Suchergebnisse

Pursuit of the Bioeconomy (BE) and the Circular Economy (CE) is high on the political agendas of many countries. Application of the concepts is intended to ameliorate a number of sustainability challenges, such as raw material constraint concerns and global warming. The concepts of BE and CE are increasingly combined to describe a 'circular bioeconomy' (CBE), which emphasises value retention for renewable resources and increased circularity in material cycles. Embedding these CE principes is anticipated to ameliorate sustainability weaknesses associated with the BE. Biorefineries, the focal point for this discussion, are perceived as essential infrastructure items within such concepts. The work focuses on the forest industries, a leading bioeconomy sector. This study draws upon a review of extant literature on the BE, CE and biorefinery concepts to summarise a set of working principles aligned with high levels of socio-economic and environmental performance. These are deemed to operationalize these concepts as parts of the concept of the circular bioeconomy. Analysis is then performed to compare a set of 22 forest biorefinery initiatives in Finland and Sweden to the working principles, and assess how the expectations are met in practice. Overall, the study finds that expectations of increased value added of the products and increased sustainability through closing the material loops are rarely met. That is, very few characteristics compliant with visions for the circular bioeconomy were found. We conclude that while a CBE framing offers insights that can help a bioeconomy sector such as forestry become more sustainable, there is a lack of consistency and coherence in the manner in which CE and BE concepts are communicated and applied. Further, it is suggested that biorefinery proponents may benefit from clearer framing and promotion of their endeavours. While scholarly works suggest this may have potential to defray trust and undermine perceptions of reliability among potential supporters or partners, we deem that further work is needed to assess whether, or how this is so. Areas of relevance for research include assessment of the actual function, and likely impacts of inconsistent use of the concepts upon the societal, industrial, and political support. ; Peer reviewed

Enhancing the bioeconomy is high on the political agenda of many countries and visible in the communications of companies in forest based industries. Bioeconomy promises to help reduce the use of non-renewable natural resources and contribute to reduced greenhouse emissions, but these promises are not always clearly validated. Another concept driven by global raw material pressures is the circular economy offering solutions for a system approaching a closed loop, where by design the products are reused, refurbished or recycled rather than disposed of as waste. In recent times, these two attractive concepts have been combined to circular bioeconomy, which emphasizes the need for sparing use of renewable resources. Biorefineries are often seen as essential building blocks in a bioeconomy and even circular bioeconomy. However, a biorefinery only represents one single step in the production chain which can be either linear or circular depending on the later stages of the value chain. Therefore, it is oxymoronic to discuss circular economy in the context of biorefineries. On the other hand, there are potential developments in biorefineries which by design enhance their participation in a circular system. Using existing cases in Finland and Sweden, we analyze the possibilities for biorefineries to become an increasingly important element of a circular bioeconomy, the barriers met and the policies needed to support the development. ; peerReviewed

This work is underlain by broad-based expectations that policy interventions such as EU 2020 goals for renewable energy will continue to drive increased international trade in biomass for energy. This work focuses on where and how large volumes of biomass for bioenergy may be brought to the market in the short to medium term and sought insights in the following areas: • the manner in which demand for biofuels can be driven by political goals; • the realism of expectations that biofuels can achieve political goals; • the nature of production/consumption structures and potential in different regions; • competence and resource needs for international bioenergy trade; • the nature of synergies and competition with incumbent industries. The work first examines immaturity and diversity in the bioenergy industry, and then presents and dissects policy cases to examine policy-making strengths and weaknesses. Management literature for emerging industrial sectors and policy literature are then used to support analysis of challenges posed by diversity in geographical, socio-economic conditions, and by energy carrier and supply chains differences. Arguments are then developed that a significant contribution to progress can be made by enhancing collective action; 'standardisation' of 'bioenergy offerings'; building the profession and professionalism; by improved interplay with other industries and stakeholders, and by improved input to policy-making processes. The report then presents quantifications for biomass resources potentially available in the near to medium term. These include residue flows from agriculture and forestry, and new dedicated agriculture-derived feedstock supply systems. Importantly, modelling supporting this analysis indicates that there is substantial scope for land-minimizing growth of world food supply. This is feasible through efficiency improvements in the food chains from existing land-in-use. Scenarios presented here indicate that it is feasible to reduce global agricultural requirements some 230 Mha from current levels while still meeting dietary requirements (mainstream FAO estimates indicate expansion by 280Mha). This provides significant scope for expansion of dedicated energy crops. If higher productivity is combined with dietary changes toward less land-demanding food, then agricultural area available for biomass-for-energy could increase to some 1000 Mha. The discussions in this report – institutional, supply chain, and biomass-bioenergy potential – all find common themes that point towards needs for enhanced sectoral action. These include: increased bioenergy-industry professionalism, aligned and consistent forms of collective action, strategic efforts to markedly increase public and political acceptance, more synergistic alliances with incumbent industries, careful application of third-party assessment schemes, the building of resilient technology strategies, and the consistent sourcing of biomass via pathways that remain accepted (legitimate) in the eyes of critical stakeholders. This analysis concludes that many of the constraints or 'barriers' being experienced by the sector can be anticipated by examination of ongoing events through management and policy assessment lenses. This in turn indicates that guidance is available for action, both in theory, and by building upon the documented experiences of other emerging sectors. However, it is also concluded that more evidence from the field is vital to enrich this work and the value it may offer the sector. The report closes with brief delineation of research work required to better document where, how and when the industry might act to more effectively – and legitimately – unlock the potential of bioenergy on a global scale. It also calls for dissemination of this report in global bioenergy networks as a seed for future work for the international bioenergy community.

