Library

D2.4 Summary paper for policy makers

This strategy lays the foundation for how the EU transport system can achieve its green and digital transformation and become more resilient to future crises. As outlined in the European Green Deal, the result will be a 90% cut in emissions by 2050, delivered by a smart, competitive, safe, accessible and affordable transport system.

McKinsey has attempted to find a societally cost-optimal pathway to achieving the emissions targets established by the European Green Deal plan.We defined more than 600 emissions-reduction initiatives covering 75 economic sectors and ten geographic regions. Then we selected initiatives and combined them to form different decarbonization pathways, any of which would enable the European Union to achieve its targets for 2030 and 2050. Countless possible pathways exist, covering a wide range of costs and economic impacts. This report describes the least costly pathway among the many we identified.

The MUSIC project will support market uptake of Intermediate Bioenergy Carriers (IBCs) by developing feedstock mobilisation strategies, improved cost-effective logistics and trade centres.
The present report is intended as a guide for stakeholders with interest, or actual involvement, in IBC value chains. It investigates the current EU and national regulatory framework for IBCs. It’s main goal is to assess how existing/forthcoming EU legislation serves as either an opportunity, or a barrier, to the introduction and deployment of IBCs.

This report, the result of two years of work by experts from across the sector, outlines how air transport can meet its long-term goal and explores how it may go beyond that already ambitious target.

Transport is an important contributor to several environmental issues, including air pollution and climate change. The EU has set challenging objectives for tackling these. To help support decision making on mitigating actions in the transport sector it is paramount to develop a better understanding of the environmental impacts of road vehicles over their entire lifecycle. This report summarises a
range of vehicle life-cycle assessment (LCA) studies available in the public domain, which were found to be of varying focus, data quality, detail and coverage. It develops a policymaker-oriented LCA methodology for light- and heavy-duty vehicles covering a selection of major powertrain types and fuel chains for the 2020 to 2050 timeframe. The study has combined state-of-the art vehicle LCA with novel methodological choices to develop results for a range of environmental impacts for 14 electricity chains, 60 fuel chains, and 65 generic vehicle/powertrain combinations across 7 vehicle types. It has also provided several suggestions for policy-makers, based on these results, especially recommendations for future LCA research.

The JEC consortium is a long-standing collaboration among the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (EC-JRC), EUCAR (the European council for Automotive Research and development) and Concawe (the scientific body of the European Refiners’ Association for environment, health and safety in refining and distribution). The consortium periodically updates their joint evaluation of the Well-to-Wheels (WTW) energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, for a wide range of potential future powertrains and fuels options, within the European context. The present Well-To-Tank report belongs to a series of JEC WTW related reports where the process of producing, transporting, manufacturing and distributing a number of fuels suitable for road transport powertrains is described. The JEC WTT v5 assesses the incremental emissions (marginal approach) associated with the production of a unit of alternative fuel, with respect to the current status of production.

Presentation of results from stakeholder consultations

The present “Summary Paper for policy makers: retrofitting Europe’s industry with bioenergy” provides an overview on the challenges, barriers and technical solutions for the addressed sectors and gives recommendations for the policy makers. It presents the current ongoing discussions within the project consortium and with stakeholders, which is a snapshot after one year of project implementation. It also summarizes the results of a project workshop on 25 September 2019 in Thessaloniki, Greece, at which project partners and external stakeholders participated. The content of this summary paper will be taken up to formulate more extended recommendations at the end of the BioFit project.

The handbook shows that there is an abundance of possibilities to produce high value energy carriers, biofuels and other forms of energy from biomass, and that bioenergy retrofitting is a promising, but also already widely practiced, proven way to increase the sustainability of production processes.

The handbook provides this information to stakeholders and decision makers in the relevant industries who might have only little technical background. The handbook aims to open their eyes and to facilitate the technical understanding of bioenergy opportunities for their industries.

