Upload
vivian
View
48
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The impacts of lignocellulosic biomass-based biofuel production on land use changes in Europe. By Anabelle Couleau (PhD Student) & Dr. David Laborde (IFPRI). International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR ), 2013, Ravello . Introduction. Introduction. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
1
The impacts of lignocellulosic biomass-based biofuel production on land use changes in EuropeBy Anabelle Couleau (PhD Student)& Dr. David Laborde (IFPRI)
International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR), 2013, Ravello
2
Introduction• 4.7% share of 1st gen biofuels is estimated to have generated 25.5
Million Tons CO2eq savings, based on NREAPs
• BUT account for ILUC may reduce or cancel GHG savings attributed to biofuels
• Growing interest for 2nd generation biofuels and design of EU biofuel policy led us to consider ILUC for cellulosic feedstocks & biofuels
• Although some are arguing that second generation would not be in competition with food markets, and so ILUC free
• Lignocellulosic biomass (2 types : Ag. Residues and Dedicated Energy Crops) is competing on production factors and so on land with food crops and pasture.
Introduction
3
EU biofuel legislation• iLUC are not subject to reporting requirements
under current legislation !
• Limiting 1st generation ?
• October, 2012 => European Commission : Proposed to limit 1st gen biofuels in transport mix at 5% by 2020 (currently 10%)• April, 2013 => Parliament (Lepage's proposal) : No limitation 1st gen but iLUC reporting and binding + incentives 2nd generation => In both they are considering 2nd generation biofuels.
Introduction
4
European 2G biofuels consumption forecasts ?
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
0
127
166
38
292
261
0
180
50
156
022
1
400
40
0 013
155
242
8
111
60
0
252
94
0
Biofuel estimation consumption in transportation in European countries by 2020. (Source: NREAPs, 2011) Austria
BelgiumBulgariaCyprusCzech RepublicDenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIrelandItalyLatviaLithuaniaLuxembourgMaltaNetherlandsPolandPortugalRomaniaSlovakiaSloveniaSpainSwedenUK
Kto
e
Introduction
5Introduction
Plants demonstration start date feedstock Final product location Plant Owner technology provider enzyme provider
INBICON EC demonstration Dec-09 Wheat straw Lignocellulosic
EthanolKalundborg, Denmark DONG Energy A/S Inbicon A/S
- Vogelbusch
Abengoa Salamanca EC demonstration
Sep-09 Straw (barley, wheat, …)
Lignocellulosic Ethanol
Babilafuente, Salamanca Spain
Abengoa Bioenergy, S.A.
Abengoa Bioenergy New Technologies, S.A.
Abengoa Bioenergy, S.A. + Genencor + Novozymes
Chemtex EC demonstration Jul-11 Giant Reed (perennial
Grass)Lignocellulosic Ethanol
Piedmont Region, Italy Chemtex Italia srl
Technology will be developed in the BIOLYFE project.
Novozymes
Abengoa Arance EC demonstration Jun-13 Forest residues,
Agricultural residuesLignocellulosic Ethanol
Arance (64) (France)
Abengoa Bioenergy, S.A.
Abengoa Bioenergy, S.A. Abengoa
Bioenergy, S.A. + Novozymes
Source : Author’s compilations from http://biomap.kcl.ac.uk, accessed in June 2013
EU cellulosic ethanol plants
6
Technologies
Biochemical=> Enzymatic digestion
Thermochemical=> gazeification (700 C, Syngas)
Cellulosic Ethanol
Cellulosic Fischer Tropsch
Diesel (FTD)Crops residues-corn stover-wheat strawDedicated energy crops-Miscanthus-Switchgrass
Cellulosic biomass
Processing routes Second-Generation Biofuels
Introduction
7
Research Question•Are 2nd generation really ILUC “free”?
•In the negative,
Introduction
what are the main drivers related to ILUC for 2nd generation biofuel? From different ligno-cellulosic materials ?
In comparison with 1st generation ?
8
Some Results from the Literature•Taheripour et al., (GTAP-BIO-ADV, general
equilibrium)•Gurgel et al., (EPPA, general equilibrium)
Literature Review
9
Crops residues : ISSUES• Removal rate and reduction yields
• Corn stover is considered the main feedstock for cellulosic ethanol production, but crop residues from small grains can also be used as bioenergy feedstock (Tarkalson et al., 2011).
• In Europe, wheat straw is expected to be a potential important feedstock for bioenergy production (Powlson et al., 2011).
• Crops residues are a direct soil organic carbon (SOC) pool. Large-scale removal of crop residues at high rates can deplete SOC pools (Blanco-canqui & Lal, 2009). So, we assume the yield will be a decreasing function of the removal rate.
Literature
10
MIRAGE-BioF: Main characteristics model
• A computable general equilibrium model (CGE)• Multi-regions (11), multi sectors (43),• A recursive, dynamic model : up to 2020• Database used: GTAP (2004)• Used in perfect competition
• In this study : extended version of MIRAGE Biof by Laborde (2011)
• Reminder : ▫ Baseline : from 2008 up to 2020▫ Scenario : National Renewable Energy Action Plans (each members
states has to released its own renewable biofuel consomptions estimations with this NREAPs document, each year).
