Sustainability Assessment of Two Alternative Bio-energy Forest Wood - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sustainability Assessment of Two Alternative Bio-energy Forest Wood Chains with ToSIA by Wendelin Werhahn-Mees M. Lindner, J. Garcia, T. Suominen, T. Palosuo 07.04.2008

The story and methodology • equation of the presentation: 1. The story and methodology Pellet & Chipping Chain Pellet Chain (P&C Chain) (P Chain) > = < 2. Results of comparison 3. Discussion of results

The story and methodology Age 30 Age 0 Age > 85

The story and methodology P&C Chain P Chain Bioenergy thinning Clearing by lumberjack Difference between the chains

The story and methodology • Research objective a) effects of additional extraction of forest biomass for energy purposes on sustainability b) greenhouse gas balance c) social and economic aspects d) potential environmental trade-offs

The story and methodology • Indicator set Indicators Units 1. Production costs euro 2. Resource / Material use m3 3. Total heat consumption MJ 4.1 male person a 4. Employment 4.2 female person a 5.1 male euro 5. Wages and Salaries 5.2 female euro 6.1 Occupational accidents non-fatal accidents 6. Safety and Health 6.1 Occupational accidents fatal accidents 7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions tons CO2 eqv. 8. Maintenance of soil quality kg 9.1 transport distance road tkm 9. Transport (road) tons 9.2 freight volume 10.1 renewable energy use MJ 10. Energy 10.2 non renewable energy use MJ 10.3 electricity from the grid use MJ 10.4 generation from renewables MJ 11. Average carbon storage in cut biomass tons

Results of the comparison a) effects of additional extraction of forest biomass on sustainability Indicator increase P Chain P&C Chain Unit in % 87 318 737 595 078 euro 1. Production costs 194 5 604 318 1 6491 609 MJ 3. Total heat consumption 120 0,99 2,18 person a 4. Employment 101 63 126 tons CO2 eqv. 7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions n.a. 0 5 382 kg 8. Maintenance of soil quality 34 272 416 363 846 tkm 9.1 transport distance 9. Transport 68 1 679 2 822 tons 9.2 freight transported 21 1 942 126 2 348 295 MJ 10.1 energy use 10. Energy 224 6 404 935 20 725 555 MJ 10.2 heat generation Based on: � one reference year (2007) � a certain land area (1803 ha)

Results of the comparison a) effects of additional extraction of forest biomass on sustainability Total production costs 700 600 in thousand EUR 500 +276 400 Total production costs 300 200 0,06 100 0,05 0 in EUR/MJ P&C Chain P Chain 0,04 0,03 Total heat consumption 0,02 0,01 20 0,00 Pellet and Chipping Pellet Chain 15 +10,8 Chain TJ 10 5 Less costs per unit heat 0 consumed in P&C Chain P&C Chain P Chain

Results of the comparison a) effects of additional extraction of forest biomass on sustainability Energy generation, use and consumption by chain 25 Total energy use 20 Total energy 15 in TJ generation 10,8 TJ 10 Total heat consumption 5 0,4 TJ 0 P&C Chain P Chain Chipping strongly increases the heat generation, > 3 times Similar energy use in both chains Pellet Chain more efficient, (0,80 vs. 0,88)

Results of the comparison a), b) & c) greenhouse gas balance and social aspects Total transport distan Total freight volume transpo 60 350 in thousand tkm/TJ 50 300 + 130 40 250 > 25 in t/TJ 200 30 150 20 100 10 50 0 0 P&C Chain P Chain P&C Chain P Chain Total employment Total greenhouse gas emissions 2,5 12 tons of CO2 eqv./TJ > + 3 10 2,0 person year + 1,2 8 1,5 6 4 1,0 2 0,5 0 P&C Chain P Chain 0,0 P&C Chain P Chain

Results of the comparison d) The potential trade-offs Average carbon storage in cut bio Total nutrients extrac 5,3 60 6 50 5 40 4 tons tons 30 44 3 2 20 0 1 10 0 0 P&C Chain P Chain P&C Chain P Chain

Discussion of results • Constraints of the pellet production – High energy use – High transport distance, freight volume – Greenhouse gas emissions balance 2 X 9 vs. 6 3 X pellets high energy density

Discussion of results Summary of results Indicator P & C Chain P Chain � � GHG bal. � � Employment � � Energy bal. � � Costs �� � Soil maint.

Conclusion & achievements • Chipping adds socio-economic advantages on sustainability • Nutrient extraction possible constraint • Basis for evaluation methods e.g. MCA • Proved unique energy efficiency ratio

Thank you for your attention