills

programme, Covenant of Mayors and EU Sustainable Energy Week. The IEE II also supported

Concerted Actions7 around key EU legislation, including the Energy Savings, Energy Performance of

Buildings and Renewable Energy Sources Directives. Under IEE II, national authorities could

informally meet to discuss and evaluate cost effective options for implementing the relevant

European Directives, and gives the opportunity for the EC to work with Member States.

Most parts of the IEE II programme were run by the Executive Agency for Competitiveness and

Innovation (EACI) (which became the Executive Agency for SMEs (EASME) in 2014) on behalf of the

European Commission.

1.1.2 Support to bioenergy under IEE II

This assessment is concerned only with those actions supported in IEE II to enhance the use of bioenergy as part of the programme of work supported on new and renewable energy sources. 47 bioenergy projects were funded under IEE II: 18 on solid biomass (total funding: €17.5 M); 14 on

3 Information summarised from: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/intelligent/files/doc/iee_at_a_glance_2011_en.pdf and IEE

Guidelines for the calculation of the IEE Common Performance Indicators (CPIs). 4 http://ec.europa.eu/energy/intelligent/about/iee-programme/. 5 https://ec.europa.eu/energy/intelligent/about/funding-areas/. 6 https://ec.europa.eu/energy/intelligent/about/iee-initiatives/ 7 https://ec.europa.eu/energy/intelligent/about/concerted-actions/

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/intelligent/files/doc/iee_at_a_glance_2011_en.pdf



4

biogas (total funding €16 M); 6 on liquid biofuels (total funding €5.2M) and 9 on strategic initiatives (total funding €9.6 M).

Bioenergy projects were supported under the IEE II programme within the ALTENER area, which had the objective of promoting new and renewable energy sources and supporting energy diversification.

Each project supported addressed one or more of five defined fields of delivery:

1. Shape policy development and implementation (e.g. provision of recommendations and

market feedback to policy makers in the European Commission and Member States (MS);

actions to support the implementation of EU Directives and policies; and actions that assist

local and regional policy makers to develop and implement local strategies and action plans,

etc.)

2. Create favourable market conditions (e.g. contribution to standards development and

implementation, accelerated uptake of certification schemes; development of infrastructure

and logistic, improved information; tackling common barriers, etc.)

3. Change behaviour (e.g. large scale information exchange and awareness raising; actions

encouraging market players to change behaviour, etc.)

4. Build skills and capacities (e.g. supporting the development of appropriate skills and

competencies of market players through e.g. trainings, study tours, workshops, developing

tools and guidelines, etc.).

5. Mobilising investments (e.g. provision of necessary information; performing feasibility

studies; mobilising decision makers and funding technical assistance; promoting cooperation

between market actors, preparation of tendering procedures and contractual arrangements;

facilitating use of structural and other investment funds, etc.)

Further information on the spectrum of bioenergy projects supported in IEE II is shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Range of work supported in bioenergy by IEE II, by key area and type of action

Bioenergy key areas addressed in IEE II

Solid biomass, biogas/bio-methane, liquid biofuels: Support to the development of supply chains and to their use for energy purposes.

Strategic initiatives - Support to policy development and implementation, including planning.

Examples of Actions supported

Development of tools and guidelines (online and published)

Training and skills development

Provision of data and information

Support to the development of standards and their implementation

Support to the development of certification schemes and their implementation

Economic data and analysis of best cost options

Development of networks for target stakeholders

Facilitation of exchange of information between regions and between different types of stakeholders (e.g. policy makers, bioenergy developers, environmental protection

associations and different regions)

Promotion of cooperation between actors in the biomass mobilisation chain and for the use of biomass for energy purposes

Establishment of supply chains

Promotion of actions and exchange of information at local levels

Support to investments and improve access to finance

Development of infrastructure for collection/harvesting, transformation, distribution and

use; improvement of use of infrastructure in existence



5

Resource quantification, information on biomass potentials and competing uses

Guidelines for development of biomass trade

Knowledge transfer between regions

Regional bioenergy planning tools

Information on biomass sustainability and development of harmonised data on sustainability and GHG emissions

Information to policy makers to create a favourable policy and support framework for bioenergy.