This report presents open questions relevant for further research: climate impacts of biomass, future-proof bioenergy systems, competing drivers, social factors, and sustainability governance

This report presents ways to lower costs and improve the benefits of aviation fuel through targeted SAF production. Part I provides background information needed for decision makers, program and technology managers, and biofuel researchers: • Chapter 1. Jet Fuel Markets • Chapter 2. Jet Fuel Specifications • Chapter 3. Jet Fuel Certification • Chapter 4. Workshop Learnings Given the preceding background, in Part II insights in consideration of one possible value chain is provided: • Chapter 5. R&D – Fuel Molecules • Chapter 6. R&D – Cost Reduction • Chapter 7. Summary and Insights

This report explores options for increasing the EU’s
2030 climate ambition to -55 per cent economy-
wide. What are sensible adjustments to the EU’s
climate policy architecture? What are the respective
roles of the EU Emissions Trading System and of
national emission reduction targets for sectors
outside the ETS (transport, buildings, agriculture,
waste, parts of industry)? What options exist for EU
Member States to achieve faster and deeper cuts in
emissions by 2030?

On behalf of the German Economic Ministry the consultancy Frontier Economics has developed a methodology of how to account the CO2 reduction of renewable fuels in the CO2 fleet regulation of the automotive industry. The political support of this study in the revision of the fleet regulation during the European Green Deal will decide if the automotive industry will purely stay on a “tank-to-wheel” approach and, therefore, has to electrify almost everything or if in addition CO2 credits from sustainable fuels are accounted.

This paper discusses the use of ammonia as a Marine fuel covering all aspects of the process including conventional and future green ammonia production, experience regarding safety with ammonia from other areas, the logistics of providing ammonia where it is needed, and the application on board the ship. Focus is on cost, availability, safety, technical readiness, emissions and the elimination of risks related to future environmental and climate related regulations and requirements. The conclusion is, that ammonia is an attractive and low risk choice of marine fuel both in the transition phase towards a more sustainable shipping industry and as a long-term solution.

While the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak is forecast to cut fossil transport fuel use by roughly
twelve percent in the EU, bioethanol and biodiesel use is projected to decline by approximately ten and
six percent, respectively. EU consumption of biofuels is supported by the ten percent blending target for
biofuels in transport fuels set for 2020. Another factor is the expanding domestic supply and blending of
hydrogenation derived renewable diesel (HDRD). The Renewable Energy Directive II (RED II), which
will be enforced on January 1, 2021, sets a binding target for the use of advanced biofuels of 3.5 percent
by 2030. In 2020, blending of advanced biofuels is projected to reach 1.5 percent, of which the majority
is produced from waste fats and oils. The EU market for wood pellets is less affected by the COVID-19
crisis than the liquid biofuels market, but further expansion could be limited by individual Member State
sustainability requirements.

The ambition of the European Union is to be climate neutral by 2050. The European refining industry supports the same ambition.

Our industry is transforming, and we have developed a comprehensive potential pathway of how we, together with our partners, can contribute to meeting the 2050 climate neutrality challenge.

In concrete terms, we outline, based on the current technology knowledge and cost estimate, a potential pathway to 2050 to develop low-carbon liquid fuels for road, maritime and air transport. To deliver such pathway an investment estimated between €400 to 650 billion will be needed. Major investments, in addition to those already deployed, could start in the next years, with first-of-a-kind plants at industrial scale potentially coming into operation at the latest by 2025.

Our Low-carbon liquid fuels pathway shows how a 100 Mt CO2/y reduction could be delivered in transport by 2035, equivalent to the CO2 savings of 50 million Battery Electric Vehicles on the road, and how it could contribute to European Union’s climate neutrality by 2050.

Low-carbon liquid fuels will play a critical role in the energy transition and in achieving carbon neutrality in all transport modes, as the global demand for competitive liquid fuels is expected to progressively increase. Alongside electrification and hydrogen technologies, low-carbon liquid fuels will remain essential even beyond 2050, bringing important benefits to the European economy and society.

We stand ready to enhance our collaboration with policymakers, our value chains and other partners to create the right conditions and policy framework for investments in new technologies to address the climate challenge.

