npsb information bulletin 2 - 2013 def - rvo.nl · cooling. in november 2013, it is highly unlikely...

NPSB

Information

Bulletin

Nr. 2 - 2013

NPSB Information Bulletin [April 2013 – October 2013]

of 36


Pagina 3 van 36

Colophon

Date December, 2013 Status Final

This study was carried out in the framework of the Netherlands Programmes Sustainable Biomass by Name organisation SQ Consult Contact person Jinke van Dam and Sergio Ugarte, SQ Consult Contact persons NL Agency Jobert Winkel, Ella Lammers Although this report has been put together with the greatest possible care, NL Agency does

not accept liability for possible errors.


of 36

Contact

Netherlands Programmes Sustainable Biomass

Jobert Winkel, Ella Lammers NL Agency NL Energy and Climate Change Croeselaan 15, 3521 BJ Utrecht P.O. Box 8242, 3503 RE Utrecht The Netherlands Email: [email protected] Phone: +31 88 602 79 69 www.agentschapnl.nl/biomass Organisation

SQ Consult Jinke van Dam and Sergio Ugarte, Associate SQ Consult Tel: +31.6.39783382 P.O. Box 8239, 3503 RE Utrecht The Netherlands E-mail: [email protected] / [email protected]


Pagina 6 van 36

Index

1 Introduction ...................................................................................... 9

2 General trends ................................................................................ 10 2.1 Sustainability criteria on European level unlikely: Member States develop

criteria on national level.................................................................... 10 2.2 Stimulating advanced biomass use and cascading within the current policy

frameworks ..................................................................................... 11 2.3 Opposite views on modification of RED ............................................... 12 2.4 Co-regulation process is maturing towards common practice ................ 13 2.5 Most used certification systems on the Dutch market ........................... 13

3 Policy discussions and announcements ........................................... 15 3.1 European Commission ...................................................................... 15 3.1.1 Status on the EC proposed modifications to the RED ...................... 15 3.1.2 EP committee backs hierarchy of biomass uses .............................. 15 3.1.3 First meeting of Bioeconomy Panel Europe .................................... 16 3.1.4 Anti-dumping duties for Argentinean and Indonesian biodiesel ........ 16 3.1.5 New forest resources strategy in the EU ....................................... 16

3.2 Netherlands: Decisions and announcements ....................................... 16 3.2.1 Dutch Roadmap for Sustainable Energy: Amongst others sustainability

criteria for solid biomass ............................................................. 16 3.2.2 Ministerial Agreement on changes ................................................ 17 3.2.3 Commission Corbey advices on social responsibility and accelerating

introduction of advanced biofuels ................................................. 17 3.2.4 First reporting on sustainability solid biomass 2012 Green Deal ....... 17 3.2.5 Reporting on sustainability biofuels 2012 by Nea ........................... 17

3.3 Policy discussions in other EU Member States ..................................... 18 3.3.1 UK: UK to introduce sustainability criteria for biomass as of April 2015 . ............................................................................................... 18 3.3.2 Spain: CNE Circular established rules for the national sustainability

system. Compliance with sustainability obligations still suspended. .. 18 3.4 Non-EU policies and announcements .................................................. 18 3.4.1 United Nations: Biofuel development should not compromise food

security .................................................................................... 18 3.4.2 USA: USDA to support advanced biofuels production ...................... 19 3.4.3 USA: EPA finalized 2013 Renewable Fuel Standards ....................... 19 3.4.4 Brazil: Regulator sets new jet biofuel laws .................................... 19 3.4.5 Brazil: Support to the sugar-ethanol industry with tax cuts and

subsidies .................................................................................. 19 3.4.6 South Africa: Mandatory biofuels blending into effect ..................... 20 3.4.7 Indonesia: Government launched biofuel policy ............................. 20 3.4.8 Philippines: Update of biodiesel standard to be in line with

international specifications .......................................................... 20 3.4.9 Zimbabwe: Mandatory 10 percent blending ethanol ....................... 20

4 Sustainability certification of biomass............................................. 21 4.1 Bonsucro ........................................................................................ 21 4.2 ISCC .............................................................................................. 21 4.3 Initiative Wood Pellet Buyers (IWPB) becomes SBP .............................. 21 4.4 NTA8080 and inclusion in ITC Standards Map ...................................... 21


Pagina 7 van 36

4.5 REDcert ......................................................................................... 21 4.6 RSB: The Roundtable on sustainable biomaterials ................................ 22 4.7 RSPO: a new version of principles and criteria ..................................... 22 4.8 BIOGRACE II .................................................................................. 22 4.9 CEN/ISO developments on standardizing sustainability of bioenergy ...... 23 4.10 GBEP: first lessons learnt from pilot studies ..................................... 23

5 International co-operation / projects ............................................. 24 5.1 Biobased Industries Public Private Partnership launched ....................... 24 5.2 The Biomass Policies Project ............................................................. 24 5.3 EC: Aid for 3rd generation biorefineries .............................................. 24 5.4 European Commission: Biofuels FlightPath event "Beyond CO2:

Biokerosene, engine emissions and technical constraints" ..................... 24 5.5 FAO: New tool for the assessment of forest biomass and carbon stocks .. 24 5.6 GRFA: Biofuel Production Mandates Overview ..................................... 24 5.7 IFAD and ICRAF: Development of Alternative Biofuel Crops .................. 25 5.8 SAHYOG: Strengthening Networking on Biomass Research and Biowaste

Conversion – Biotechnology for Europe India Integration ...................... 25

6 Reports ........................................................................................... 26 6.1 AEBIOM: Forest sustainability and carbon balance ............................... 26 6.2 Ecofys: Low ILUC potential of wastes and residues for biofuels .............. 26 6.3 E-PURE: Biofuels, food security and grab lands ................................... 26 6.4 EurObser’ER annual biofuels barometer 2012 released ......................... 26 6.5 FAO and ICTSD: Global biofuel trade - How uncoordinated biofuel policy

fuels resource use and GHG emissions ............................................... 27 6.6 GIZ: Lessons learned on the procedure for the recognition of schemes .. 27 6.7 International Energy Agency (IEA) Bioenergy Task 40: Future perspectives

of international bioenergy trade ........................................................ 27 6.8 IEA Bioenergy Task 40: Low cost, Long Distance Biomass Supply Chains 27 6.9 IEA Bioenergy Task 40: History, status & outlook on securing sustainable

bioenergy supply, demand and markets ............................................. 28 6.10 IEA Bioenergy Task 40: The Science-Policy Interface on the

Environmental Sustainability of Forest Bioenergy .............................. 28 6.11 IUCN: Betting on best quality certification for biomass, soy and palm oil . .................................................................................................. 28 6.12 JRC: Carbon accounting of forest bioenergy ..................................... 28 6.13 KPMG: A roadmap to responsible soy: Approaches to increase

certification and reduce risk ........................................................... 28 6.14 NL Agency: Biomass merits of bamboo, switchgrass, wheat and rice

straw .......................................................................................... 29 6.15 NL Agency: Combining bioenergy production and food security .......... 29 6.16 NL Agency: Competition in wood waste: inventory of policies and

markets....................................................................................... 29 6.17 NL Agency: Handbook on sustainability certification of solid biomass for

energy production ........................................................................ 30 6.18 NL Agency: New tool assesses charcoal alternatives with underlying

cases .......................................................................................... 30 6.19 NL Agency: Smallholder certification in biomass supply chains,

challenges and strategies .............................................................. 30 6.20 PBL and Alterra: Climate effects of wood used for bioenergy .............. 31 6.21 UNCTAD: Wake up before it’s too late ............................................. 31 6.22 USDA GAIN: EU biofuels annual 2013.............................................. 31