1.1.3 IEE II bioenergy intervention logic

It is critical to ground any programme or project review in an understanding of how the programme intervenes in the implementation process (referred to as its “intervention logic”). This is an important process as defining the intervention logic helps to frame the assessment questions that the study is

seeking to answer, as well as defining the scope and depth of the analysis.

An intervention logic pathway starts with the rationale and objectives of the programme and the challenges and barriers the programme was designed to address. It then describes the actions taken

under the programme (e.g. creating awareness; building capacity), the expected results (e.g. in this case, bioenergy mobilisation) and the wider impacts (e.g. greater market competitiveness; contributing to EU 2020 renewable energy targets and beyond).

Our assessment uses the intervention logic as a framework for understanding the IEE II bioenergy projects’ impacts and outcomes in the wider context of the IEE II programme. We have produced a simplified intervention logic for the IEE II programme, in relation to its impact in bioenergy in Figure 1-2.

The key drivers for the IEE II programme are: improvement in the sustainability of energy and increased energy security; and a need to stabilise GHG concentrations in the atmosphere. There is

clearly capacity for bioenergy to contribute to these needs, as has been identified through the IEE programme. However the market for bioenergy is underdeveloped in many EU countries. The driving intervention logic in supporting bioenergy projects under IEE II is that market development is a key part of the path to success.

Targeted funding on projects that are designed to deliver on the five defined fields of delivery (Section 1.1.2), is intended to result in individual quantitative targets being met, as well as various other results such as policy development and implementation, supply chain mobilisation, increased access to finance and feasibility studies.

The consequent intended impact of IEE II funding for bioenergy was an increased uptake of bioenergy in Europe, beyond that which would have been achieved by EU and national Member State policy alone.

The objective of this review of bioenergy projects delivered under IEE II was to produce a

reliable evidence base to show the impact of market support on the bioenergy market.


Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME)

EASME/H2020/EE/2014/008 6

Figure 1-2 IEE II Bioenergy Projects’ Intervention Logic



7

EU Bioenergy Policy Background

1.2.1 Renewable Energy policy

Bioenergy is part of renewable energy (RE) policy at the EU level. Development of RE has the following EU policy objectives:

Reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels

Increase energy security

Make energy production more sustainable

Drive technical innovation and employment opportunities across Europe

Until 2008, the development of renewable energy was driven by the Renewable Electricity Directive and the Biofuels Directive8, which set national indicative targets. These Directives did not include heat and cooling, and the targets were non-binding.

The Renewable Energy Directive (RED) came into force in April 20099 and superseded the previous Directives. The RED set a binding target of 20% final energy consumption in the EU from renewable sources by 2020. Each EU Member State (MS) has its own binding national renewable energy target, and a sub target of at least 10% of transport fuels from renewable sources by 2020. An amendment in 2015 requires MS to set a non-binding sub target for advanced renewable transport fuels production by 202010. In addition the amendment sets a cap of 7% to first generation biofuels

produced from energy crops and addresses the indirect land use change (ILUC) impact for biofuels.

The bioenergy sustainability debate has developed as follows:

Issues related to crops and wood grown specifically for energy purposes requiring land.

o Land use for bioenergy purposes has led to concerns over food security and direct and indirect land use change, (LUC) and (ILUC).

o Energy crop production also requires ecosystem resources and fossil energy use

which may reduce GHG emissions savings for the overall bioenergy production chain.

o GHG emissions and direct land use constraints were addressed from the outset in the RED for liquid biofuels and bio-liquids. Since 2010 there has been a debate about extending sustainability requirements to solid and gaseous bioenergy. This is not currently an EU requirement, but recommendations on appropriate requirements were made in a report by the EC in February 201011 and have been implemented in several countries. In 2014 the EC reviewed solid and gaseous biomass sustainability again12 and concluded that up to 2020 biomass will be mainly from EU sources, and

current sustainability safeguards are adequate. However, sustainability of imported biomass remains a major concern.

o In 2010 the EC investigated the impact of ILUC from biofuels. An impact assessment was published in 201213, in which 4 options for minimising the impact of ILUC on GHG emissions of biofuels was considered. In October 2012 a proposal was put forward to limit ILUC based on limiting the proportion of bio-liquids from food crops

and raising the GHG emissions savings required14. Since 2012 there has been sustained and intense discussion on the ILUC proposals for biofuels and bio-liquids, and also how ILUC may impact on solid and gaseous biomass. In 2015 agreement was reached on an amendment to RED which provided short term solution15, which

