The Contributions of Biomass Supply for Bioenergy in the Post-COVID-19 Recovery

This research investigates how biomass supply chains (BSChs) for bioenergy within the broader bioeconomy could contribute to the post-COVID-19 recovery in three dimensions: boosting economic growth, creating jobs, and building more resilient and cleaner energy systems in four future scenarios, in the short term (by 2023) and long term (by 2030). A SWOT analysis on BSChs was used for generating a questionnaire for foresight by a two-round Delphi study. To interpret the results properly, a short survey and literature review is executed to record BSChs behavior during the pandemic. In total, 23 (55% response rate) and 28 (46% response rate) biomass experts from three continents participated in the Delphi and the short survey, respectively. The strongest impact from investment in BSChs would be on economic growth, followed by a contribution to the resilient and cleaner energy systems and job creation. The effects would be more visible in the long- than in the short-term period. Investments with the most impact on recovery are those that improve biomass material efficiency and circularity. Refurbishment of current policies to enhance the supply of biomass as a renewable resource to the future economy is a must.

Large-Scale Implementation of Bioenergy With Carbon Capture and Storage in the Swedish Pulp and Paper Industry Involving Biomass Supply at the Regional Level

Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) has been identified as a possible major contributor to efforts to reach ambitious climate targets through the provision of negative emissions–offsetting residual fossil emissions in “hard-to-abate” sectors and accomplishing net-negative emissions. The pulp and paper industry is the single largest consumer of biomass in Sweden, with many large point sources of biogenic CO2 emissions that could be captured. This work investigates the biomass supply required for large-scale implementation of BECCS in the pulp and paper industry. Logging residues are considered as a fuel to supply the additional energy demand imposed by the capture plant, and the potential of these residues is evaluated in a case study that includes four pulp and paper mills located in regions of Sweden with different conditions for biomass supply. Two of the mills are located in southern Sweden, where there is strong competition for logging residues from the heating sector, and two of the mills are located in northern Sweden, where the competition is weaker. We show that implementing carbon capture at the four pulp and paper mills using regional logging residues to supply the additional heat demand required by the capture process (the reboiler heat demand) has the potential to capture around 4.6 Mt CO2/year. The results also show that the fuel share of the capture cost, i.e., the cost to supply the reboiler heat demand with regional logging residues, is 22–30 €/tCO2 captured, where the lower value corresponds to regions with weaker competition for logging residues (in this study, northern Sweden). In regions that have competition for logging residues, the possibility to increase the regional supply of logging residues to fuel the capture process while maintaining mill production output is limited, which in turn limits the possibilities to generate negative emissions via BECCS. In contrast, in regions with a low level of competition and strong availability of logging residues, there is an additional potential for logging residues to cover the additional heat demand required for CCS implementation.

Decarbonising Industry via BECCS: Promising Sectors, Challenges, and Techno-economic Limits of Negative Emissions

Purpose of Review This paper reviews recent literature on the combined use of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) in the industries of steel, cement, paper, ethanol, and chemicals, focusing on estimates of potential costs and the possibility of achieving “negative emissions”. Recent Findings Bioethanol is seen as a potential near-term source of negative emissions, with CO2 transport as the main cost limitation. The paper industry is a current source of biogenic CO2, but complex CO2 capture configurations raise costs and limit BECCS potential. Remuneration for stored biogenic CO2 is needed to incentivise BECCS in these sectors. BECCS could also be used for carbon–neutral production of steel, cement, and chemicals, but these will likely require substantial incentives to become cost-competitive. While negative emissions may be possible from all industries considered, the overall CO2 balance is highly sensitive to biomass supply chains. Furthermore, the resource intensity of biomass cultivation and energy production for CO2 capture risks burden-shifting to other environmental impacts. Summary Research on BECCS-in-industry is limited but growing, and estimates of costs and environmental impacts vary widely. While negative emissions are possible, transparent presentation of assumptions, system boundaries, and results is needed to increase comparability. In particular, the mixing of avoided emissions and physical storage of atmospheric CO2 creates confusion of whether physical negative emissions occur. More attention is needed to the geographic context of BECCS-in-industry outside of Europe, the USA, and Brazil, taking into account local biomass supply chains and CO2 storage siting, and minimise burden-shifting.