Search

Abstract: Bioenergy could make a significant contribution in reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Europe and is unique in its potential to service all three of the major energy demand sectors for heat, electricity and transport fuels. Consequently during the last two decades many different initiatives have been launched and policy instruments employed in different countries to develop the bioenergy sector, some of which have been more successful than others. This paper analyses the relationship between the growth of bioenergy in four European states and national energy policy. The policy instruments used are critically evaluated alongside the evidence base of bioenergy capacity and output achieved. The possible reasons for success or failure of different instruments and any unexpected impacts are discussed and some general conclusions drawn. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This paper uses both quantitative and qualitative analyses to evaluate the effectiveness of government policy and support mechanisms in the UK, Sweden, Denmark and Finland in promoting bioenergy – a key technology fundamental to each country's decarbonisation strategies. It is crucial that countries develop effective policies and support mechanisms to grow sustainable bioenergy sectors. This paper analyses the success of bioenergy policies within each country and evaluates the importance of wider independent variables that collectively characterise the background to energy sector, economic and environmental dynamics. Statistical correlation and regression analyses are applied to identify if the policy landscape has had an identifiable impact on actual bioenergy development. Furthermore, the outputs from a stakeholder workshop and expert interviews are analysed to identify drivers and barriers to bioenergy. The result is a comprehensive analysis of the successes and challenges in bioenergy development, and possible lessons that can be drawn for future promotion of the sector. The research finds that the UK and Nordic countries have had different yet equally successful approaches to promoting bio-power and bio-heat respectively. However, the influence of wider factors within different countries is found to have a potentially greater collective impact on bioenergy than any single policy mechanism. Thus there is credence in learning lessons from what does and does not work in different countries, but countries also need to develop their own brands of policy interventions that suit their country's unique challenges. • Performance of bioenergy policies assessed for the UK, Denmark, Finland & Sweden. • Analyses through statistical tests, stakeholder engagement & expert interviews. • Wider factors can have greater collective impact on bioenergy than policy. • UK's approach to promoting bio-power achieved a successful step change in generation. • Nordic countries' success in bio-heat sector may have limited transferability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bioenergy is widely included in energy strategies for its GHG mitigation potential. Bioenergy technologies will likely have to be deployed at scale to meet decarbonisation targets, and consequently biomass will have to be increasingly grown/mobilised. Sustainability risks associated with bioenergy may intensify with increasing deployment and where feedstocks are sourced through international trade. This research applies the Bioeconomy Sustainability Indicator Model (BSIM) to map and analyse the performance of bioenergy across 126 sustainability issues, evaluating 16 bioenergy case studies that reflect the breadth of biomass resources, technologies, energy vectors and bio-products. The research finds common trends in sustainability performance across projects that can inform bioenergy policy and decision making. Potential sustainability benefits are identified for People (jobs, skills, income, energy access); for Development (economy, energy, land utilisation); for Natural Systems (soil, heavy metals), and; for Climate Change (emissions, fuels). Also, consistent trends of sustainability risks where focus is required to ensure the viability of bioenergy projects, including for infrastructure, feedstock mobilisation, techno-economics and carbon stocks. Emission mitigation may be a primary objective for bioenergy, this research finds bioenergy projects can provide potential benefits far beyond emissions - there is an argument for supporting projects based on the ecosystem services and/or economic stimulation they may deliver. Also given the broad dynamics and characteristics of bioenergy projects, a rigid approach of assessing sustainability may be incompatible. Awarding 'credit' across a broader range of sustainability indicators in addition to requiring minimum performances in key areas, may be more effective at ensuring bioenergy sustainability. • Sustainability will be fundamental for bioenergy to be deployed at scale. • Bioeconomy Sustainability Indicator Model applied to map 16 bioenergy case studies. • Bioenergy sustainability is a balance of trade-offs & an unlikely end destination. • Risk & benefit trends across resources & technologies should inform policy. • With uncertainties in bioenergy sustainability reducing, policy focus should evolve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]