8 Directive 2001/77/EC of 27 September 2001 on the promotion of electricity produced from renewable energy sources

Directive 2003/30/EC of 8 May 2003 on the promotion of the use of biofuels or other renewable fuels 9 Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources . http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-

content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32009L0028 10 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32015L1513&from=EN 11 http://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/2014_biomass_state_of_play_.pdf 12 State of play on the sustainability of solid and gaseous biomass used for electricity, heating and cooling in the EU, (2014)

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/2014_biomass_state_of_play_.pdf 13 Impact Assessment on indirect land use change related to biofuels and bioliquids.

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/swd_2012_0344_ia_resume_en.pdf 14 Proposal for a Directive amending the FQD and RED. http://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/com_2012_0595_en.pdf 15 Directive 2015/1513 amending the RED and FQD. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-

content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32015L1513&from=EN

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32009L0028http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32009L0028http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32015L1513&from=ENhttp://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/2014_biomass_state_of_play_.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/2014_biomass_state_of_play_.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/swd_2012_0344_ia_resume_en.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/com_2012_0595_en.pdf



8

was to limit proportion of transport fuels from food crops to 7% and introduce a non-binding sub target of 0.5% for advanced biofuels.

Issues related to the alternative competing markets of agricultural and forestry residues:

o Current emphasis is on utilisation of residues and waste biomass to both maximise

GHG emissions savings and to avoid the land use concerns. However, these resources can have other existing markets. Future policy aims to ensure fair access to resources for all potential markets

The EU is currently considering renewable energy policy after 2020, and published a policy framework for climate and energy in the period 2020 to 2030 in 2014. The focus in the Framework is on a low carbon economy, GHG emissions reductions, and cost effective implementation. RE targets for 2030 are part of the energy and climate goals. No national RE targets are proposed, but

a RE target of 27% of final energy consumption in the EU as a whole by 2030 was agreed by EU heads of state in October 2014. The policy framework also suggests that the RED is substantially revised for the post 2020 period, and that National Plans are streamlined and simplified to one

consolidated plan containing

GHG emissions reductions plans

Amount of Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency intended for 2030

National policies to deliver the above.

In the policy framework for 2020 to 2030 it is proposed that food based biofuels should not receive public support after 2020.

1.2.2 Bioenergy contribution and special considerations

There are no specific binding targets for bioenergy, but bioenergy is recognised in MS National Renewable Energy Action Plans (NREAPS)16 as likely to make an important contribution to renewable energy targets and EU policy objectives because:

It is dispatchable, i.e. generation is independent of time of day and weather conditions.

It is flexible and can be used to produce electricity, heat and transport fuels, and is suitable for technologies a range of sizes from domestic to industrial.

Many bioenergy technologies are commercially available today, and In particular liquid biofuels produced with current technology make a significant contribution to renewable transport fuels targets.

It offers opportunities in rural developments for agriculture and forestry and for technology

development in advanced conversion systems.

However, there are also issues that relate specifically to bioenergy. These have been addressed to some extent in current legislation, and future policy aims to address these issues more fully.

1.2.3 Impacts of policy on bioenergy production

The RED requires Member States to report progress towards renewable energy targets every two years. On the basis of these reports from 2011, 2013 and 201517 and the Intermediate Evaluation

of the RED the following general observations can be made relating to bioenergy

Member States foresee a substantial contribution of bioenergy to their RE targets

The bulk of financial support is offered at MS level. Bioenergy is usually eligible for some level of support, although some biomass sources are excluded in some Member States based on sustainability or resource competition concerns. A range of different instruments are used, with the most common being Feed In Tariffs for electricity, Investment grants for heat and tax exemptions/ quota obligations for transport18.

16 http://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/renewable-energy/national-action-plans 17 http://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/renewable-energy/progress-reports 18 COM 2011 31 Final. Renewable Energy: Progressing towards the 2020 target. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-

content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52011DC0031&from=EN

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/renewable-energy/national-action-planshttp://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52011DC0031&from=ENhttp://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52011DC0031&from=EN



9

Barriers of infrastructure, planning and permitting were identified in 2009. There has been slower than expected removal of key barriers to renewable energy growth. In 2015 market barriers still persisted but progress was observed in this area, with a large number of simplification measures reported by MS in 2015.