Pagina 8 van 36

6.23 USDA GAIN: Bundle of biofuels annual country reports 2013 .............. 31 6.24 WWF: Searching for sustainability - Comparative analysis of certification

schemes ...................................................................................... 31 6.25 WWF: 2013 Palm Oil Buyers Scorecard ............................................ 32

7 List of important abbreviations ....................................................... 33

8 Disclaimer ....................................................................................... 35


Pagina 9 van 36

1 Introduction

This Information Bulletin is issued as part of the Netherlands Programmes Sustainable Biomass (NPSB). The NPSB Bulletin gives an overview of recent worldwide policy developments, production, trade, certification, and use of sustainable biomass. This edition focuses on the latest policy discussions, certification developments, and most important published reports. The mission of the NPSB is to promote the sustainable production of biomass around the world. This mission is in line with the Dutch policy facilitating the transition towards a biobased economy. In this context, the Dutch government launched two programmes in 2008: The Sustainable Biomass Fund and the Sustainable Biomass Import. These programmes cluster the experience and knowledge gained from the biomass-project portfolio supported by NL Agency. These programmes also support supplementary research to gain better understanding of over-arching questions. The NPSB evaluate project results in the broader context of developing a sustainable society. These evaluations take into consideration different facts such as growing economy, changing global relationships and evolution of markets. The NPSB also monitor the influence of policy developments on the biomass market in the Netherlands, Europe and in other countries. These activities result into valuable information for governments, stakeholders, and for the NPSB projects as well. This Information Bulletin summarises relevant news items and reports issued from April to October 2013. It builds on earlier published Bulletins to keep an articulated and complete overview of the evolution of sustainability of biomass in the world. The second chapter of the Information Bulletin presents the general trends happening around the European Renewable Energy Directive (RED) transposition and certification development. The third chapter focuses on the main policy discussions and announcements within the European Union (EU), the Netherlands and the rest of the world. The fourth chapter presents the latest in sustainability certification of biomass. The fifth chapter informs on relevant happenings within international co-operation and projects. And finally, the sixth chapter summarises the latest reports and publications around sustainability of biomass. The team of NL Agency for Sustainable Biomass


Pagina 10 van 36

2 General trends

2.1 Sustainability criteria on European level unlikely: Member States develop

criteria on national level

While the European Commission (EC) Consultation process early 2011 showed there is large support for binding sustainability criteria for solid and gaseous biomass, the EC has reached no agreement so far to establish binding requirements for solid and gaseous biomass for their use in electricity, heating and cooling. In November 2013, it is highly unlikely that mandatory sustainability criteria will be implemented on European level. Consequently, few Member States have started developing sustainability criteria on national level. The UK has decided to implement mandatory sustainability requirements for solid biomass for heat and electricity since early 2015. Criteria for electricity produced from biomass include increasing Greenhouse Gas (GHG) reduction targets (from 60% to 70% over time) compared to fossil fuel alternatives. Requirements on sustainable forest management, biodiversity protection, land use rights for indigenous populations and land criteria are defined as well. The social criteria go further than the ones earlier recommended by the EC Communication from 2010 (GHG savings, biodiversity protection, no conversion on carbon rich land, stimulate higher conversion efficiencies). Requirements in the UK are for all electricity generators of 1 megawatt (MW) capacity or higher. The Netherlands is developing sustainability criteria for solid biomass, based on the current standard of the NTA8080 certification scheme. The NTA8080 criteria are to be combined with additional requirements regarding indirect land use change (ILUC), sustainable forest management and carbon debt. Carbon debt is the topic of research in various reports in the last months.


Pagina 11 van 36

Other Member States such as Germany, Belgium and Poland have also developed policy initiatives in the direction of establishing mandatory criteria for solid biomass.

Considerations for the market: • European mandatory sustainability criteria for solid biomass are most unlikely; • Some Member States have started developing policies on sustainability criteria

for solid biomass on national level; • This situation calls for urgent attention to homogeneous criteria for solid

biomass across the EU to avoid the risk for fragmentation and higher costs; • Companies and suppliers need to get prepared to show traceability and to proof

compliance to sustainability requirements in Member States in which this is required.

2.2 Stimulating advanced biomass use and cascading within the current

policy frameworks

Large investments have been recently made to further explore the possibilities of the biobased economy in Europe. The European Biobased Industry Consortium is worth a €1 billion of European Union funds from the new Horizon 2020 program. Meanwhile, €2.8 billion of EU finding has been earmarked to accelerate the deployment of biobased products. The French funded Genesys project to develop zero-waste, positive-energy third generation biorefineries is granted € 39 million. Similar large investments are taking place in the US where the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has announced a 181 million US$ support of the Biorefinery Assistance Program while as well supporting the deployment of advanced biofuels through the Advanced biofuel Payment Program with another 15.5 million US$. This development goes hand in hand with ongoing policy debates on how to better design policies to promote the bioeconomy. The report “Innovating for sustainable growth: a bioeconomy for Europe” from the European Parliament calls for establishing a cascading use principle, taking into account its different segments and strengthening it at its highest levels. This report is not in line with the draft report discussed by the same Committee on the 7th Action Programme. This draft report mentioned that the cascading principle couldn’t be disconnected from the economic context of the different uses. These differences show the internal debate within the European Parliament (EP) on the cascading principle, and how to use biomass. On the advanced biofuels front, the Netherlands has made first steps on recognising the practical and legislative barriers for deploying advanced biofuels and addressing possibilities for solving those. The Ministerial Decree of May 2013 makes it now possible that refined grasses can be double counted for biofuels under certain conditions. The Commission Corbey has published its advice on the accelerated introduction of advanced biofuels. This Advice gives recommendations on how to do so. First, it recommends introducing sub-objectives for blends with advanced biofuels (while removing the possibility for double counting of certain biofuels). Secondly, stimulating innovation through grants or a revolving fund is recommended. Finally, it advices to introduce market incentives by greening the excise system and, or, by introducing a preferential government procurement policy.


Pagina 12 van 36

Considerations for the market: • The lost months, there have been more funding available to deploy and

accelerate the introduction of advanced biofuels • Policy attention to consider the cascading principle and to create more market

incentives for advanced biofuels; • This points to possibilities for a growing advanced biofuels sector, despite still

existing uncertainties; • The promotion of biobased products will accelerate the discussion on how to

best use biomass resources.

