Indirect land use change (iLUC) and biogas industry - Horst Fehrenbach

1 1 October 2014 Horst Fehrenbach

ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg GmbH

Indirect Land Use Change (iLUC) and biogas industry

Horst Fehrenbach

EBA Conference 2014 Egmond aan Zee, the Netherlands, 1 October 2014

[email protected]



Overview 1 Why ILUC? 2 How to „measure“ ILUC 3 How to reduce ILUC risk 4 ILUC and biogas 5 Outlook



Why ILUC?

1

EU Energy policy goals after 2000

Increasing demand for biomass as renewable energy source (biofuel quotas)

Increased demand for crops / land use

Raised awareness of sustainability requirements

Solution: certification of production chain



Thus certification is mandatory according to EU Directive 2009/28/EC (à list of land-use-related sustainability requirements)

Why ILUC? 1

However certification … à does not cover the entire problem

à  is focussed only on direct effects

à  fails to prevent leakage effects

Since 2006 many scientific articles and reports (also by US experts) are dealing with that issue.



What is ILUC?

Why ILUC? 1

(1) certified producer:

production of feedstock for bioenergy

(2) replaces previously

grown food/feed crops on same acreage

NEW Demand: biomass for

biofuel

Ongoing Demand: food/feed

(3) replaced food/feed crops are produced elsewhere.

(4) “elsewhere” is likely

to be natural areas (e.g. Primary forest)

INDIRECT EFFECT: DEFORESTATION



Is ILUC relevant?

Why ILUC? 1

IFPRI Report (October 2011): … emissions related to land use changes driven by biofuel policies are a serious concern. This finding is robust .... The LUC effect reduces the environmental gains of the biofuel policy and should not be neglected.

Laborde, D., (2011). Assessing the Land Use Change Consequences of European Biofuel Policies, Final Report. ATLASS Consortium, Contract No SI2. 580403. Available at: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/biofuelsreportec2011.pdf



Source: IINAS/IFEU-Study for Shell (2012)

The IFPRI results (GHG emissions due to ILUC)

Why ILUC? 1

No ILUC if based on residues



How to measure ILUC

2

First of all: all current ILUC assessments are expressed by Greenhouse gas emission (g CO2eq/MJ biofuel) However: ILUC is more than just a carbon debt Ø Biodiversity Ø Food security Ø  local energy security Ø Water scarcity



The indirectness counteracts any straight-forward approach to „measure“ ILUC

2

Ø  It is a matter of market relations Ø  It is a matter of magnitude à There are many approaches out there, ranging

from simple assumptive approaches to highly complex econometric models.

à There is no way to avoid a large number of conventions and assumptions.

How to measure ILUC



Key issue: „who‘s responsible?“

2

Ø  ILUC to be blamed rather on the policy than on the single producer.

Ø  ILUC effects are direct effects of someone else (sectoral thinking is implicating the problem)

Ø  Tendency to differ between low-ILUC-risk and high-ILUC-risk bioenergy (favoured by EU Commission).

How to measure ILUC



How to reduce ILUC risk

How to reduce ILUC risk 3

Ø  The EU Commission is tending to phase out First Generation biofuels (from crops à ILUC) and to promote 2nd Gen. from residues/waste.

Ø  Low Indirect Impact Biofuels (LIIB) by WWF/EFPL/Ecofys §  Biofuel feedstocks produced from yield increases. §  Biofuel feedstocks produced by increasing the overall

system efficiency. §  Biofuel feedstocks produced on unused land with low

carbon stocks and low biodiversity values. §  Biofuels produced from waste.



Key issue “residues”

How to reduce ILUC risk 3

Ø  How exactly are residues defined?

Ø  What if the residue is already used for some other reasonable purpose?

Ø  Does double-counting (or even quadruple-counting) insentivise the „production“ of waste/residues?



ILUC and biogas

ILUC and biogas 4

Ø  Mode of utilization does not matter, only feedstock acquistion matters. à biogas = ILUC-relevant like any other biofuel

Ø  Biogas from crops (e.g. maize) need to be handled the same way as Biodiesel from rapeseed oder Ethanol from wheat.

Ø  Biogas from residues/waste: à consider the aspects from previous slides



Considerations on „residues“ for biogas

ILUC and biogas 4

Ø  Manure: digestion does not compete with any other potential use of manure. à no ILUC at all

Ø  Industrial residues (e.g. glycerine) is there evidence that there is no competing use? The waste character has to be justified, otherwise the feedstock is a co-product à land use to be allocated à ILUC (?)



Considerations on „residues“ for biogas

ILUC and biogas 4

Ø  Agricultural residues (e.g. straw): firstly: straw is a residue per RED definition à formally no ILUC secondly: is it actually a residue? Or rather a lucrative co-product? à industrial waste (slide before) à land use to be allocated à ILUC in actuality (?) (matter of market / magnitude)



What about „low ILUC biogas“

ILUC and biogas 4

Ø  LIIB criteria can be easily applied on biogas feedstock production:

Ø  e.g. Intercropping Ø  e.g. plants leading to yield increases along

the crop rotation Ø  e.g. integration of biogas plants leading to

increased overall system efficiency (integrated cycles which livestock à manure)



" The EU Commission is still pending the decision on how ILUC shall be handled for biofuels. Likely that crop-based biofuels will be phased out, residue-based biofuel featured.

" The EU Commission will not set mandatory requirements for biogas (heat/power) à SWD(2014) 259 final Therefore: legally no ILUC for biogas

" The discussion is ongoing anyhow §  land use is the most discussed environmental key

aspect after climate change §  Food security remains an unsolved global issue.

OUTLOOK

5



Thank you for listening

[email protected] +49 6221 4767-16

Government & Nonprofit

Indirect land use change (iLUC) and biogas industry - Horst Fehrenbach