Disruptive changes to renewable energy support schemes at national level, including retroactive measures in some Member States, have slowed development.

Policy uncertainty relating to sustainability has also affected development, particularly for biofuels for transport. Although there are no specific sustainability requirements in the RED for solid and gaseous biomass at present, the intense debate created uncertainty.

After a slow start, strong development of RE in heating, with substantial contribution from solid biomass, was reported in 2015.

Biogas use in heating and electricity is increasing, but more effort is required to enable them to meet potential to 2020.

Improvements in co-ordination and co-operation amongst involved authorities was reported in 2015.

Evaluation of RED suggests that RE capacity would probably have increased in some MS without mandatory targets, but that the RED has been a key driver for other MS that were previously

striving less to develop RE.

To achieve 2020 targets more use should be made of co-operation mechanism.

After 2020 the EC intends to develop an improved biomass policy including further consideration of sustainability.

1.2.4 Development of bioenergy policy during IEE II

Table 2 lists the main EU bioenergy policy developments over the period IEE II was active, summarises the Member State actions relating to bioenergy over this period.



EUR 2016.6932 EN 10

Table 2: Summary of bioenergy policy developments and Member State Actions within the timeframe of IEE II

European Policy Developments Member State (MS) Actions IEE II Developments

2007Until 2008, the development of renewable energy was driven by the Renewable

Electricity Directive and the Biofuels Directive

which did not cover all energy sources and set non-binding national indicative targets.

Intelligent Energy Europe II (IEE

II) programme begins. Bioenergy

projects eligible under a range of

key actions.

2009

Renewable Energy Directive (RED) introduced: sets mandatory target of 20% final

energy consumption from renewable sources by 2020, with 10% sub target for the

transport sector. Sustainability requirements for biofuels and bioliquids included.

2010

EC introduces non-binding recommendations for increased efficiency in renewable

energy production and the sustainable use of solid and gaseous biomass.

MS submit National Renewable Energy Action Plans (NREAPS) to show how they will

meet 2020 national renewable energy targets. IEE II introduces a specific key

action on bioenergy

2011

MS report they foresee a substantial contribution to RE targets from bioenergy. MS

introduce a range of instruments for support of renewable energy.

2012

EC places additional emphasis on sustainability of biofuels feedstocks, and explores

how minimising indirect land use change could be included in legislation. Capping use

of food crops in biofuels and introducing a sub target for advanced biofuels is

proposed.

2013

EC reviews MS progress reports and finds that progress towards RE targets impeded by

continuing key barriers in planning/ permitting and disruptive changes in support schemes.

More effort is required to increase deployment in heating sector and advanced biofuels.

Sustainability concerns affect investment decisions.

IEE II programme closes

2014

EC publishes policy framework for climate and energy for 2020 to 2030. EU heads of

state agreeto the proposed 27% renewable energy target for 2030. Policy proposes

food based biofuels should not receive support after 2020. EC also publishes a review

of biomass sustainability, which concludes that sustainability safeguards are

adequate up to 2020, but that an improved biomass policy will be prpared for the

post 2020 period, which will include sustainability considerations.

EC reports that about half MS have adopted regulations to promote higher efficiency of

bioenergy production. 5 MS have adopted sustainability measures for solid and gaseous

biomass.

2015

RED amendment sets limit of 7% on food crops used for biofuels and introduces non-

binding target of 0.5% for advanced biofuels

EC reviews MS progress reports and finds that there has been strong development in

biomass heating. Biogas use is also increasing but more effort is required to meet 2020

potential. Biofuels progress has been hampered by uncertainty in ILUC policy and

insufficient progress with advanced biofuels. Improvements in planning/ permitting

procedures and co-ordination and co-operation amongst relevant authorities noted . A

number of MS have introduced legislation aimed at addressing potential competition with

exising biomass uses by excluding some biomass feedstocks from subsidy schemes.

Review of impact of IEE II

bioenergy projects. Impacts

influenced by IEE II shown in

bold.