2.3 Opposite views on modification of RED

The EC proposal to modify the Renewable Energy Directive (RED) in various aspects related to sustainability of biofuels and bioliquids is facing several difficulties before a final compromise. Groups with different interests lobby in opposite directions, which result in lengthy negotiations. The approval of the RED modification is now delayed until probably the second half of 2014. In October 2012, the EC proposed to amend the RED and the Fuel Quality Directive (FQD). The general objective of the proposed amendments was to promote advanced biofuels that will help achieve substantial emission reductions and which do not directly compete with food production. The specific objectives of the proposal were fourfold: • A cap on the contribution from conventional biofuels from food crops to 5% to

the total target; • Combined with introducing advanced 60% GHG savings in biofuels produced in

new installations by 1 July 2014; • Encouraging advanced biofuels by multiple-counting towards national targets; • A reporting obligation on estimated ILUC emissions of biofuels. The proposed modifications were criticized by all different stakeholder groups in different directions. Companies producing food-crops biofuels argue that the proposed cap would jeopardise their investments. Most of the incumbent biofuel industry is also against ILUC reporting and measures. Several NGOs and companies that aim to develop advanced biofuels wanted to see, on the other hand, all these changes go faster. Discussions on policy level are fed with the publication of various reports addressing the role of biofuels on food security and the possibilities to come to solutions. The E-Pure report “Biofuels and food security - Risks and opportunities” concludes that the contribution of biofuels to price changes remained very small. The NL Agency report “Combining bioenergy production and food security” shows examples of best practices in how producing and using biomass for energy and food security can be combined. The UN Conference on Trade and Development (CTAD) report “Wake Up before it’s too late” stresses the need to make a shift in agricultural production systems. The report also questions some of the assumptions that had driven food, agricultural and trade policy in recent decades. After lengthy negotiations, the EP has voted at the end on a 6% cap this last September, along with a new 2.5% sub-target for advanced biofuels in 2020. The Parliament did not get to an approval though. Member States have now to reach an agreement on their own. This debate is ongoing since then with a new proposal end of November with a 7% cap. A final round of voting on the Bill at the


Pagina 13 van 36

European Council is planned for December 13. When undefined, the proximity of the European elections will delay a final compromise on the RED modification.

Considerations for the market: • No cap is set on the use of food crops for biofuels at this point, although this is

to be expected on the short to medium term; • Priority is given to find ways to optimize agricultural systems for food and fuel.

2.4 Co-regulation process is maturing towards common practice

Since July 2011, the EC started recognising certification schemes to demonstrate that biofuels put in the European Union (EU) market comply with the RED mandatory sustainability requirements. Only three years ago, in 2010, biofuels and feedstock production was unregulated in terms of sustainability. Fourteen EC recognised certification schemes and tools are now operating in the EU. The co-regulation process that recognises voluntary schemes for their use in the EU is an on-going learning process. The major steps to establish a sustainability system for biofuels and bioliquids in the EU market have been successful. The co-regulation process is now maturing towards common practice among the voluntary schemes. This means that there are less policy changes at Member States to transpose the EU RED to national level. Changes now occur within the operating procedures from schemes, as they need to adapt to the reality of a developing market. Schemes have started to make changes to their standards and guidance documents, as well as to implement cross-acceptance procedures among them. Scheme changes are to be approved by the EC when those changes affect the official Decision recognising them. However, there is no official procedure on how this approval should take place. As for the cross acceptance of certificates among schemes, the RED does not contain any rules or guidelines although the possibility for cross-recognition should be part of the Decision. This possibility exists for ISCC, REDcert or 2BSvS. The NL Agency report on “Scheme changes and cross-recognition” recommends to focus on monitoring scheme changes after their recognition. It also recommends improving the procedure for making those changes, and establishing some guidance for the cross-acceptance of certificates.

Considerations for the market: • Less policy changes on national level related to the transposition of EU RED are

expected as those have already happened; • Meanwhile, changes in operating procedures of schemes are continuing; • This, combined with cross-acceptance of certificates, requires awareness of the

market to understand what certificate they are choosing and what that represents.

2.5 Most used certification systems on the Dutch market

The Dutch Emissions Authority (Nea) report 2012 on biofuels shows that ISCC is the most used sustainability system for biofuels in the Netherlands. Its share on the market has increased from 57.5% in 2011 to 76.2% in 2012. Due to the possibility of cross-recognition, it is well possible that different systems are used


Pagina 14 van 36

at the beginning of the chain. The following certification systems are for the first time used on the Dutch market in 2012: Bonsucro (0.4%), NTA8080 as recognized for biofuels (2.4%) and RSB EU RED (0.2%). The Green Deal report 2013 shows that the Green Gold Label is the most used sustainability system (52.3%) for solid biomass by those parties that signed the Green Deal. This is followed by the use of SGS Laborelec (28.4%). Other systems that have only a minor share in the market are forest certification systems (SFC, FSC, PEFC) or the NTA8080 (0.6%).

Considerations for the market: • ISCC is in 2012 the sustainability certification system with the largest share on

the Dutch market for biofuels; • Due to the possibility of cross-recognition, it is well possible that other systems

are used at the biomass production side. This stresses the urgency for the market to ask for transparency as it is possible that less strict systems are presented into the Dutch market with a certificate from a stricter system;

• GGL was the certification system with the largest share on the Dutch market for solid biomass in 2012 for those parties that signed the Green Deal. The SGS Laborelec system was the second most used.

•


Pagina 15 van 36

3 Policy discussions and announcements

3.1 European Commission

3.1.1 Status on the EC proposed modifications to the RED

On 11 September the EP voted on a draft legislation to set a 6% cap on the use of traditional biofuels and a fast switchover to new biofuels from alternative sources such as seaweed and waste. The measures aim to reduce GHG emissions that result from the increasing turnover of agricultural land to biofuel production. In order to try to make up the shortfall created by the cap on first-generation fuels, the parliament said the EU should set a new 2.5% sub-target for the use of advanced, non-crop fuels made from algae or agricultural waste in 2020. Originally, the proposition had set the cap for traditional biofuels from food crops at 5%. This cap was lifted to 5.5% by the Environmental Committee (ENVI) on a vote that took place on early July 2013. The EU Industry Research and Energy Committee had recommended though raising the number to 6.5%. Biofuel companies that make the first generation biofuel have argued that the proposal would kill their business and ruin the investments they have made based on the original EU policy to encourage biofuel. They also said the science on ILUC is too uncertain to make policy around it. Rapporteur Ms Lepage, the French liberal Member of European Parliament (MEP), had submitted a proposal to negotiate with Member States on restraining the use of biofuels. The ENVI Committee blocked this proposal on October 17. Consequently, Member States. Member States will now seek a common position of their own. This debate is ongoing since then with a new proposal end of November with a 7% cap. A final round of voting on the Bill at the European Council is planned for December 13. When undefined, the approaching end of the parliamentary term in April 2014 may delay a final decision.

3.1.2 EP committee backs hierarchy of biomass uses

On May 29th, the ENVI committee of the EP adopted its report on the Bioeconomy (based on the 2012 EC Communication "Innovating for sustainable growth: a Bioeconomy for Europe"). A compromise amendment on article 10c) was voted. The EP emphasises in this report that: “bioeconomy policies must be better designed to ensure a cascading use of biomass” The report calls for the development of a legal instrument that will drive a more efficient and sustainable use of biomass; such an instrument shall establish a cascading use principle in the 'pyramid of biomass', taking into account its different segments and strengthening it at its highest levels”. This amendment is not in line with the draft report discussed by the same Committee on the 7th Action Programme for the environment, which states that: "The cascading principle cannot be disconnected from the economic context of the different uses to which the biomass resource may be put". This shows the ongoing internal debate within the EP on the cascading principle.


Pagina 16 van 36

3.1.3 First meeting of Bioeconomy Panel Europe

The 30 members of Europe's new Bioeconomy Panel met for the first time on 17 September. The panel’s aim is to take a holistic approach to bioeconomy and build bridges between the different policy areas, sectors and stakeholders to ensure its coherent development. The Panel discussed a working plan. Regarding thematic working groups, the Commission's preference is for the following three groups: biomass supply, the Bioeconomy Observatory and a group looking at the demand-side and market, including regulatory barriers.