The study is divided into three main tasks:
• Review of CONCAWE’s refinery model and its accompanying documentation with regard to scientific validity and plausibility.
• Review of SPHERA’s GaBi LCA refinery model and its accompanying documentation with regard to scientific validity and plausibility.
• Summarizing report including methodology overview, key findings, conclusion and recommendations on how to derive representative GHG inventories for fuels and vehicles in a given goal & scope.
Note, the reviews on the two refinery models are solely performed by IFPEN. They are performed not as a formal critical review against the ISO standard, but with regard to its technical content and scientific validity and consistency. A full validation of the primary data, databases and model are outside the scope of this review, but spot checks and plausibility checks are performed. This summarizing report is collectively developed by IFPEN and SPHERA.

CO2‐based motor vehicle taxes in the European Union

Position paper of ACEA on the AFID (DAFI)

The present work analyses the lessons learnt from the Covid19 (Coronavirus) pandemic that could possibly apply to the energy sector, with a special focus to decarbonizing transport. Distinguishing between short/medium- and medium/long-term options, the scope is to discuss how issues such energy security, energy storage and energy system resilience should deserve more attention. Today, fuel demand has fallen to unprecedented levels, with jet fuel demand being the most affected one. Oil price is at the lowest values recorded for many years while on 20 April it even reached a negative price in the US for the first time in history. While in the short-term low oil prices would be attractive, the long-term negative consequences could be very relevant, with significant associated costs for the EU economy and Member states (MS) related to the collapse of demand and to the socio-economic impacts. New measures should thus be considered in the post Covid19 strategy. In particular, while in a short- to medium-term view the oil sector will require specific support measures to overcome the economic and physical shock brought in by the pandemic, in a medium to long-term perspective domestic sources such as Renewable and Recycled Carbon Fuels (RRCF) should be regarded as a way to secure energy supply, leading to significant technical and economic advantages. Thus, EU should allocate adequate resources in the post-Covid recovery plans to definitely allow the transition to renewable energy sources and particularly to bio-based economy and stainable transport fuels.

Decarbonisation of transport through RRCF and economic recovery do not compete, but rather represent a win-win solution in a well-designed and sustainable implementation strategy, especially when low or zero interest-rate investments are foreseen. The EU should take the opportunity to match the UN SDG (Sustainable Development Goals) and EU Green Deal goals with the need to inject economic and financial resources into the real economy improving the socio-economic conditions of EU populations. Both agroforestry and RRCF industry are ready to produce (biomass) or source (waste) the feedstocks as well as the technologies, systems and components needed by the industry along the whole value chain. The roadmap to cleaner transport fuels thus represent an evident opportunity to meet climate, economic and societal post-Covid19 goals, in a win-win-win approach.

This report is a market update on the IEA’s most recent five-year renewable energy forecast, Renewables 2019, published in October 2019. It provides an early analysis of the drivers and challenges since last October, and covers renewable capacity additions for all technologies and transport biofuel production expected during 2020 and 2021. An update on renewable heat technologies is also included; however, the analysis is qualitative due to limited data availability.

Given ongoing uncertainty, the forecasts for 2020 and 2021 will be updated in the second half of the year to reassess recent market and policy developments.

CO2 emissions from the steel industry are amongst the most difficult to abate, since carbon is used as a stoichiometric reducing agent in most steel mills. This carbon ends up as a CO/CO2 mixture in the steel mill gases, which are combusted to generate heat, electricity, and more CO2. Strategies to capture and store (CCS), utilize (CCU) or avoid CO2 in steel production exist, but are highly dependent on the availability of renewable electricity for the production of low-carbon H2. Steel mill gas contains energy, and can thus be re-used more easily than combustion gas or process gas from the cement industry. In this study, we evaluate several strategies to reduce CO2 emissions in the steel industry and rank them according to their renewable electricity requirement. We propose the following steps: (1) shut down the steel plant’s power plant, since it produces electricity with a carbon intensity that is even higher than coal-based power plants; (2) replace steel mill gas with natural gas to generate heat within the steel mill; (3) recover the reducing gases, H2 and CO, from the steel mill gases: e.g., using pressure swing adsorption to obtain a H2-rich stream from COG, and sorption-enhanced water gas shift to obtain a H2-rich stream and a pure CO2 stream from BFG and BOFG; (4) the recovered H2 converts some of the CO2 to methanol, excess CO2 is stored. The proposed CCUS scenario can retrofit existing infrastructure, uses proven technology and reduces CO2 emissions by 70% for a marginal renewable electricity demand. Other energy-intensive alternatives have the potential to reduce CO2 emissions by 85%, but require an order-of-magnitude more renewable electricity .