2007

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015



EUR 2016.6932 EN 11

2. IEE II BIOENERGY PROJECTS: AN OVERVIEW

The bioenergy projects funded by IEE II programme were aimed at supporting initiatives that addressed non-technological barriers by triggering and accompanying the implementation of local supply chains of the most sustainable solid biomass, biogas & biomethane and liquid biofuels resources. They also aimed to support the implementation of strategic actions to support policy development and implementation, contributing towards the 2020 targets and setting strategies in the bioenergy field beyond 2020. The bioenergy projects funded by the programme are summarised in Sections 2.1 – 2.4

Solid Biomass IEE II projects

Table 3 Summary of projects supported under IEE II

Acronym Led by Project website

Brief description of main purpose Duratio

n

#

Project Partner

s

Countries

Total Budget (€m)

AFO Activating private forest

owners to increase forest fuel supply.

VTT, Finland

www.afo.eu.com

The aim of the project was to activate forest owners and to increase wood fuel supply and use at regional and local levels. Activation was through

workshops, study tours and face-to-face meetings. Wood fuel supply clusters were established in

target regions 4 countries. The experience from Austria and Finland was transferred to these countries.

2009-12

9 FR, LV, SK, UK

1.4

AGRIFORENERGY II Promoting and securing the production of biomass from

forestry and agriculture without harming the food

production.

Lk-stmk,

Austria

www.agrifor

energy.com

The aim of the project was to promote and secure the production of bioenergy through workshops, study tours and one-to-one meetings between stakeholders from the supply and demand sides of

bioenergy. The project aimed to operate in the

following specific areas: biomass heating; pure vegetable oil use; and biogas and biomethane.

2009-

12 8

AT, SK, IT, BG,

FI, DE, SE

1.5

http://www.afo.eu.com/http://www.afo.eu.com/http://www.agriforenergy.com/http://www.agriforenergy.com/



EUR 2016.6932 EN 12



n

# Project Partner

s

Countries

Total Budget (€m)

BASIS Biomass Availability and

Sustainability Information

System.

AEBIOM,

EU

www.basisbi

oenergy.eu

The aim of the project was to interact with bioenergy project developers and investors, providing them with a comprehensive view on the sustainable supply and competition for wood chips

for woodchip boilers, using intuitive maps of NUTS2

regions of all EU-27 Member States. The final product was a GIS mapping exercise that allows assessment of regional biomass potential, feedstock competition and integration of sustainability criteria for wood chip supply.

2013-

16 10 All 1.0

Bioenergy farm Implementation plan for

BioEnergy Farm.

CCS, The

Netherlands

www.bioenergyfarm.eu

The aim of the project was to disseminate well-structured and unbiased information about the feasibility of bio energy and biofuels in agricultural environment. It aimed to increase the production and use of bioenergy by farmers (biogas, bioheat, energy crops), supporting them in determining the

profitability and feasibility of different bioenergy

options.

2010-13

11

BE, DE,

ES, IT, PL, NL

1.2

BioEUParks

Exploiting the potentialities of solid biomasses in EU

Parks.

LEGAMBIENTE, Italia

www.bioeuparks.eu

The aim of the project was to create new biomass supply chains from sustainably managed forests and from agricultural residues in national parks in Austria, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Romania and

Slovenia. The mobilised biomass was to be used in heating and CHP plants. The project was particularly focused on starting up local biomass supply chains in Nature Parks in EU countries, promoting short chains and small-scale

installations. A methodology was developed involving discussions, sharing and co-planning

between the key actors in order to overcome possible social conflicts.

2013-16

10 AT, EL, HU, IT,

SK 1.3

http://www.basisbioenergy.eu/http://www.basisbioenergy.eu/http://www.bioenergyfarm.eu/http://www.bioenergyfarm.eu/http://www.bioeuparks.eu/http://www.bioeuparks.eu/



EUR 2016.6932 EN 13



n

# Project Partner

s

Countries

Total Budget (€m)

Bio-HEAT Promotion of Short Rotation Coppice for District Heating Systems in Eastern Europe

BIOAZUL, Spain

www.bio-heat.eu

The aim of the project was to promote the use of Short Rotation Coppice (SRCs) as a source of

energy for District Heating (DH) in Eastern European countries in order to set up regional SRC

to DH chains.

2010-12

9

CZ, DE, LI, PL,

RO, SK, SV, ES

0.8

BiomassTradeCentre II

Development of Biomass Trade and Logistics Centres for Sustainable Mobilisation

of Local Wood Biomass Resources.