3.1.4 Anti-dumping duties for Argentinean and Indonesian biodiesel

On May 27, the EC adopted rules to impose a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of biodiesel originating from Argentina and Indonesia. On 22 October 2013, EU Member States have agreed on imposing indeed higher duties as of end of November 2013 after further procedural steps. Argentina plans to challenge this decision at World Trade Organization (WTO). Indonesia expects its industry to appeal against the EU duties. The Argentinean “Consultora Investigaciones Económicas Sectoriales” mentions a significant drop on the production of biodiesel in the first eight months of 2013. The production dropped with 39.7% compared to lost year, reducing to an export value (602.9 million US$) of 58.4% compared to lost year. Main reasons are the anti-dumping duty combined with a lower production of soy oil and lower soybean harvests in 2011/2012.

3.1.5 New forest resources strategy in the EU

A new Forest Strategy responding to the new challenges facing forests and the forest sector has been published by the EC on 20 September. The New Forest Strategy identifies the key principles needed to strengthen sustainable forest management and to improve competitiveness and job creation, in particular in rural areas. This needs to be done while ensuring forest protection and delivery of ecosystem services. The Strategy also specifies how the EU wishes to implement forest-related policies.

3.2 Netherlands: Decisions and announcements

3.2.1 Dutch Roadmap for Sustainable Energy: Amongst others sustainability criteria for

solid biomass

On September 6, the Dutch Government, private sector and NGOs signed the “Energy Agreement for Sustainable Growth” [Energieakkoord voor duurzame groei]. Within this Agreement, parties agreed amongst others to cap the promotion of biomass in coal plants on a maximum of 25 PJ. Government incentives for large-scale use of biomass will limit itself to new coal plants and coal plants that were built in the nineties. The Agreement also states that there will be further sustainability requirements following the NTA8080. Carbon debt, ILUC and sustainable forest management (based on FSC) will be included in addition to the requirements as laid down in the NTA8080 standard. These sustainability requirements will be further formulated in consultation with government, the energy sector and environmental organizations. The consultation will make use of outcomes of earlier discussions as the ones held in the Commission Corbey.


Pagina 17 van 36

The sustainability requirements must be determined at the latest on 31 December 2014. These requirements should be further adopted in early 2015 to ensure that 25 PJ biomass will contribute to the realisation of the 14% renewable energy target in 2020.

3.2.2 Ministerial Agreement on changes

The Ministerial Decree of 31 May 31 2013 makes an adjustment around the topic of double counting of biofuels in the Regulation on Renewable Energy for Transport. The Regulation has been adapted amongst others by providing a list of materials that count double. The materials are listed in an annex of the Decree. Materials in table 1 of the annex (process waste or process residues), table 2 (waste or residues from agriculture, aquaculture, fisheries and forestry) and table 3 (non-food cellulosic material, and ligno-cellulosic materials) do count double. The materials in table 4 (product and co-product) and table 5 (other materials such as grass or starchy products) do not count double. A possibility and procedure is given to provide that materials listed in table 5 can count double under specific circumstances.

3.2.3 Commission Corbey advices on social responsibility and accelerating introduction

of advanced biofuels

The Advice on Social Responsibility of 8 April 2013 gives input to the debate about social sustainability criteria in the European biofuels policy. The Advice recommends expanding the sustainability framework for biofuels with a social framework. The Commission advises to give a central place to the principle of Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC): the principle that a community has the right to give or withhold its consent to proposed projects that may affect the lands they customarily own, occupy or otherwise use. The Commission also advises the Minister to ask companies to report on the social consequences of using biofuels. The Commission’s Advice on the Accelerated introduction of advanced biofuels from 3 September 2013 stresses the need for large investments for development. The Commission recommends three measures for stimulating this development: • Introducing sub-objectives for blends with advanced biofuels, while removing

the possibility for double counting of biofuels; • Stimulating innovation through grants or a revolving fund; • Introducing market incentives by greening the excise system and, or, by

introducing a preferential government procurement policy.

3.2.4 First reporting on sustainability solid biomass 2012 Green Deal

The first reporting on sustainability of solid biomass 2012, as agreed upon in the Green Deal, was published in September 2013. Participating producers reported about 2,025 tonnes of solid woody biomass, from which almost half (47%) came from the Netherlands. The United States, with 29%, was also a major supplier of wood pellets. Of all reported biomass more than 36% consisted of old, used wood with low sustainability risks. The remaining (64) consisted of fresh wood, from which 71% were certified. According to the participants, 15% of the fresh wood originated from residual streams.

3.2.5 Reporting on sustainability biofuels 2012 by Nea

The Nea report “Naleving jaarverplichting 2012 hernieuwbare energie vervoer en verplichting brandstoffen luchtverontreiniging” from August 2013 shows that 20% of the physically delivered raw materials of biofuels in 2012 originated from the


Pagina 18 van 36

Netherlands, which is similar to 2011. The share of raw materials from Western and Eastern Europe in 2012 amounted to over 50% and has increased at the expense of the share of North America. ISCC is the mostly applied sustainability system for biofuels that are placed on the Dutch market in 2012 ((76.2%) and its share has increased compared to 2011. The following certification systems are used for the first time on the Dutch market in 2012: Bonsucro, NTA8080 (as recognized for biofuels) and RSB EU RED. The systems 2BSvs, RBSA and REDcert only have a small share on the Dutch market in 2012. The Nea will pay more attention in 2013 to operators that have reported their sustainability systems as “unknown” (0.2%).

3.3 Policy discussions in other EU Member States

3.3.1 UK: UK to introduce sustainability criteria for biomass as of April 2015

The UK Department of Energy & Climate Change (DECC) has announced in August that, starting in 2015, the biomass industry must show its fuel is sustainable to receive financial support. According to the information released by DECC, all electricity generators of 1 MW capacity or higher that use solid biomass or biogas feedstock will be required to demonstrate that they are meeting certain sustainability criteria in order to claim support under the Renewables Obligation (RO). The DECC estimates the 1 MW threshold will cover approximately 98 percent of all biomass power generation in the U.K. In order to ensure sustainability of wood-fuel, the government stated that biomass electricity have to comply with increasing GHG reduction limits over time (60% saving in 2015, 72% in 2020 and 75% in 2025) compared to fossil fuel alternatives. Land criteria are defined as well, which will be different for virgin wood and all other non-waste biomass. New criteria for sustainable forest management are formulated paying attention to issues as sustainable harvesting rates, biodiversity protection and land use rights for indigenous populations.

3.3.2 Spain: CNE Circular established rules for the national sustainability system.

Compliance with sustainability obligations still suspended.

On 9 May 2013, the National Commission of Energy (CNE) issued a Circular establishing the operating rules of the national system for the sustainability certification of biofuels and bioliquids. The Circular establishes requirements for all economic agents along the whole biofuel production and supply chain that opt for certification with the national system. However the compliance with RED sustainability requirements is still suspended indefinitely. Earlier in February 2013, the Royal Decree Law (RDL) 4/2013 suspended for a non-defined period the obligation to comply with sustainability requirements. This RDL also established that economic agents are still obliged to present sustainability information to the CNE during this period. The presentation of information regarding sustainability, but not its compliance, is a requisite for biofuels to be counted towards the national target.

3.4 Non-EU policies and announcements

3.4.1 United Nations: Biofuel development should not compromise food security

In October 2013, The Committee on World Food Security (CFS) stressed the link between biofuels and food security, saying that the "progressive realization of the right to adequate food for all" should be a priority concern in biofuel development.