The European steelmaking industry emits 4% of the EU’s total CO2 emissions. It is under growing public, economic and regulatory pressure to become carbon neutral by 2050, in line with EU targets. About 60% of European steel is produced via the so-called primary route, an efficient but highly carbon-intensive production method. The industry already
uses carbon mitigation techniques, but these are insufficient to significantly reduce or eliminate carbon emissions. The development and implementation of new technologies
is underway.
With limited investment cycles left until the 2050 deadline, the European steelmaking industry must decide on which new technology to invest in within the next 5-10 years.
We assess the most promising emerging technologies in this report. They fall into two main categories: carbon capture, use and/or storage (CCUS), and alternative reduction of iron ore. CCUS processes can be readily integrated into existing steel plants, but cannot alone achieve carbon neutrality. If biomass is used in place of fossil fuels in the steelmaking process, CCUS can result in a negative carbon balance.
Alternative reduction technologies include hydrogen-based direct reduction processes and electrolytic reduction methods. Most are not well developed and require huge amounts of green energy, but they hold the promise of carbon-neutral steelmaking.
One alternative reduction process, H2-based shaft furnace direct reduction, offers particular promise due to its emissions-reduction potential and state of readiness. It is the technology that we envisage steelmakers will pursue in order to achieve carbon neutrality. H2-based shaft furnace direct reduction is ready to use and can be introduced step-by-step into brownfield plants. This ensures operational continuity and reduced emissions during the transition from conventional steelmaking methods.
A full transition is only achievable through high CAPEX and a plentiful supply of green electricity. To switch the approximately 30 million tons per annum of steel produced via the primary route in Germany to H2-based shaft furnace direct reduction would require estimated capital expenditure of about EUR 30 bn at current prices. In addition, electricity production of 120 TWh per annum would be required, a figure roughly equal to half the amount of green electricity Germany produced in 2019. Political support is therefore vital
if the European steel industry is to achieve carbon neutrality. Without it, large parts of
the steelmaking value chain may move abroad.

The IEA Bioenergy Annual Report 2019 includes a special feature article ‘Gasification – a versatile technology’ prepared by Task 33.
The Annual Report also includes a report from the Executive Committee and a detailed progress report on each of the Tasks. Also included is key information such as Task participation, Contracting Parties, budget tables and substantial contact information plus lists of reports and papers produced by the Technology Collaboration Programme.

ETIP Bioenergy Working Group 2 – Conversion processes – has recently released a new report listing current demonstration and first commercial facilities for advanced biofuels in Europe. The report considers operational plants, plants under construction and planned projects, based on publicly available information.

The facilities covered include demonstration and first-of-a-kind commercial projects (TRL 6 to 8), based on the priority value chains (PVC) for advanced biofuels as defined by ETIP Bioenergy, as well as other important facilities based on different technologies.

The analysis shows that all the pathways together currently provide a capacity of 358 828 t of advanced biofuels per year; another 151 900 t/y are currently under construction and plans for another 1 742 760 t/y have been announced.

Most of the operational capacity available today stems from pyrolysis oil plants (74 000 t/y), followed by plants producing alcohols from cellulosic sugars (49 420 t/y).

When looking at the planned capacity, gasification pathways provide the majority (685 760 t/y in total over a variety of pathways and products), followed by alcohols from cellulosic sugars (380 000 t/y), in addition to a large contribution expected from a planned facility for the production of 500 000 t/y of renewable diesel from tall oil.

The most important fuel products are ethanol, followed by pyrolysis oil and methanol. The upgrading of pyrolysis oil in refineries and the integration of advanced biofuel production into pulp mills become increasingly attractive in the European context.