SFI, Slovenia

www.biomasstradecentre

2.eu

The aim of the project was to trigger investments

in new bioenergy business, new biomass trade and logistic centres and promote new bioenergy supply contracts by bringing together interested key actors in workshops, one-to-one meetings, study visits and open days. Creation of a network of biomass quality laboratories and promoting the implementation of CEN quality standards.

Demonstration of modern technologies for wood

biomass production chains to forest owners, farmers, forest entrepreneurs and SMEs in rural areas.

2011-14

11

AT, HR,

DE, EL, IE, IT,

RO, SV, SP

1.6

Cross Border Bioenergy (CBB)

Cross-border markets for the European bioenergy industry

AEBIOM, EU

www.crossborderbioenerg

y.eu

The aim of the project was to help SMEs to evaluate bioenergy markets in Europe with a view to develop cross-border investments. The project aimed to help SMEs to evaluate bioenergy market (biogas,

small scale heating, district heating, CHP and biofuels for transport) attractiveness relevant to cross-border investments and support to B2B activities. The European Biomass Association and

nine bioenergy trade associations located in Austria, Denmark Germany, Finland, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Sweden and Slovakia were involved.

2010-13

12

AT, DE,

DK, FI, HU, IT, LV, SE,

SK

0.9

EPIC 2020 Symbiotic bio-Energy Port Integration with Cities by

2020.

City of

Malmö, Sweden

www.epic2020.eu

The aim of the project was to build capacity and know-how to promote the most efficient use of

available bioenergy resources within ports and port regions. It promoted the establishment of symbiotic relationships between industries located

2013-16

10 SE, IT, DE, EL

1.9

http://www.bio-heat.eu/http://www.bio-heat.eu/http://www.biomasstradecentre2.eu/http://www.biomasstradecentre2.eu/http://www.biomasstradecentre2.eu/http://www.crossborderbioenergy.eu/http://www.crossborderbioenergy.eu/http://www.crossborderbioenergy.eu/http://www.epic2020.eu/http://www.epic2020.eu/



EUR 2016.6932 EN 14



n

# Project Partner

s

Countries

Total Budget (€m)

close to port areas for the use of wastes for the production of bioenergy in four ports in the EU.

EUBIONET III Solutions for biomass fuel market barriers and raw

material availability.

VTT, Finland

www.eubionet.net

The aim of the project was to increase the use of biomass fuels in the EU by finding ways to overcome the market barriers. It aimed to boost

sustainable and transparent international biomass fuel trade by analysing price mechanisms, proposing CN codes for biomass fuels and identifying, evaluating and implementing

sustainability criteria and certification for biomass fuels (solid, liquid and gaseous) in cooperation with market actors. It assessed the most cost efficient and value-adding use of biomass for energy and industry and identified unexploited biomass fuels from industry and agriculture. It provided an overview of heating/cooling sector and

opportunities for biomass based systems.

2008-11

19 All 1.8

FOREST FOsteRing Efficient long term

Supply parTnerships

University of

Exeter, UK

www.forestprogramme.c

om

The aim of the project was to promote and support the development of integrated supply chains in the biomass heating sector. It did this by working directly with businesses in the biomass supply

chain, from farmers and foresters to architects and designers, to develop and consolidate long-term supply partnerships to increase end-user confidence and so encourage greater investments in renewable biomass heat. The project supported businesses through the creation of a best practice

toolkit focused on supply chain business models

and contracts, the organisation of B2B networking events and the development of direct capacity building to pilot new supply chain models and partnerships.

2010-

12 10

AT, IE, IT, PL,

ES, SE, UK

1.3

http://www.eubionet.net/http://www.eubionet.net/http://www.forestprogramme.com/http://www.forestprogramme.com/http://www.forestprogramme.com/



EUR 2016.6932 EN 15



n

# Project Partner

s

Countries

Total Budget (€m)

MixBioPellets Market Implementation of

Extraordinary Biomass Pellets.

DBFZ, Germany

www.mixbiopells.eu

The aim of the project was to promote the

production & use of alternative pellets (from agriculture residues, excluding wood) and develop a concept for a standardised labelling system for Europe.

2010-12

7

AT,

Denmark, FI,

DE, IT, ES, SE

1.0

PellCert

European Pellet Quality Certification.