Pagina 19 van 36

On the subject of biofuels and food security, informed by a report from the High Level Panel of Experts (HLPE) on Food Security and Nutrition, the CFS noted that biofuel development encompassed "both opportunities and risks in economic, social and environmental aspects," depending on the context and practices. The report added that: "in some cases, current biofuel production creates competition between biofuel crops and food crops". The CFS encouraged FAO and other stakeholders to look at ways to help countries strengthen their capacities to assess their situation with regards to biofuels, taking into account food security concerns at global, regional and national levels, and legitimate land tenure rights.

3.4.2 USA: USDA to support advanced biofuels production

On 21 October 2013, the USDA announced the support to the production of advanced biofuels, through stimulating appropriate technologies to commercial-scale biorefineries or retrofit existing facilities. The support of 181 million US$ is part of the Biorefinery Assistance Program. In addition, the USDA announced in September 2013 the support of 188 US biofuels producers through another 15.5 million US$. This support is part of the Advanced biofuel Payment Program, also supporting advanced biofuels production under the 2008 Farm Bill.

3.4.3 USA: EPA finalized 2013 Renewable Fuel Standards

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set in August 2013 the Standard for cellulosic biofuel at 6 million ethanol-equivalent gallons. This action also sets the 2013 volume requirements for advanced biofuel and total renewable fuel at the levels required by the statute: 2.75 and 16.55 billion gallons, respectively. EPA previously set the 2013 volume requirement for biomass-based diesel in a separate action, finalizing a volume of 1.28 billion gallons. All the given volumes are ethanol-equivalent, except for biomass-based diesel, which is actual volume. EPA is providing extra time to obligated parties to demonstrate compliance with the 2013 standards by extending the compliance deadline from February 28 to June 30, 2014. The EPA Notice acknowledges that there are constraints in the market’s ability to consume renewable fuels at the volumes specified in the Clean Air Act in future years, and states that the EPA anticipates proposing adjustments to the 2014 volume requirements in the 2014 Rule to address these constraints.

3.4.4 Brazil: Regulator sets new jet biofuel laws

In June 2013, the Brazilian energy regulator ANP outlined new rules to include up to 50% renewable fuel in airplanes. The rules entail that the production of bio-kerosene includes, among others, sugarcane, coal and shale gas.

3.4.5 Brazil: Support to the sugar-ethanol industry with tax cuts and subsidies

On 23 April 2013, the Brazilian government announced support to the sugar-ethanol industry through two measures: Tax cuts and government-subsidized credits. The tax cuts, from 12% to almost zero will come in addition to the previously announced mandatory blends of 25% anhydrous ethanol in gasoline as of May 1st. Together this will secure a vast amount of the biofuel used. Following this, the investment climate for ethanol outputs will improve. The government-subsidized credits are a 2 billion US$ credit to finance replanting of cane fields and a 914 million US$ credit to finance storage of ethanol over the inter-harvest period.


Pagina 20 van 36

3.4.6 South Africa: Mandatory biofuels blending into effect

As of October 1st 2013, biofuels blending mandates E2 and B5 have come into effect in South Africa while, a Biofuels Pricing Framework will be released end of 2013. These supporting measures aim to give an impulse to the South Africa’s Biofuel Industrial Strategy‘s targets. Biofuels approved for blending are bioethanol, from sugar and starch crops, and biodiesel from vegetable oils. Maize is not approved from its use in biofuels due to its importance as food crop.

3.4.7 Indonesia: Government launched biofuel policy

Indonesia decided in August 2013 to boost biodiesel use to support its economy by reaching a B10 blend as fast as possible. Already biodiesel prices in the country are lower than diesel imports.

3.4.8 Philippines: Update of biodiesel standard to be in line with international

specifications

In August 2013, the Philippines Department of Energy has updated its biodiesel standard to align with national and international fuel quality standards. The new standard includes changes to improve oxidation stability, sulphur content, as well as dealing with carbon residue, iodine number and total contamination.

3.4.9 Zimbabwe: Mandatory 10 percent blending ethanol

This October, Zimbabwe introduced a mandatory blending ratio of 10% with ethanol, with potential for further increase.


Pagina 21 van 36

4 Sustainability certification of biomass

This chapter will first discuss the developments in certification schemes, followed by an update on the development of standardization for sustainability of bioenergy. Only EU recognized schemes for biofuels are listed that have news developments relevant to mention.

Certification schemes:

4.1 Bonsucro

Early June 2013, Bonsucro has achieved ISEAL full membership status. This reflects its full compliance with ISEAL’s Standard-Setting Code and other internationally recognized guidance (e.g. ISO17011), as well as its steady path to meeting the requirements of ISEAL’s Impacts Code.

4.2 ISCC

ISCC has developed new system documentation and procedures for the certification of biodiesel plants under the ISCC DE standard. These documents have been recognized by the Federal Agency for Agriculture and Food in Germany.

4.3 Initiative Wood Pellet Buyers (IWPB) becomes SBP

The IWPB has changed its name to Sustainable Biomass Partnership (SBP), due to the broader focus that the organization aims to achieve. The focus will change from wood pellets alone to solid biomass as a whole. There have been organizational changes as well, now also including specialists in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and experts in forestry as contributors, next to biomass buyers.

4.4 NTA8080 and inclusion in ITC Standards Map

The NTA8080 is continuing the revision of its standard. Meanwhile, the NTA8080 is added to the Standards Map, an online comparison-tool developed by the International Trade Centre. The Standards Map is an interactive online database of over 120 voluntary standards, operating in over 200 countries. The addition of NTA8080 in the Map provides companies the possibility to analyse, compare, review and understand requirements of the NTA8080 certification system in relation with other sustainability systems.

4.5 REDcert

In reaction to provisions of the Federal Agency for Agriculture and Food (BLE) on inspections and changes in the German Nabisy system, REDcert made various small changes in its system documentation. REDcert has also developed a new tool for its participants to search for a NUTS2 region for Germany. The GHG values of the respective NUTS2 region and the respective NUTS2 values for various biomass types can be used as alternatives to the familiar partial default values for GHG emissions in farming. The tool also makes it possible to choose between the unit kg CO2-eq/t and g CO2 eq/MJ. REDcert and ISCC adopted a rule on the acceptance of waste and residues. Participants to the REDcert EU certification system may only accept waste and


Pagina 22 van 36

residues as sustainable if materials are collected and processed under the REDcert-EU or ISCC-EU system. This means that waste and residual materials, or products made from them, from other EC-approved certification systems may not be accepted as sustainable as long as these systems have not been checked by REDcert and approved as equivalent.

4.6 RSB: The Roundtable on sustainable biomaterials

The RSB has broadened its scope and name. RSB’s scope has broadened from solely biofuels to biomaterials, including bio-products derived from biomass such as bio-chemicals and bioplastics. The full name of the RSB is now the ‘Roundtable on Sustainable Biomaterials’. There have been organizational changes as well, including a new secretariat and governance structure. The RSB also entered into a service and license agreement with Accreditation Services International (ASI). These changes aim to ensure transparency and efficient decision-making. The RSB Assembly of Delegates approved the implementation of the Low Indirect Impact Biofuels (LIIB) approach as a built-in complementary module. This module is based on experiences in pilot studies (supported by NL Agency). The module is proposed to RSB- certified companies willing to demonstrate a low risk of creating indirect impacts and will remain voluntary. The RSB also embarked in a new gap analysis of the Bonsucro Standard, in partnership with ISEAL. The first step of this analysis consisted in a comparison of sustainability requirements of Bonsucro with the sustainability requirements described in the RSB standard. On the basis of this gap analysis and due consideration for implementation aspects, the RSB aims to establish a simplified procedure for Bonsucro certified operators willing to obtain RSB certification

4.7 RSPO: a new version of principles and criteria

As part of its continuous improvements, the RSPO General Assembly has approved its revised Principles & Criteria (2013). These revisions entail additional or more stringent criteria on GHG emissions, pesticides, peat planting, forced labour, human rights and corruption. Its further implementation will take place through a process called ‘National Interpretation’, where the revised principles and criteria are further aligned with existing national legislation by means of stakeholder participation. Developments in standardization:

4.8 BIOGRACE II

On June 1st 2013, the EC published the Decision to recognize the BioGrace GHG calculation tool as a voluntary scheme for biofuels and other bioliquids. The used methodology in the tool is considered to be in line with the sustainability criteria for greenhouse gas emissions of both the RED and FQD. At the same time, the BioGrace-II project is developing a tool that aims to harmonise calculations of GHG emissions for electricity, heat and cooling from biomass throughout the European Union. A preliminary version of the tool and calculation rules are ready and were already discussed with stakeholders in small groups during five feedback sessions in the last months.


