Biomass and bioenergy in the wider land‐use context of the European Union

Allen, B.; Keegan, Dearbhla; Elbersen, B.S.

doi:10.1002/bbb.1359

Cited by 15 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some biomass products are traded for material purposes, yet ultimately end up being used for energy purposes. Thus, by‐products from wood processing industry from the upgrading industry, which uses sawn timber as raw material, are the main raw material for the wood pellet industry . For example, in Finland, sawdust is the main raw material for wood pellets production …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Imported biomass or a product that includes imported biomass can be processed in the imported country into more refined final products, which are then consumed within the country or exported forward. Liquid biofuels constitute one of the largest areas of new demand for agricultural products, and they play an important role on commodity markets and are expected to continue to be important in the near future …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Global biomass trade for energy – Part 1: Statistical and methodological considerations

Proskurina

Junginger²,

Heinimö

et al. 2017

Biofuels Bioprod Bioref

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many countries have limited, low‐cost biomass resources to satisfy their own demand for bioenergy. International trade of biomass in various solid and liquid forms is consequently increasing. The aim of this study is to present a quantitative overview of the development of international biomass trade for energy purposes, including a discussion of methodological issues. The paper focuses on the production, export, and import of solid and liquid biofuels, including industrial roundwood, wood chips, fuel wood, wood pellets, biodiesel, and bioethanol. The study highlights changes in trends that have occurred over the past decade. Trade on global bioenergy markets is increasing: total trade of biomass for energy purposes is estimated as having increased twofold from around 780 PJ in 2004 to 1250 PJ in 2015. Despite the importance of the bioenergy market and the growth of biomass trade for energy, accurate evaluation of energy‐related biomass trade faces several methodological challenges, such as uncertainties in international statistics, inconsistent data regarding export and import volumes, as well as limited information about the final use of traded products. © 2017 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global biomass trade for energy – Part 1: Statistical and methodological considerations

Proskurina

Junginger²,

Heinimö

et al. 2017

Biofuels Bioprod Bioref

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to FAO 6 this is particularly true for biofuels which is seen as one of the largest sources of new demand for land for agricultural products, besides already existing and growing land uses (see also the discussion by Allen et al (2013) in this issue 7 ).…”

Section: Background Bioenergy Demand and Sustainability Concernsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the effect of stricter sustainability criteria on EU biomass crop potential

Elbersen

Fritsche²,

Petersen

et al. 2013

Biofuels Bioprod Bioref

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates how different sustainability criteria restrict the supply of cropped biomass sources within the EU. There are already mandatory sustainability criteria formulated in the Renewable Energy Directive (RED) at EU level for biomass feedstocks to be used for conversion into biofuels. For solid and gaseous biomass feedstock, however, there are only recommendations formulated by the European Commission (EC) to be adopted on a voluntary basis by the EU member states (MS). This paper specifi cally focuses on the potential supply of biomass from crops for all bioenergy sectors when applying stricter sustainability criteria. These criteria relate to greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation targets, including indirect land-use change (iLUC) related GHG emissions, and the introduction of no-go areas, such as areas of high biodiversity value and high carbon stock. The results show that stricter criteria indeed reduce the cropping potential and change the crop mix signifi cantly, as rotational arable crops for biofuels do no longer comply with the stricter mitigation criteria. This is because they usually compete with food and feed crops for higher quality land requiring a compensation for iLUC emissions. The stricter sustainability criteria can only be applied successfully if they are accompanied by a change in demand, in particular for lignocellulosic biomass for advanced biofuels and other bioenergy uses. Without stimulation of such pathways, it will be diffi cult to realize improved sustainability in the bio-energy sector.

show abstract

“…In order to achieve a sustainable biomass supply it is necessary to broaden the range of biomasses used for biofuels and to include the multi-functionality of land use [3]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ensiling and hydrothermal pretreatment of grass: consequences for enzymatic biomass conversion and total monosaccharide yields

Ambye‐Jensen

Johansen

Didion

et al. 2014

Biotechnol Biofuels

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundEnsiling may act as a pretreatment of fresh grass biomass and increase the enzymatic conversion of structural carbohydrates to fermentable sugars. However, ensiling does not provide sufficient severity to be a standalone pretreatment method. Here, ensiling of grass is combined with hydrothermal treatment (HTT) with the aim of improving the enzymatic biomass convertibility and decrease the required temperature of the HTT.ResultsGrass silage (Festulolium Hykor) was hydrothermally treated at temperatures of 170, 180, and 190°C for 10 minutes. Relative to HTT treated dry grass, ensiling increased the solubilization of dry matter (DM) during HTT and gave increased glucan content, but lower lignin in the insoluble fiber fraction. Ensiling improved glucose yields in the enzymatic hydrolysis of the washed solid fiber fraction at the lower HTT temperatures. At 170°C glucose yield improved from 17 to 24 (w/w)% (45 to 57% cellulose convertibility), and at 180°C glucose yield improved from 22 to 29 (w/w)% (54 to 69% cellulose convertibility). Direct HTT of grass at 190°C gave the same high glucose yield as for grass silage (35 (w/w)% (77% cellulose convertibility)) and improved xylan yields (27% xylan convertibility). The effect of ensiling of grass prior to HTT improved the enzymatic conversion of cellulose for HTT at 170 and 180°C, but the increased glucose release did not make up for the loss of water soluble carbohydrates (WSC) during ensiling. Overall, sugar yields (C6 + C5) were similar for HTT of grass and grass silage at both 170 and 180°C, but at 190°C the overall sugar yield was better for HTT of dry grass.ConclusionsThis study unequivocally establishes that ensiling of grass as a biomass pretreatment method comes with a loss of WSC. The loss of WSC by ensiling is not necessarily compensated for by providing a lower temperature requirement for HTT for high enzymatic monosaccharide release. However, ensiling can be an advantageous storage method prior to grass processing.

show abstract

Biomass and bioenergy in the wider land‐use context of the European Union

Cited by 15 publications

References 18 publications

Global biomass trade for energy – Part 1: Statistical and methodological considerations

Global biomass trade for energy – Part 1: Statistical and methodological considerations

Assessing the effect of stricter sustainability criteria on EU biomass crop potential

Ensiling and hydrothermal pretreatment of grass: consequences for enzymatic biomass conversion and total monosaccharide yields

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About