Biomass and Bioenergy Vol.38 Nr.March, 117-127 ; Policy-makers apply multiple policy instruments simultaneously in the climate and energy policy field at both EU and Member State levels. This creates interactions between instruments that can be complementary and synergistic but also conflicting. This article focuses on the interactions of climate policy instruments and their impact on biomass use. The objectives are to examine interactions of the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) with the main national climate policy instruments and to identify the influence of these on biomass use. The work draws experiences from seven EU countries (Austria, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden and the United Kingdom), with a special focus on Finland and Sweden. The analysis explores the effects of policy interactions and is based on an examination of literature, and interviews with biomass experts in research, industry and policy spheres. Results indicate that the combined effects of climate policy instruments have a tangible impact on biomass use, whereas the causal links to the EU ETS are difficult to assess separately. Policy impacts found include increased competition for biomass resources, changes in fuel mixes and a contribution to upward pressure on wood prices. Differences in these effects are linked to differing national policy mixes and energy-carrier portfolios - an example being the relative differences in the importance of peat to the energy mix in Finland and Sweden. Analysis and comparison of the effects in the selected countries can yield insight on how to improve the design of policy interventions that impact biomass use. This study confirms the importance of identifying interactions between policy instruments so as to recognise - and manage - synergies and conflicts. The development of more synergistic and coordinated policy instrument mixes would also be beneficial for the bioenergy field

Forest industry portfolio diversification into transport fuels is important for Swedish climate and energy policy goal achievement, and for Swedish forest industry competitiveness. This paper presents the research background and methodology for a project that examines constraints/drivers to the expansion of Swedish forest-derived transport biofuels. It focuses on the interaction of innovation niches with the incumbent socio-technical regime, and the interplay of innovators as they seek to advance their technology systems. The study is on going and about to enter field interviews using this preparatory work as a base. Literature reviews, interviews and web-survey(s) are to deliver improved understanding of the positions/views and activities of transportation biofuel producers, heavy transport motor platform developers, and incumbent petrochemical industry actors. The investigation addresses a) synergies or competition for resources or political support; b) proponent strategies in forest, biofuel and petrochemical sectors; c) general 'viability perceptions' for leading fuel-engine systems/pathways. It is to provide improved knowledge for decision-making to policy makers, industry, and researchers, regarding the structural function of important regime level drivers and constraints – and where policy interventions are a help/hinder to desired progress. This article delivers the theoretical considerations, research approach, and a mapping of research targets. ; QC 20150709

VTT Tiedotteita - Research Notes 2441 ; The study carried out within the Bioenergy Network of Excellence analyses the implementation of important EU directives and policies relating to bioenergy in Europe to identify major RD&D needs in the field. Major EU directives, commonly known as the Promotion of Renewable Electricity, Biofuels and Landfill Directives, along with the EU Emissions Trading Scheme and parts of the Common Agricultural Policy, are some of the most important drivers behind the growth of bioenergy in the EU27 today. The report compares how Germany, Finland and the Netherlands have implemented the directives, examining the policy frameworks in each country and the plans and mechanisms in place to reach national targets. A wider European perspective for each directive is then drawn out, and recommendations for RD&D actions to meet the EU directive targets or obligations in each area are outlined. The report also takes a broader look at the effects the EU Emissions Trading Scheme and the Common Agricultural Policy are having on the use of biomass in the EU with RD&D recommendations for each area. Bioenergy NoE advocates stronger communication and co-operation among various EU-wide projects and initiatives focusing on bioenergy development. Industry commitment to RD&D projects is, however, the only direct path for bringing state-of-the-art technology and products to market. Building sustainable production pathways and addressing competition with food products is crucial to developing environmentally-sound biofuels. Research in renewable electricity from biomass should prioritize development of higher efficiency power production and power-to-heat ratios in combined heat and power plants over new technology development. In the biofuels field, RD&D should prioritize the development of more sustainable, second generation biofuels. To meet landfill diversion targets, thermal conversion and energy recovery of municipal solid waste in some EU countries will have to increase. Meeting the European targets set for 2020 requires significant technology development in order to introduce a new generation of biofuels and feedstocks: this is the focus for Bioenergy NoE RD&D.

The scope of the compendium covers many parts of theemerging circular economy. We choose to place considerablefocus on some of the substances that we extract from theground – in particular raw materials and critical materials.We focus on circularity in these areas, because presentlywe use too much, too fast, and we are not re-using nearlyenough. In turn, this approach demands that we look atthe technologies that rely on such materials, and howbusinesses are innovating to make circularity of materialsa reality.This document provides many concrete examples of whatwe mean by sustainable materials management. We presentcutting edge insights on a range of topics.• Why raw material supply chains are important to society?• How circularity can benefit us?• Where changes in our economies are required?• Who needs to be involved?• What businesses are doing to make the circular economya reality?• How governments and regulators can support the circulareconomy?