Pagina 23 van 36

4.9 CEN/ISO developments on standardizing sustainability of bioenergy

The CEN Technical Committee 383 on ‘Sustainability produced biomass for energy’ has adopted the part on the chain-of-custody, as being CEN / TS 16214-2. It is possible that additional work is required because of possible changes within the European Commission and Parliament. A second concept of a standard for the ISO 13065 on ‘Sustainability criteria for bioenergy’ has been circulated from mid June to mid September for voting and comments. Comments are being discussed in working groups until mid December. The objective is to get agreement on the final discussion points in mid 2014 and to proceed with the public comment document from then onwards.

4.10 GBEP: first lessons learnt from pilot studies

The Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) has developed 24 sustainability indicators that can be used at country level and give an indication of the sustainability of bioenergy in that country over time. The indicators are currently tested in pilot studies in various countries so far. Ecofys has completed a study in November 2013, commissioned by the Dutch government, to draw overall lessons of five of these pilot studies; the ones conducted in the Netherlands, Ghana, Germany, Indonesia and Colombia. The study showed that the indicators provide a good basis for developing (further) bioenergy policies. Using the indicators has provided countries a good insight in the available data that can be used for monitoring the bioenergy sector. Lessons are learnt on how to further improve the data collection and its collection methodologies. Detailed lessons learnt are given for each indictor.


Pagina 24 van 36

5 International co-operation / projects

5.1 Biobased Industries Public Private Partnership launched

Forty-eight large and small companies grouped under the Biobased Industry Consortium, have joined forces with the EC to set up a Public-Private Partnership. The Partnership is worth a €1 billion of EU funds from the new Horizon 2020 program. A €2.8 billion is earmarked to accelerate the deployment of biobased products in Europe by 2020. The Partnership is part of the EC’s Innovation and Investment Package that was released on 10 July.

5.2 The Biomass Policies Project

The “Biomass Policies” project, a EU funded project, started in April 2013 and will be running to March 2016. The project aims to build up a consistent knowledge base both for the efficient resource mobilisation including sustainability criteria, costs, logistics and availability. Knowledge is also built for the assessment of resource efficient biomass value chains (with a set of consistent technical indicators) based on recent information from three recent EU funded studies.

5.3 EC: Aid for 3rd generation biorefineries

The EC has decided in May 2013 that the € 39 million Aid granted by France to the Institut d’Excellence en Énergies Décarbonées (IEED, institute of excellence in the field of low-carbon energy) complies with the EU rules on state aid. The aim of the funded Genesys project is to develop “zero-waste, positive-energy” third-generation biorefineries using oilseed and lignocellulosic biomass (agricultural and forestry residues and urban waste) to produce clean energy (electricity, heat), as well as food products and chemicals. The project aims for around 100 scientific publications per year and the filing of some 40 patents on oilseeds and lipids over the next 10 years (patent pool).

5.4 European Commission: Biofuels FlightPath event "Beyond CO2:

Biokerosene, engine emissions and technical constraints"

In April 2013, The Directorate-General for Energy organised the Workshop “Beyond CO2: Biokerosene, engine emissions and technical constraints” in collaboration with the Core Team of the Biofuels FlightPath 2020 Initiative. The purpose of the workshop was to discuss with key stakeholders environmental issues other than CO2 related to the use of biofuels in aviation.

5.5 FAO: New tool for the assessment of forest biomass and carbon stocks

A new online platform launched by Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) on June 2013 allows countries to improve the assessment of forest volumes, biomass and carbon stocks. These data are crucial for research in climate change and mitigation activities, such as increasing the carbon stock in forests through reforestation, and for bioenergy development

5.6 GRFA: Biofuel Production Mandates Overview

In August 2013, The Global Renewables Fuels Alliance (GRFA) announced an interactive map showing the current mandate and planned targets for biofuel production in countries across the globe. The map shows 62 countries with biofuels friendly policies. The map can be viewed at the site: http://globalrfa.org/biofuels-map/


Pagina 25 van 36

5.7 IFAD and ICRAF: Development of Alternative Biofuel Crops

The World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) have launched the IFAD-ICRAF Programme for the Development of Alternative Biofuel Crops, an initiative focused on providing clean energy for rural communities, enhancing local food security and increasing subsistence farmers' resilience to climate change. The program will develop and scale up pro-poor, sustainable biofuel production models in Asia, Africa and Latin America and help determine to what extent sustainable biofuels can reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.

5.8 SAHYOG: Strengthening Networking on Biomass Research and Biowaste

Conversion – Biotechnology for Europe India Integration

The objective of the project SAHYOG is to actively and effectively link research activities implemented within EU research programmes and related programmes by Indian national institutions. One of the aims of the project is to develop a Strategic Research Agenda and a roadmap for the advancement of RTD with mutual benefits. Twinning of large sets of research projects, as well as short-term exchange visits of researchers are implemented. Based on SAHYOG findings, RTD Roadmaps are elaborated through consultation with stakeholders. A mini-symposium on “Developments in Sustainable Biomass Valorisation EU-India R&D collaboration on Biomass and Biowaste” was organized in Utrecht on 28 and 29 October 2013.


Pagina 26 van 36

6 Reports

6.1 AEBIOM: Forest sustainability and carbon balance

The report “Forest Sustainability and Carbon Balance of EU Importation of North American Forest Biomass for Bioenergy Production” was published by European Biomass Association (AEBIOM) in September 2013. The report focuses on the Southeast region of the US and British Columbia in Canada. Main findings are that the use of solid biomass for power generation achieves significant carbon savings. An immediate or very rapid contribution to climate change mitigation can be observed, when assumptions and real data from the field are used for modelling forest carbon dynamics.

6.2 Ecofys: Low ILUC potential of wastes and residues for biofuels

In this report published in September 2013, Ecofys shows with the LIIB methodology that the assessed waste and residue materials have substantial sustainable potentials and varying low ILUC potentials. A substantial quantity of cereal straw and forestry residues could be harvested and used for biofuels, but that an even greater quantity cannot be harvested without risking serious negative sustainability impacts. The current proposed positive lists for multiple counting do not limit the quantitative use of specific materials, in theory allowing both straw and ‘bark, branches, leaves, saw dust and cutter shavings’ (woody residues) to be completely harvested and used for biofuels. In order to reconcile the need for truly sustainable biofuels and the need to avoid negative sustainability impacts it would be necessary to introduce a maximum removal rate for primary land-using agricultural and forestry wastes and residues before these materials are included in the positive lists. This report was commissioned by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, the German Federal Environment Agency, the German Fachagentur Nachwachsende Rohstoffen, the Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment, and the Danish Energy Agency.

