1. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Technologies (and their role for sustainable bioenergy) 1 st Workshop ESSP Bioenergy – Bioenergy and Earth Sustainability. Escola Superior de Agricultura “ Luiz de Queiroz” Piracicaba - Brazil, July 19-22, 2008. André Faaij Copernicus Institute - Utrecht University Task Leader IEA Bioenergy Task 40 Member Steering Group BIOPEC Initiative

2. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Integration… Pfff, it’s complex…

3. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Key bioenergy utilisation routes

4. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Bioenergy today 45 EJ + 10 EJ total use 9 EJ + 6 EJ commercial; non-modern ~ 8 EJ Modern; commercial: –< 1 EJ electricity –~ 2.5 EJ heat –~ 1.5 EJ biofuels (bulk = ethanol; half of that ethanol sugar cane based) Main controversy on biofuels from annual crops and palm oil. Currently some 20 Mha in use for biofuels worldwide (compared to 5,000 Mha for food)

5. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Combustion; workhorse of bio-energy… Efficiency: from 20 – 40% CHP: 60 - <80% Capacity: 20 – 250 MWe … Economics OK with residues

6. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Power Station Kymijärvi, Lahti Finland

7. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Future BIG/CC technology -> Current status: ~3500 U$/kWe, 30% electrical efficiency, ACFB, ~10 Mwe -> Future:~1500,- U$/kWe, ~50% efficiency, (ACFB..), >100 MWe -> Ultimate: 55% eff., PCFB, HT gas cleaning >200 MWe Cost of electricity: ~ 10 U$ct/kWh -> 3-4 U$ct/kWh, almost doubling of electrical output [Faaij, van Ree et al., 1998]

8. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Perennial crops (vs. annual crops) Lower costs (< 2 €/GJ) Planted for 15-25 years Low(er) intensity – Can restore soil carbon and structure – Suited for marginal/degraded lands – Requires less inputs (well below key threshold values) Wide portfolio of species & production systems – Possibilities for enhancing (bio-) diversity – Adaptable to local circumstances (water, indigenous species) Earlier development stage – Large scale and diverse experience needed – Learning curve to be exploited – Improvement potential Miscanthus x giganteus

9. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Yields: perennials ~3x annual CropBiomass yield (odt/ha* yr) Energy yield in fuel (GJ/ha*yr) Wheat4 - 5~ 50 Corn5 – 6~ 60 Sugar Beet9 – 10~ 110 Soy Bean1 – 2~ 20 Sugar Cane10 – 11~ 180 Palm Oil10-15~ 160 Jathropha5-6~ 60 SRC temperate climate10 – 15100 - 180 SRC tropical climate15 - 30170 - 350 Energy grasses good conditions10 - 20170 – 230 Perennials marginal/degraded lands3 - 1030 – 120

10. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Bioethanol from lignocellulosic biomass 1.SHF 2.SSF 3.SSCF 4.CBP +BIG/CC… Major demonstrations In US/Canada, EU

11. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Synthetic fuels from biomass Biomass & coal gasification to FT liquids - with gas turbine Power Pre-treatment: - grinding - drying feedstock is poplar wood Gasification: - air or oxygen - pressurised or atmospheric - direct/indirect Gas cleaning: - ‘wet’ cold or ‘dry’ hot FT liquids Offgas Recycle loop FT synthesis: - slurry reactor or fixed bed Gas turbine Gas processing: - reforming - shift - CO 2 removal Major investments in IG-FT capacity ongoing in China right now: - Reducing dependency on oil imports! - Without capture strong increase in CO2 emissions… About 50% of carbon!

12. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management What are we waiting for? Yueyang Sinopec-Shell Coal gasification project; (China) Shell gasifier arriving at site September 2006. 15 licences in China at present… Courtesy of Shell

13. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Economic performance 2 nd generation biofuels s.t. & l.t.; 3 Euro/GJ feedstock [Hamelinck & Faaij, 2006, Energy Policy]

14. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management GHG Balances (without indirect land-use changes) IEA – Fulton, 2004

15. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Composing chains… Source: Hamelinck, Faaij, 2005

16. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Technological learning; improvement potentials and development pathways. Detailed bottom –up analyses of bio- energy systems. Breakdown of factors in conversion, supply lines and biomass (crop) production. Essential for implementation Many case studies, methodology development & applied research.

17. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Cost reduction potential in 2 nd generation technologies. [Wit, Junginger, Faaij, 2008]

18. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Total learning system for biomass-fuelled power plants producing electricity Source: Junginger, Faaij et al., 2005

19. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Experience curve for primary forest fuels in Sweden and Finland (1975 and 2003). Source: Junginger Faaij et al., 2005

20. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Experience curve for the average and marginal production cost of electricity from Swedish biofuelled CHP plants from 1990-2002 Source: Junginger, Faaij et al., 2005

21. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Experience curve of sugarcane production 1975 – 2004 Experience curve for total hydrated ethanol (1975- 2004) excluding feedstock [Wall Bake et al., Biomass & Bioenergy, 2008]

22. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Examples of various sugarcane cost breakdowns in Sao Paulo 1976-2005 [Wall Bake et al., Biomass & Bioenergy, 2008]

23. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Cost breakdowns of industrial ethanol production process excl. feedstock [Wall Bake et al., Biomass & Bioenergy, 2008]

24. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Estimated future costs of sugarcane and ethanol production assuming 8% annual growth Explaining the experience curve: Cost reductions of Brazilian ethanol from sugarcane J.D. van den Wall Bake, M. Junginger, A. Faaij, T.Poot, A. da Silva Walter Biomass & Bioenergy, 2008

25. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Ethanol plants US (status 2006) Source: John Urbanchuk (data for Oct 31 2006; green = operating, red = under construction) Global ethanol Production & outlook

26. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Corn production costs 60% reduction in costs per bushel Still 38% reduction in costs per acre (so without yield increase influences) [Hettinga, 2007]

27. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Corn production costs -64% -46% -63% +171% [Hettinga, 2007]

28. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Source: Adapted from Pioneer, NCGA (ProExporter Network) Development: yield increase Open pollinated Hybrids Single cross hybrids Genetic modification? [Hettinga, 2007]

29. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Ethanol operating costs -75% ? [Hettinga, 2007]

30. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Experience curve: operating costs [Hettinga, 2007]

31. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Yield developments in Europe Historic yield development  example: wheat Average yields plotted for The Western European Countries The Central and Eastern European Countries Significant difference! [Wit & Faaij, 2008]

32. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Yield projections Europe Observed yield CEEC and WEC Linear extrapolation of historic trends Widening yield gap Applied scenarios Low, baseline and high [Wit & Faaij, 2008]

33. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Results - spatial production potential Arable land available for dedicated bio-energy crops divided by the total land [Wit & Faaij, 2008]

34. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Results - spatial cost distribution Production cost (€ GJ -1 ) for Grassy crops [Wit & Faaij, 2008]

35. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Results – cost-supply curves Production costs vs. supply potential for 2010, 2020 and 2030 Variation areas indicated around the curves represent uncertainties and scenario variables. Only CEEC cost level increases [Wit & Faaij, 2008]

36. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management 1 EJ (ExaJoule) = 24 Mtoe 1 st generation 2 nd generation Crop specific supply curves Feedstock potentials Produced on 65 Mha arable and 24 Mha on pastures (grass and wood) Significant difference between ‘1st and 2nd generation crops’ Supply potentials high compared to demand 2010 (0,78 EJ/yr) and 2020 (1,48 EJ/yr) [Wit & Faaij, 2008]

37. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Development in net feedstock use for biofuels (REFUEL project; example scenario) [www.refuel.org, 2008]

38. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Closing remarks Technological and management improvements key factor: –Agricultural (and livestock) management! –Energy cropping & supply systems –Conversion. Technological learning and improvement potentials still fairly poorly covered in analyses around bioenergy (potentials & projections), agriculture a.o (especially 2 nd generation and beyond!). Combination of bottom-up engineering work and modelling generally gives good results. Takes considerable effort.

39. Copernicus Institute Sustainable Development and Innovation Management Thanks for your attention For more information, see e.g. IEA Task 40: www.bioenergytrade.org: Key References: Junginger, Faaij et al., 2005 Smeets et al., 2007, Progress in Energy & Combustion Science, Hoogwijk et al., 2005 & 2008, Biomass & Bioenergy Hamelinck & Faaij, 2006, Energy Policy Dornburg et al.,2008 Biomass Assessment WAB Wicke et al., 2008, Biomass & Bioenergy Wall Bake et al., 2008, Biomass & Bioenergy Wit & Faaij, 2008, REFUEL – (Forthcoming) Hettinga et al., 2009 (forthcoming).