DECC’s BEaC Model (Bioenergy Emissions and Counterfactual Model) Dr Anna Stephenson March 8 th, 2013

DECC’s BEaC Model 2 1.Policies that support bioenergy should deliver genuine carbon reductions that help meet UK carbon emissions objectives to 2050 and beyond. 2.Support for bioenergy should make a cost effective contribution to UK carbon emission objectives in the context of overall energy goals. 3.Support for bioenergy should aim to maximise the overall benefits and minimise costs (quantifiable and non-quantifiable) across the economy. 4.At regular time intervals and when policies promote significant additional demand for bioenergy in the UK, beyond that envisaged by current use, policy makers should assess and respond to the impacts of this increased deployment on other areas, such as food security and biodiversity. UK Bioenergy Strategy Principles

DECC’s BEaC Model 3 Carbon impacts of different bioenergy pathways to determine effect of future increase in bioenergy use. Focus on counterfactual land use (reference system). If land not used for bioenergy, what would carbon impacts be? Chosen counterfactuals: –Abandoned land: leave land to revert to its ‘native state’ –Unmanaged land: leave land unmanaged –Managed forests: what would the biomass be otherwise used for (several choices for the user)? Do not compare to using land for food, as bioenergy should not be competing with food for land (Principle 4). Time frames, 20, 40 and 100 years Aim

DECC’s BEaC Model 4 DECC working in collaboration with: –Forest Research for forest carbon modelling –University of Aberdeen and Cranfield University – land carbon stock and counterfactual modelling –University of Exeter – ‘abandoned land’ availability modelling –Tyndall Centre – method and calculation review and advice Advice from –North Carolina State University –Duke University, North Carolina Preliminary Model produced – Not Final Results Looking for feedback and peer-review for the next 2-3 months Published online The Model

DECC’s BEaC Model 5 Projected Future UK Biomass Potential Requirements YearProjected Woody Biomass Requirement (million oven dry te/y) Energy OutputFold increase since GW electricity 0.15 GW heat GW electricity 4.5 GW heat Mix of transport, heat and electricity References Industry projections UK Bioenergy Strategy 2012 Forestry Commission Statistics on wood production

DECC’s BEaC Model 6 Heat Majority domestically produced wood chips and pellets Current Solid Biomass Feedstocks 92% of pellets from North America 100% of wood chips from UK Residues from many locations, e.g. UK, Spain, Russia, Malaysia. Power UK Biomass feedstocks for power

DECC’s BEaC Model 7 Industry indicate that by 2020, majority biomass for power in the form of North American pellets. Current North American wood production in million oven dry tonnes/ year: USACanadaTotalUse Wood harvest Traditional wood products Potential Forest Residues Generally unused Saw Mill Residues already used for pulp, boards, fuel, animal bedding 1.FAOSTAT average yearly roundwood harvest Assuming 30% of FAOSTAT harvest is residue 3.USDA North American Wood Pellet Sector Report Feedstocks up to 2020

DECC’s BEaC Model 8 Forest residues (tops, branches which are currently not harvested, diseased trees) Biomass displacing wood products ‘Abandoned’ managed forests Intensifying managed forests Bringing unmanaged forests into production New plantations on abandoned agricultural land Where could the additional forestry biomass come from? Image from Georgia Biomass website (located Georgia, produces 0.75 million te pellets/y)

DECC’s BEaC Model 9 ‘Abandoned agricultural land’ could be made available if we improve agricultural efficiencies and move to more intense agricultural system. Globally up to 1.5 billion hectares could be made available by 2050 if global average agricultural efficiencies equalled current Western highest standards and crop yield continued to increase. If agricultural efficiencies do not improve significantly, there will be increased land required for food, and no ‘abandoned agricultural land’ available for bioenergy. Feedstocks up to 2050 Willow energy crop Eucalyptus short rotation forestry

DECC’s BEaC Model 10 Power from: North American forest residues (tops and branches which are currently not harvested) Canadian beetle diseased trees North American biomass displacing wood products Intensifying management of North American managed forests (reduced rotation) Intensifying management of Southern USA managed forests (reduced rotation, species selection) Using ‘abandoned’ managed forests in North America Using North American ‘Old Growth’ forests Bringing unmanaged UK Broadleaf forests into production New SRC plantations on abandoned agricultural land reverting to Oceanic forest in Europe New Eucalyptus plantations on abandoned agricultural land reverting to Rainforest in South America Example Scenarios

DECC’s BEaC Model 11 13,577 Preliminary Results (20 year time horizon)

DECC’s BEaC Model 12 Carbon Impacts of Power Scenarios Left: Carbon impact of using North West USA wood residues for power. Includes any small roundwood which would be left to decay in the forest and diseased trees. Right: Carbon impact of using small roundwood for power which would otherwise be used to produce particle board. Power from Coal Dedicated Biopower Sust. Standard

DECC’s BEaC Model 13 Carbon Impacts of Power Scenarios Left: Carbon impact of using all additional wood created by reducing rotation length of North West USA managed forest from 100 years to 50 years. Right: Carbon impact of using all small roundwood and branchwood created by reducing rotation length of North West USA managed forest from 100 years to 50 years. Benefits from saw-logs used in construction attributed to bioenergy. Power from Coal Dedicated Biopower Sust. Standard

DECC’s BEaC Model 14 Forest Research C-SORT model Douglas Fir Conifer Rotation reduced from 100 to 50 years Typical to North West USA Forest Intensification by Reducing Rotation Length