6.3 E-PURE: Biofuels, food security and grab lands

The European Association e-Pure, representing the renewable ethanol industry, published in August 2013 two reports ordered to Ecofys. The first report, “Biofuels and food security- Risks and opportunities”, explores the background and details of the 2006-2008 food crises and the 2011 commodity price spike. The study concludes that the contribution of biofuels to price changes remained very small. Systemic factors, like for example reduced reserves, food waste, speculation, transportation issues or hoarding played a much larger role in local food price changes. The second report, “Land grabs for biofuels”, concludes that the acreage of land possibly subject to land grabbing caused by EU biofuels demand is far less than often presented in the debate: “At best, only 0.5% of all deals in the Land Matrix concern land grabs for EU biofuels.”

6.4 EurObser’ER annual biofuels barometer 2012 released

EurObserv’ER has released its annual Biofuels Barometer, reporting increased biofuel consumption within the European Union in 2012. Between 2011 and 2012, consumption grew by 2.9%, to nearly 14.4 million metric tons of oil equivalent


Pagina 27 van 36

(Toe). According to the report, biofuels accounted for approximately 4.7 percent of transportation fuel within the EU last year.

6.5 FAO and ICTSD: Global biofuel trade - How uncoordinated biofuel policy

fuels resource use and GHG emissions

In May 2013, the FAO and International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) released their joint study on biofuel policies and counter-productive arbitrage. The study explains the two-way trade of homogeneous products due to uncoordinated environmental legislation, resulting in additional fossil energy consumed and the associated emissions from transport.

6.6 GIZ: Lessons learned on the procedure for the recognition of schemes

On April 2013, the German Agency for International Cooperation published a report produced by SQ Consult on the Recognition of private certification schemes for public recognition: Lessons learned from the Renewable Energy Directive. The recognition process for biofuel sustainability schemes started in 2010 and has been a continuous learning process for all stakeholders. The experiences gathered and analysed up to now represent a snapshot of two years (2010–2012) of implementing co-regulation. The lessons learned in this on-going learning process are presented in this study. These lessons aim to be useful for designing future co-regulation processes. Possible future co-regulation processes include the private certification of biomass for producing electricity and heat or compliance with sustainability requirements established by public procurement regulations.

6.7 International Energy Agency (IEA) Bioenergy Task 40: Future

perspectives of international bioenergy trade

This study published in August 2013 aims to provide insight into "possible futures" of bioenergy trade and discusses implications and challenges related to different developments. The report gives insight into future scenarios and perspectives of bioenergy trade. It reveals that substantial challenges for future development of global and international bioenergy trade may be expected in the coming decades if a low carbon energy system is to be developed.

6.8 IEA Bioenergy Task 40: Low cost, Long Distance Biomass Supply Chains

This report from August 2013 focuses on long-distance biomass supply chains, including ground-based supply of raw biomass to densification plants, and transportation of densified biomass to ports in other continents. The report aims to provide an overview of the characteristics of three densified biomass forms; solid wood pellets, solid torrefied wood and liquid pyrolysis oil. It outlines for these biomass products existing and future markets and specific supply chains, while exploring large sources of biomass worldwide. The report highlights the importance of the costs of logistics in biomass supply chains and illustrates current cost structures of existing long-distance biomass supply chains. The report explores how the cost of current and future long-distance supply chains of wood pellets, torrefied pellets and pyrolysis oil could be lowered, and what this would require form the stakeholders involved.


Pagina 28 van 36

6.9 IEA Bioenergy Task 40: History, status & outlook on securing sustainable

bioenergy supply, demand and markets

The book, finished in May 2013, analyses the trade of global bioenergy commodities, such as ethanol, biodiesel and wood pellets. These commodities have been growing exponentially in the past decade, and have by 2013 reached true "commodity" volumes, i.e. tens of millions of tonnes traded each year, and billions (both in US$/EUR) of annual turnover.

6.10 IEA Bioenergy Task 40: The Science-Policy Interface on the

Environmental Sustainability of Forest Bioenergy

This publication from May 2013 reports on the discussions and opinions expressed during an expert workshop on the environmental sustainability of forest bioenergy in Canada, held in Quebec on 3 to 5 October 2012. The workshop was organised by the IEA Bioenergy Task 40 and Task 43 (Biomass Feedstocks for Energy Markets), the IEA Bioenergy Executive Committee, the Faculty of Forestry, Geomatics and Geography of Laval University (Quebec, Canada), and Natural Resources Canada, with collaboration from the Global Bioenergy Partnership and the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers. Participants engaged in dialogue critical for the formulation of rational policy to achieve sustainable forest bioenergy production systems.

6.11 IUCN: Betting on best quality certification for biomass, soy and palm oil

On 28 November, IUCN presented this report at the WWF Biofuel workshop in Brussels. This report aims to provide insight in the quality and level of assurance of voluntary schemes fro biomass, soy and palm oil, and help stakeholders to bet on best quality certification. The report combines a thorough review by Proforest of eight existing benchmarking studies covering the ten most commonly used schemes. The study follows with additional in-depth analysis and further interpretation by SQ Consult in Guidance for companies on how to select best quality schemes. An indicative score of high, good, medium and low quality is given to all 10 compared schemes. Several recommendations are made to the EC, certification schemes and companies in the biofuel industry.

6.12 JRC: Carbon accounting of forest bioenergy

The Joint Research Centre (JRC) published the report on “Carbon accounting of forest bioenergy” in April 2013. JRC concludes in this report that the assumption of carbon neutrality, as described in the RED, is not true for every biomass type in the short term.

6.13 KPMG: A roadmap to responsible soy: Approaches to increase certification

and reduce risk

This study published in May 2013 identifies four key barriers to mainstreaming responsible soy production. The report presents a roadmap to overcome them and a framework of actions to assist companies in developing an effective response strategy. The Roadmap highlights that only 2 to 3% of soy production is currently certified as responsibly-produced, lagging far behind other commodities such as palm oil, cocoa and coffee. This brings reputational and commercial risks to end-users including manufacturers of food, animal feed and biofuel. The Roadmap to Responsible Soy is published in collaboration with the Sustainable Trade Initiative (IDH), WWF, FMO (the Netherlands Development Finance Company) and the International Finance Corporation (IFC).


Pagina 29 van 36

6.14 NL Agency: Biomass merits of bamboo, switchgrass, wheat and rice straw

Three different studies were completed in July 2013 by Food and Biobased Research (part of Wageningen University and Research centre) to critically review the biomass merits of bamboo, switchgrass, wheat and rice straw. The reports present separate analyses of the production system and reviews for various biobased application options and they also discuss relevant sustainability issues. The reports show that each feedstock has its own ramifications, although switchgrass seems to be the better option if this is the main application. Due to the low production cost involved, and due to the productivity of the crop on lower quality soils it may have a role to play when ILUC avoidance is important.

6.15 NL Agency: Combining bioenergy production and food security

This report, published in May 2013, analyses how bioenergy can be produced within the context of food insecurity. The Dutch government has set four goals for food security in Dutch Development Cooperation policy: i) Increased sustainable food production, ii) Improved access to food of sufficient quality, iii) improved functioning of markets and iv) improved investment climate. The report explores to what extent biomass production for biofuels is consistent with each of the goals of food security policy of the Netherlands. The report aims to contribute to Dutch Development Cooperation policy on food security by showing ways and best practices on how the production and use of biomass for bioenergy can best be combined with food production and food security.