AEBIOM, EU

www.pellcert.eu

The aim of the project was to develop and implement an EU certification system for pellets (ENPlus) and develop procedures to certify the sustainability of pellet production and trade.

National bioenergy and pellet associations from ten countries (Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Portugal, Spain and Sweden) and a representative of the power sector (Belgium) participated.

2011-14

12

AT, BE, FI, DE,

FR, HU, IT, PT, ES, SE

0.9

Promobio Promotion of regional

bioenergy initiatives.

Metla, Finland

www.promobio.eu

The aim of the project was to provide support to

the regional bioenergy initiatives and to facilitate new bioenergy business projects in Eastern European countries (Poland, Romania and Slovakia) where potentials in particular of forest and agricultural biomass have been utilised insufficiently as renewable energy sources. Best

bioenergy practices and successful business models from the partner countries Finland and Austria were tested and transferred to the target regions.

2011-14

8 PL. RO,

SV 0.9

SolidStandards

Enhancing the

Implementation of Quality and Sustainability Standards and Certification Schemes

for Solid Biofuels.

WIP, Germany

www.solidstandards.eu

The aim of the project was to support the implementation of EU standards for solid biofuels

by delivering training, by implementing the standards in selected companies (in Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Germany, Finland and Poland) and by collecting feedback on biomass standards from the stakeholders.

2011-14

11

AT, BG, HR, DK, DE, FI,

PO

1.4

http://www.mixbiopells.eu/http://www.mixbiopells.eu/http://www.pellcert.eu/http://www.pellcert.eu/http://www.promobio.eu/http://www.promobio.eu/http://www.solidstandards.eu/http://www.solidstandards.eu/



EUR 2016.6932 EN 16



n

# Project Partner

s

Countries

Total Budget (€m)

SRC-Plus Short Rotation Woody Crops (SRC) plantations for local

supply chains and heat use.

WIP,

Germany

www.srcplus

.eu

The aim of the project is to support and accelerate the development of local supply chains of Short Rotation Woody Crops (SRC) by implementing various capacity building measures and regional

mobilisation actions for the key actors in local

supply chains. Sweden will transfer its best practice, know-how and experience to the target regions.

2014-17

On-

going

10

HY, CZ, FR, DE,

EL, LV,

MK

1.4

SUCELLOG Triggering the Creation of

Biomass Logistic Centres by the Agro-Food Sector.

CIRCE, Spain

www.sucellog.eu

The aim of the project is to increase the

participation of the agrarian sector in the sustainable supply of solid biofuels in Europe. The project action focuses on the implementation of biomass logistic centres in the agro-industry, using the large synergy existing between the agro-food economy and the bio-economy.

2014-17

On-going

7 AT, FR, DE, IT,

ES

Unknown

Whs Woodheat Solutions

Forestry Commissi

on, UK

www.woodheatsolutions.

eu

The aim of the project was to mobilise wood

biomass potential for heat generation from private unmanaged/under-managed forests and from agricultural land by increasing cooperation among farmers and forest owners, promoting new quality assurance standards for solid biofuels. Transfer of

knowledge to target countries from Finland and Austria.

2008-11

6 SV, HY,

UK 1.0

http://www.srcplus.eu/http://www.srcplus.eu/http://www.sucellog.eu/http://www.sucellog.eu/http://www.woodheatsolutions.eu/http://www.woodheatsolutions.eu/http://www.woodheatsolutions.eu/



EUR 2016.6932 EN 17

Biogas & Biomethane IEE II projects



n

#

Project Partners

Countries

Total

Budget (€m)

BioEnergy Farm II Manure, the sustainable

fuel for the farm.

CCS, The

Netherlan

ds

www.bioenergyfarm.eu

BioEnergy Farm II is based on the previous experience and lessons learnt from the original

BioEnergy Farm. The project focuses on micro-scale biogas installations that mainly use own

manure and feed leftovers of the farm. This can increase the amount of sustainable energy produced on farms, by assisting farmers to assess the feasibility of business plans. The project proposal estimated that it should result in an

increase of 60 MW of biogas capacity installed

2014-17

On-going

13

BE, DK,

FR, DE, IT, NL,

PO

1.9

Biogas Heat Development of sustainable

heat markets for biogas plants in Europe.