This document includes an updated Part B: Methodology from the June 2019 report and an updated Part
F: Full list of technical screening criteria. The other original sections from the June 2019 report can be
found as labelled in the June 2019 report.

The action plan on sustainable finance adopted by the European Commission in March 2018 has 3 main objectives:

– reorient capital flows towards sustainable investment, in order to achieve sustainable and inclusive growth
– manage financial risks stemming from climate change, environmental degradation and social issues
– foster transparency and long-termism in financial and economic activity

The European Green Deal communication published by the European Commission in December 2019, emphasised the need to accelerate the transition to a low-emission and climate-neutral economy, including through the shift to sustainable mobility. The Commission has announced a basket of measures as part of this transition including the preparation of a strategy for sustainable and smart mobility, which will be published in 2020 and set the framework for EU measures on the matter. Some key areas of intervention in the maritime sector concern ramping-up the production, deployment and uptake of sustainable alternative transport fuels, regulating access of the most polluting ships to EU ports and obliging docked ships to use shore-side electricity. A revision of the Energy Taxation Directive along with a proposal to extend European emissions trading to the maritime sector are also amongst the measures proposed for 2021 addressing the call for the price of transport to reflect the impact it has on the environment. Moreover, a revision of relevant State aid guidelines including the environmental and energy State aid guidelines, reflecting the policy objectives of the European Green Deal, should ensure a level-playing field in the internal market also in this sector (including for deployment of on-shore charging infrastructures).
By creating a clear pathway for the demand of sustainable alternative fuels (low and zero-emissions sustainable alternative fuels and power) in maritime transport, the ‘ReFuelEU Maritime’ initiative, announced in the context of the 2020 Commission Work Programme, aims to accelerate achievement of low-emission, climate-neutral shipping and ports by promoting the uptake of sustainable alternative energy and power. It is a first concrete step to bring the maritime sector in line with the European ambition of climate-neutrality by 2050. It will build on the impact assessment that the Commission plans to present by summer 2020 to increase the EU’s greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction target for 2030 to at least 50% and towards 55 % compared to 1990 levels.
This initiative continues the approach already promoted by the 2016 Low Emission Mobility Strategy. It outlines a clear pathway for the maritime sector to deliver the projections in the Commission’s long-term vision for a prosperous, modern, competitive and climate-neutral economy by 2050 as well as the strategic orientations of Horizon Europe. It is also in line with the global strategy for reduction of GHG emissions from ships by the International Maritime Organization, which includes measures to support the development and uptake of low- and zero-carbon alternative fuels. Furthermore, other complementary initiatives are on-going in the context of the European Green Deal, such as the Strategy for Smart Sector Integration, scheduled for Q2 2020, which aim at decarbonising the energy system by further integrating the different sectors, including transport and buildings, where decarbonisation efforts have not been equally successful to date.

The handbook includes arguments for retrofitting, describes the retrofitting process and its impact on public perception, summarizes the European biomass potential and logistics of biomass, provides an overview on biomass conversion pathways, and finally, explains technical retrofitting solutions for industries. The addressed industries are first-generation biofuels, pulp and paper, fossil refineries, fossil firing power and Combined Heat and Power (CHP) sectors.
The handbook shows that there is an abundance of possibilities to produce high value energy carriers, biofuels and other forms of energy from biomass, and that bioenergy retrofitting is a promising, but also already widely practiced, proven way to increase the sustainability of production processes.
The handbook provides this information to stakeholders and decision makers in the relevant industries who might have only little technical background. The handbook aims to open their eyes and to facilitate the technical understanding of bioenergy opportunities for their industries.

The report considers whether the introduction of an annual renewable energy obligation for aviation would be an effective way to stimulate the production and consumption of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), with a view to achieving the objective of a minimum of 14% sustainable aviation fuel in the Netherlands by 2030. It also discusses the preconditions for and risks of introducing an obligation. To assess this, we have undertaken analysis and stakeholder interviews, covering six key areas: legal framework, choice of policy mechanism, supply options, sustainability, promoting production in the Netherlands, economic impacts and logistics.

This Communication sets out a European Green Deal for the European Union (EU) and its citizens. It resets the Commission’s commitment to tackling climate and environmental-related challenges that is this generation’s defining task.