6.16 NL Agency: Competition in wood waste: inventory of policies and markets

The report by SQ Consult on “Competition in wood waste: inventory of policies and markets” from April 2013 discusses the legislative framework of wood waste in Europe and in the Netherlands, the UK and in Belgium. Market developments of wood waste in Europe and the selected European countries are discussed as well, both from a supply and a demand perspective. Conclusions are given on the risk for competition in the wood waste market, with recommendations on how the use of wood waste pellets for energy can be increased while avoiding negative indirect sustainability effects to competitive markets.


Pagina 30 van 36

6.17 NL Agency: Handbook on sustainability certification of solid biomass for

energy production

This Handbook was published in November 2013. Its objective is to facilitate market players and other stakeholders in information gathering and informed decision-making in relation to sustainability certification of solid biomass, and a number of related issues. Market players in international or national chains of solid biomass production, processing and use (bio-energy producers) can use this handbook, as well as other stakeholders in sustainability certification of solid biomass. The Handbook has a modular structure and provides per chapter information about e.g. certification schemes, legislative developments or practical tools for assessing sustainability impacts.

6.18 NL Agency: New tool assesses charcoal alternatives with underlying cases

A new tool has come online in September 2013 that assesses the opportunities and threats for several promising alternatives to charcoal. To sustainably introduce a new source of energy, a reliable and sufficient supply chain is necessary to guarantee its availability to households. This is difficult, however. A new 'alternative charcoal tool' (ACT) has been developed by environment consultancy BTG with funding from NL Agency. The tool allows users to assess these obstacles and opportunities for supply chains that involve any of the several promising feedstock alternatives (e.g. processing residues, energy crops and harvest residues). The tool, based on case studies, is meant to be a source of information as well as a decision making tool.

6.19 NL Agency: Smallholder certification in biomass supply chains, challenges

and strategies

This study, published in June 2013, focuses on the certification of smallholders in the biomass for energy production market or the bio-energy market. Experiences on smallholder certification from other commodities (e.g. coffee) are also used for lessons learnt. Smallholders are considered by many as a specific target group in


Pagina 31 van 36

the context of production and certification of agricultural production and substantial efforts are being undertaken to include them in supply chains. The study identifies the benefits for including certified smallholders in biomass supply chains as well as the challenges and risks associated with smallholder certification.

6.20 PBL and Alterra: Climate effects of wood used for bioenergy

This PBL–Alterra Note, published in August 2013, focuses on the potential effects on CO2 emissions and climate change of using wood from different sources, and discusses the risk for carbon debt. A short overview of the most important aspects of carbon balances for wood and the resulting CO2 flows is presented in the report, as well as a number of other relevant issues for climate change and their policy implications. The overview is based on the literature, including recent reviews of scientific information, in combination with additional model calculations and analyses.

6.21 UNCTAD: Wake up before it’s too late

The report, published in September 2013, mentions that the 2008 food crisis was an important catalyst for realizing the need for a fundamental transformation and questioning some of the assumptions that had driven food, agricultural and trade policy in recent decades. The report states that the world needs a paradigm shift in agricultural development: from a “green revolution” to an “ecological intensification” approach. Elements for the required transformation of agriculture are given and include optimization of fertilizer use, reduction of direct and indirect GHG emissions and reduction of waste through the food chains.

6.22 USDA GAIN: EU biofuels annual 2013

This US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Global Agriculture Information Network (GAIN) report, published on 13 August 2013, presents the situation and outlook for biofuels in the EU. The report highlights that about a fifth of the domestic use of transport biofuels was imported from outside the EU from 2007 to 2012. Since then, a series of trade actions have been imposed to hinder this trade of bioethanol and biodiesel. The EC expects that solid biomass for heat and power generation will play an important role in meeting the 20% target for renewable energy use by 2020.

6.23 USDA GAIN: Bundle of biofuels annual country reports 2013

The USDA GAIN published between June and September 2013 a bundle of biofuels annual country reports with all highlights of the biofuel industries during 2012 on those countries. Available reports are the: Brazil – Biofuels Annual; China – Biofuels Annual; India – Biofuels Annual; Guatemala – Biofuels Annual; Paraguay – Biofuels Annual; Indonesia – Biofuels Annual; Philippines – Biofuels Annual; Russian Federation – Biofuels Annual; Malaysia – biofuels Annual; Peru – Biofuels Annual; Australia – Biofuels Annual; Argentina – Biofuels Annual; Japan – Biofuels Annual; Thailand – Biofuels Annual; Colombia – Biofuels Annual; and Canada – Biofuels Annual.

6.24 WWF: Searching for sustainability - Comparative analysis of certification

schemes

On 28 November, WWF-DE presented this report at the WWF Biofuels workshop taking place in the WWF European police office in Brussels. This study assessed EC recognised schemes against a Certification Assessment Tool (CAT) developed by WWF. The study concluded that schemes fall short of ensuring of ensuring that


Pagina 32 van 36

Europe's push towards increased biofuel use is not contributing to environmental destruction and social exploitation. The study found that many of the analysed standards had middle to low-level performance.

6.25 WWF: 2013 Palm Oil Buyers Scorecard

WWF has published early November 2013 the “Palm Oil Buyers Scorecard”. The scorecard assesses the performance of 130 major retailers, food service companies and consumer goods and other manufacturers worldwide on their use of certified sustainable palm oil. The scorecard shows the individual performance of companies in Europe, Asia and in the US. Results can be compared with earlier scorings in 2009 and 2011.


Pagina 33 van 36

7 List of important abbreviations

AEBIOM European Biomass Association CFS Committee on World Food Security CSR Corporate Social Responsibility EC European Commission ENVI Environmental Committee EPA Environmental Protection Agency EP European Parliament EU European Union EUTR European Union Timber Regulation FAO Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations FPIC Free Prior Informed Consent FQD Fuel Quality Directive GAIN Global Agriculture Information Network GHG Green House Gas GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GRFA Global Renewables Fuels Alliance IEA International Energy Agency IEED Institut d’Excellence en Énergies Décarbonées ICRAF World Agroforestry Centre ICTSD International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development ILUC Indirect Land Use Change JRC Joint Research Centre MEP Member of European Parliament


Pagina 34 van 36

Nea Dutch Emissions Authority NPSB Netherlands Programmes Sustainable Biomass RED Renewable Energy Directive RES Renewable Energy Sources UCO Used Cooking Oil UKDECC UK Department of Energy and Climate Change UNCTAD UN Conference on Trade and Development USDA US Department of Agriculture USEPA US Environmental Protection Agency WTO World Trade Organization


Pagina 35 van 36

8 Disclaimer

This information bulletin was compiled by the Netherlands Programmes Sustainable Biomass, consisting of: • The Sustainable Biomass Import programme (by order of the Ministry of

Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation) • The Global Sustainable Biomass programme (by order of the Ministry of

Foreign Affairs) • The Daey Ouwens Fund (by order of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs) These programmes are being executed by NL Energy and Climate (NL Agency). Although this information bulletin has been produced with the greatest possible care, NL Energy and Climate cannot be held responsible for any errors that it may contain. The bulletin does not reflect the opinions of NL Energy and Climate. For more information about the abovementioned programmes or for any questions or comments about this information bulletin, please contact [email protected].


of 36

npsb information bulletin 2 - 2013 def - rvo.nl · cooling. in november 2013, it is highly unlikely...

Documents