Methodology
11
Main general assumptions• At this stage, there is no trade of 2nd generation
biofuels and specific feedstocks => design of 100% EU production
• We are first focusing on cellulosic ethanol
• Constant 1st generation ethanol consumption in the EU is assumed but the source of ethanol can still vary
• No competition between type of lignocellulosic feedstocks
Methodology
12
Modeling ChoiceWhat are initial use of crops residues ? • Option 1 : Crop residues (Wheat Straw or Corn Stover)
stay on field as a SOIL FERTILIZER
• Option 2 : Off-field use of Crops residues : livestock (feed, litter, …) => too many uncertainties are surrounding this option
Methodology
13
Modeling ChoiceWhat are initial use of crops residues ?
• Option 1 : Crop residues (Wheat Straw or Corn Stover) stay on field as a SOIL FERTILIZER
• Option 2 : Off-field use of Crops residues : livestock (feed, litter, …) => too many uncertainties are surrounding this option
Methodology
14
Modeling ChoiceWhat are initial use of crops residues ?
• Option 1 : Crop residues (Wheat Straw or Corn Stover) stay on field as a SOIL FERTILIZER▫ Soil fertilizer is not directly compensated by fertilizers. The dominant
effect is a decrease in yield▫ SOIL FERTILIZER =
Carbon and Nitrogen Soil Humidity Can not be compensated by Mineral Fertilizers
• Option 2 : Off-field use of Crops residues : livestock (feed, litter, …) => too many uncertainties are surrounding this option
Methodology
15
Modeling ChoiceWhat are initial use of crops residues ?
• Option 1 : Crop residues (Wheat Straw or Corn Stover) stay on field as a SOIL FERTILIZER▫ Soil fertilizer is not directly compensated by fertilizers. The
dominant effect is a decrease in yield
▫ Soil fertilizer is directly compensated by an add-on fertilizers. Assumption : no direct effect on the price of wheat
• Options 2 : Off-field use of Crops residues : livestock (feed, litter, …) => too many uncertainties are surrounding this option
Methodology
16
How to integrate crops residues in the model ?
▫We assume a removal rate of 30% for the EU grain harvested area supplying 2nd generation plants
▫We account for the technical constraint of carrying biomass
▫The yield is a decreasing function of the removal rate
Methodology
17
How to integrate crops residues in the model ? Two options allow to have yield endogenous to the scale of second generation production at the EU level:1. Assume a homogenous removal rate of X% on each hectare of
wheat (e.g) and yield will be a decreasing function of the removal rate (X);
2. Assume two management techniques for wheat/corn and endogenous choice of management method for each ha:
▫ normal management (crop residues stay on the field), ▫ removal of crop residues with a fixed rate of 30%.
Methodology
The second option has been selected since it has two main advantages:
▫ well suited to account for technical constraint of carrying biomass (minimal threshold of removal to cover logistics costs).;
▫ Do not need to define the full relation between removal rate and yield decrease at the field level. Only a point estimate is needed.
18
Cropland Expansion in Ha by TJ
Results
Brazil CAMCarib China CIS EU27 IndoMalay LAC RoOECD RoW SSA USA World0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Wheat Straw Ethanol Corn Stover ethanol
Ha
by T
J
Source: MIRAGE-BioF Simulation
19
• The increase in demand for cellulosic ethanol leads to a net extension of the land area used for crops.
• This is the result of an increase in land area for wheat production (wheat straw scenario) and corn production (corn stover scenario) but a decrease in cropland mainly absorbed by oilseed crop production.
• In the first generation ethanol scenario (DL, 2011), the increased demands led to the extension of the land area used for the production sugar beet.
Cropland Expansion in Ha by TJ
20
Annual LUC of EU consumption, 20 years
Results
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
1012
14
16
gCO
2eq/
MJ
1st generation Ethanol
2nd generation Ethanol
21
Discussion on ILUC results• Differences within 2nd gen. : yield/conversion
rate.
• Differences 1st vs 2nd gen. :▫No DDGS effects in 2nd generation case,▫Required cropland expansion for 2nd generation
case is significantly reduced,▫Conversion rate.
• Differences 2nd gen in MIRAGE-Biof & GTAP-BIO-ADV : design of cropland-pasture land use allocation.
Interpretation / Discussion
22
Sensitivity Analysis•We still need to test the sensitivity of
ILUC results with respect to changes in :▫Conversion rate of biomass into cellulosic
ethanol,
▫Relaxing assumptions that no added fertilizer to offset the reduction in yields.
Sensitivity Analysis
23
Conclusion : ongoing stages• Account for cellulosic ethanol co-products (Molasse, Lignin pellets)
• New feedstocks => working differently than crops residues : perennial grasses « Miscanthus » (high biomass potential in EU compared to Switchgrass)
• Integrating new technology : cellulosic biodiesel => Biomass to Liquid Fuel (FTD)
• Cellulosic biofuel (ethanol and biodiesel) industry design
• Alternatives closures
• Non linearity behavior for second gen. Biofuels
Conclusion
24
Thank you for your attention !!
25
CaveatsMay drive ILUC factors results of 2nd gen biofuels :
•Design of fertilizers markets (inherent to the model)
•Multicropping, crop rotation: general problem for land use. For 2nde gen., specific crops rotation could resolve the problem of soil fertilizer. (Farmers => crop protection, especially designed for crop residues).
Conclusion
26
EU Crop Residues specific LUC emissions Breakdown by source of emissions
Results
50%46%
4%
49%45%
6% Annual carbon release from forest biomass (gCO2eq/MJ)Annual carbon release from carbon in mine-ral soil (gCO2eq/MJ)Annual carbon release from Palm extension on Peat (gCO2eq/MJ)
Wheat straw Corn Stover