Decarbonising transport will require a range of bio-based transport fuels, and especially advanced low carbon fuels which are suitable for long-haul transport applications including aviation. A number of appropriate technologies to produce such fuels are being developed and commercialised. However so far, their production has only reached a limited scale.

The costs of these advanced biofuels are currently higher than those of the fossil fuels which they can displace and of more conventional biofuels such as ethanol from sugar or corn, or biodiesel. This report consider what scope there is to reduce the production costs of a range of advanced biofuels, and to identify under what conditions they could become affordable.

As this report highlights, wood energy potential could be further enhanced by collecting a larger share of logging residues. Just over half of Swedish forest fellings come in the form of roundwood from tree trunks, which are harvested for lumber, other wood products, pulp and paper. While processing residues are already converted to bioenergy, felling residues – such as tree stumps and “slash” from branches and small trees – could also provide a sustainable bioenergy source.
Among other findings:
• Sustainable wood use from Swedish logging could rise seven-fold through collecting 70% of slash and 30% of stumps.
• Wood growth in Swedish forests each year is twice what it was a century ago – on about the same land area.
• Every tonne of wood used in Swedish buildings avoids nearly three tonnes of CO2 emissions.
Although the market for wood-based heat and power to displace fossil-based fuel oil is largely saturated in Sweden, further wood resources could be redirected to other biofuel production, including jet fuel. Meanwhile, the carbon uptake potential from forests could be enhanced through focused application of fertiliser. Further carbon uptake could be achieved in buildings by replacing materials like steel and concrete with more lumber and wood-residue composites, the report notes.

ACEA’s position paper on the European Green Deal

The report examines the introduction of E20 to the EU market focusing on the Supply and Demand characteristics.

This report, based on the project data, goes beyond the objectives of the carriers and the
comparison of the different types of motorization. Thus, for spatial planning, it is
necessary to know where the emissions are concentrated and what are the impacts of
traffic, infrastructures and facilities4.
In this report, in addition to the raw results, we will try to highlight four essential points:
• The first is the correction of a cliché considering a road transport dominated by long distances traveled on highway. As will be seen immediately below, this correction is of great importance for pollutant emission estimates.
• The second point is the identification of factors that explain consumption and emissions, which are not always the ones that carriers or infrastructure designers and managers think about.
• The third point is the importance of the actual operating conditions and the complexity of the description of the use of a vehicle.
• The fourth and last point is the great variability of the operating conditions, linked to the multiplicity of explanatory factors, which renders illusory the belief in the existence of typical journey profiles.

This Roadmap explores the challenge of industrial heat decarbonization. It is intended to be an initial, “1.0” analysis of the topic. After providing general background, we discuss four technological approaches for providing low-carbon industrial heat: hydrogen, biomass, electrification and CCUS. We next examine decarbonizing heat production in the cement, iron and steel, and chemical industries. We then turn to policy options and an innovation agenda. We close with findings and recommendations.

This Implementation Plan (IP) of Action 8, Bioenergy and Renewable Fuels for Sustainable
Transport, describes the Research and Innovation (R&I) activities that need to be implemented in
order to achieve the strategic targets adopted in the SET Plan Declaration of Intent (DoI), agreed in
December 2017 by the representatives of the European Commission services, SET Plan countries
and stakeholders most directly involved in the respective sectors.

This report provides information on the use of sustainable biomass in Germany during the 2018 calendar year. Details on the quantities of biofuels and bioliquids are split into three sections. These are:
– Biofuels counting towards the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Quota (Chapter 6);
– Bioliquids registered for electricity generation and supply under the EEG [Renewable Energy Act] (Chapter 7);
– Biofuels and bioliquids not destined for energy use in Germany (Chapter 8).
The data used for the evaluation report are provided by our sustainable biomass system government database (Nabisy). It is a record of all biofuel and bioliquid quantities relevant to the German market. This begins by the certified manufacturers of biofuels entering the data required for producing a sustainability certificate. After that, the biofuel is generally traded a number of times, with all economic operators along the trade chain also requiring certification and a Nabisy account in order to receive or transfer the certificate, now referred to as a partial sustainability certificate. The process is similar to online banking. As the competent authority, the BLE is required to submit an annual progress report to the federal government.