Ekodoma, Latvia

www.biogasheat.org

The aim of the project was the creation of a handbook on ‘Sustainable Heat use from Biogas Plants’, running 90 pre-feasibility studies on strategies and business models for the utilisation of heat from biogas plants as well as formulating

policy recommendations.

2012-15

10

AT, BE, HY, CZ, DK, DE,

IT, PO,

RO

1.4

BIOGAS3 Sustainable Small-scale

biogas production from agro-food waste for energy

Self-sufficiency.

Ainia, Spain

www.biogasheat.org

The aim of the project was to promote the

sustainable production of renewable energy from biogas obtained from agricultural residues and food and beverage industry wastes in small-scale projects for energy self-sufficiency.

2014-16

10

FR, DE, IE, IT, PO, ES,

SW

1.4

BiogasIN Sustainable biogas market development in Central and

Eastern Europe.

EIHP, Croatia

www.biogasin.org

The aim of the project was to create a sustainable

biogas market in Central and Easter Europe (CEE) by addressing market barriers, specifically building capacity in the public sector and to create awareness of the technology. The project undertook training of biogas market actors, improvement of permit procedures and facilitation

of access to finance for new biogas plants based on the experience of German partners.

2010-12

10

HY, BG,

CZ, EL, LV, RO,

SV

1.5

http://www.bioenergyfarm.eu/http://www.bioenergyfarm.eu/http://www.biogasheat.org/http://www.biogasheat.org/http://www.biogasheat.org/http://www.biogasheat.org/http://www.biogasin.org/http://www.biogasin.org/



EUR 2016.6932 EN 18



n

# Project

Partners

Countries

Total Budget

(€m)

Biomaster Biomethane as an

Alternative Source for Transport and Energy

Renaissance.

ISIS, Italy www.biomast

er-project.eu

The aim of the project was to promote the use of biomethane as transport fuel in four European regions by a consortium covering the entire supply

chain (waste-to-wheel). The project aimed to stimulate investments and remove non-technological barriers, through the creation or

revitalisation of biomethane networks; promotion of investments in biogas plants, grid injection points and filling stations; production of adapted recommendations for policy makers; analysis of

the engine and storage possibilities, etc.

2011-

14 17

IT, PO,

SW, UK 2.4

Biomethane regions Promotion of BioMethane

and its Market Development through Local and Regional

Partnerships

Severn

Wye Energy Agency

Limited, UK

www.bio-methaneregio

ns.eu/

The aim of the project was to focus on the increased production of biogas and its efficient conversion to usable energy. The project focused on achieving this through the development of new digesters; the optimisation of existing digesters to produce more biogas; switching of gas utilisation

from electricity generation to biomethane production; and increased utilisation of heat from combined heat and power units.

2011-14

15

AT, BE,

DE, IT, SE, FR, HR, SK,

UK, DK, HU

1.6

FABbiogas Biogas production from

organic waste in the European Food and

Beverage industry.

TUV,

Austria

www.fabbiog

as.eu

The aim of the project was to trigger the implementation of biogas units in food and beverage industry or supply contracts between the

food and beverage industry and biogas plants for the use of food waste as renewable energy resource.

2013-

15 9

AT, CZ, FR, DE, IT, PO

1.1

Farmagas

Biogas Production from Agricultural Wastes in

European Farms.

TTZ, Germany

www.farmagas.eu

The aim of the project was to train farmers in high biogas potential areas, based on the materials prepared in the FP7 project AGROBIOGAS, which

developed useful materials and information for farmers about the potential of their agricultural wastes and different crops to produce biogas. The project achieved widespread dissemination of knowledge, tools and guidelines; exchange of

2009-11

5 HU, PO,

RO 0.6

http://www.biomaster-project.eu/http://www.biomaster-project.eu/http://www.bio-methaneregions.eu/http://www.bio-methaneregions.eu/http://www.bio-methaneregions.eu/http://www.fabbiogas.eu/http://www.fabbiogas.eu/http://www.farmagas.eu/http://www.farmagas.eu/



EUR 2016.6932 EN 19



n

# Project

Partners

Countries

Total Budget

(€m)

information on

Documents

Review of bioenergy projects implemented under …...Please cite this publication as: Howes P., Groves L. et al. (2016) Review of bioenergy projects implemented under Intelligent Energy