DECC’s BEaC Model 15 Carbon Impacts of Power Scenarios Right: Carbon impact of using NW USA abandoned managed forest for bioenergy Left: Carbon impact of using all additional wood created by intensifying Southern USA managed forest by reducing rotation length from 50 to 25 years, changing from natural regeneration to planting, species selection, and fertilisation. Power from Coal Dedicated Biopower Sust. Standard

DECC’s BEaC Model 16 Forest Research C-SORT model Sitka Spruce, 59 year rotation Typical to UK Forestry Carbon Stock Change Example – Abandoned Forest

DECC’s BEaC Model 17 Carbon Impacts of Power Scenarios Left: Carbon impact of using NW USA ‘Old Growth’ forests for bioenergy Right: Carbon impact of using wood from previously unmanaged UK broadleaf forests. Power from Coal Dedicated Biopower Sust. Standard

DECC’s BEaC Model 18 Carbon Impacts of Power Scenarios Left: Carbon impact of using Eucalyptus from ‘abandoned land’ reverting to Rainforest in South America. Right: Carbon impact of using SRC willow from ‘abandoned land’ reverting to Oceanic forest in Europe. Power from Coal Dedicated Biopower Sust. Standard

DECC’s BEaC Model 19 NA Forest Residues Canadian Mountain Beetle dead trees NA wood displacing traditional use Intensifying NA forests, reduced rotation length South US managed forests to intensive plantations Abandoned NA managed forests NA small roundwood otherwise left in forest Managing NA ‘Old Growth’ forests UK unmanaged broadleaf forests Conifer plantations on ‘abandoned land’ Preliminary Results for Power Generation 2020 Power from Coal By 2020, projection that UK requires 20 – 35 million oven dry te/y for power, ~10 million oven dry te/y for heat

DECC’s BEaC Model 20 Next Steps No final results. However, preliminary results indicate: –Bioenergy from wood created by intensification of forestry, displacement of construction products or using unmanaged forests often causes large emissions. –Carbon benefits possible from bioenergy using forest residues or energy crops grown on abandoned land. Next Steps: –Peer review next 2-3 months. –Online version. –Collaboration with Aberdeen and Cranfield University to improve land counterfactual data. –Improve data on wood counterfactuals. –Add data on future technology efficiency improvements.

DECC’s BEaC Model 21 Questions? Any comments, data, scenarios which should be modelled:

DECC’s BEaC Model 22 Can bioenergy demand be met from reduction in paper use? Small roundwood Sawlogs Softwood inventory, price and removals for the states of Alabama, Georgia and Florida, 2007 – Abt et al., 2012, Forest Science, 58 (5), 523. Demand from traditional wood product s South East USA wood production: ~45 million dry te/y Demand from traditional uses unlikely to reduce significantly in future Wood for bioenergy more likely from intensification and new plantations Demand from traditional wood product s and bioenergy

DECC’s BEaC Model 23 Replacing Pulp and Paper? Left: Softwood consumption in USA South East Coastal States (Prof Bob Abt, North Carolina State University)

DECC’s BEaC Model 24 Forest Research C-SORT model Sitka Spruce, 59 year rotation Typical to UK Both with and without thinning, production of 3.7 odt/ha/y Thinning?

DECC’s BEaC Model 25 Abandoned forests used for construction and bioenergy Forest TypeProportion of wood which must go to saw mill to offset forgone C sequestration Abandoned NW USA Conifer80% Abandoned Southern USA Conifer 65% Abandoned Pacific Canada Conifer 80% Abandoned Boreal Conifer10% Abandoned Broadleaf> 100% Old Growth NW Conifer68%

DECC’s BEaC Model 26 North American Pellet Feedstocks New pellet plant design to be built by Canadian Northern Timber in Labrador million te/y pellets. FAQ section from Envova website. 3 plants, each producing 0.45 million te/y. “How is a pellet mill similar to or different from other timber processing plants in the area today? Pellet Mills can use saw mill residues like sawdust or chips or they can use full length trees as their feed stock.”

DECC’s BEaC Model 27 NA Forest Residues, assuming 30 wt% of FAOSTAT average yearly roundwood harvest 2008 – million te Canadian Mountain Beetle dead trees available by Equivalent to 40 million te/y for 10 years NA wood displacing traditional use, FAOSTAT average yearly roundwood harvest 2008 – 2011 of 214 million dry te/y. Intensifying NA forests, reduced rotation length. Assume could get additional 30% wood from intensification. South US managed forests to intensive plantations. Assume additional 50% from intensification. Current production 45 million dry te/y from Southern Coastal States. Communication with North Carolina State University. Abandoned NA managed forests. Assume little available. NA small roundwood otherwise left in forest. Assume little available. Managing NA ‘Old Growth’ forests. Assume little available (protected). UK unmanaged broadleaf forests. Forestry Commission Wood Fuel Strategy for additional 2 million te/y. Conifer plantations on ‘abandoned land’. Abt et al., 2012, Forest Science, 58 (5), 523. predicts up to 0.6 Mha additional plantations up to These figures are approximate and represent quantities of biomass theoretically available, rather than quantities which are likely to be available for use in the UK in Preliminary Results for Power Generation 2020: References By 2020, projection that UK requires 20 – 35 million oven dry te/y for power, ~10 million oven dry te/y for heat