Technoeconomic and life-cycle analyses are presented for catalytic conversion of ethanol to fungible hydrocarbon fuel blendstocks, informed by advances in catalyst and process development. Whereas prior work toward this end focused on 3-step processes featuring dehydration, oligomerization, and hydrogenation, the consolidated alcohol dehydration and oligomerization (CADO) approach described here results in 1-step conversion of wet ethanol vapor (40 wt% in water) to hydrocarbons and water over a metal-modified zeolite catalyst. A development project increased liquid hydrocarbon yields from 36% of theoretical to >80%, reduced catalyst cost by an order of magnitude, scaled up the process by 300-fold, and reduced projected costs of ethanol conversion 12-fold. Current CADO products conform most closely to gasoline blendstocks, but can be blended with jet fuel at low levels today, and could potentially be blended at higher levels in the future. Operating plus annualized capital costs for conversion of wet ethanol to fungible blendstocks are estimated at $2.00/GJ for CADO today and $1.44/GJ in the future, similar to the unit energy cost of producing anhydrous ethanol from wet ethanol ($1.46/GJ). Including the cost of ethanol from either corn or future cellulosic biomass but not production incentives, projected minimum selling prices for fungible blendstocks produced via CADO are competitive with conventional jet fuel when oil is $100 per barrel but not at $60 per barrel. However, with existing production incentives, the projected minimum blendstock selling price is competitive with oil at $60 per barrel. Life-cycle greenhouse gas emission reductions for CADO-derived hydrocarbon blendstocks closely follow those for the ethanol feedstock.

Advanced liquid biofuels are a key part of low-carbon transport development to meet emission-reduction targets and international climate commitments. Liquid biofuels, requiring minimal changes to fuel distribution infrastructure or the transport fleet, can be deployed rapidly to cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
This study from the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) analyses current barriers to investment in advanced biofuels. Based primarily on a survey of industry executives and decision makers, the study aims to capture the perspective of project developers aiming to nurture the market and scale up actual usage in competition with fossil fuels.
Among the findings:

• Regulatory uncertainty stands out as the most important impediment to investment in advanced biofuels.
• Transport sector decarbonisation calls for accepting several fuel alternatives simultaneously rather than resorting to a single, all-encompassing solution.
• Low subsidy levels, high financing costs and limited availability of finance are seen by many executives as barriers in the current market.
• Unless regulators devise specific promotional measures, the cellulosic ethanol segment will face uneven cost competition from first-generation ethanol producers in a declining market.
• Industry executives question the accuracy and reliability of common methods for estimating GHG emissions, land-use change and indirect land-use change.

On behalf of vehicle and engine manufacturers from around the world, the Worldwide Fuel Charter (WWFC) Committee is
pleased to present the Sixth Edition of the Worldwide Fuel Charter for Gasoline and Diesel Fuel, 21 years after publishing the
First Edition. In addition to this Charter, the Committee recently published the First Edition of the WWFC for Methane-Based
Transportation Fuels and previously published guidelines for ethanol and biodiesel blendstocks.
The Charter and Guidelines have two purposes: to inform policymakers and other interested parties how fuel quality can
significantly affect engine and vehicle operation, durability and emissions performance throughout the year; and to promote
harmonised fuel quality worldwide in accordance with vehicle, engine and emission control system needs, for the benefit of
consumers and the general environment.
This edition updates the previous edition in several ways and presents each fuel in its own chapter for easier reading. The
gasoline chapter introduces a new Category 6 to address anticipated vehicle and engine regulations for emission control
and fuel efficiency in certain major markets. Also, it introduces new metrics to help reduce particle emissions. Notably, in light
of global progress on gasoline quality since the WWFC was first published more than two decades ago, we are pleased to
announce the retirement of Category 1 gasoline as obsolete.
We have also seen great progress in diesel fuel quality around the world, but some regions, unfortunately, still have unacceptably
high sulphur levels, even exceeding 10,000 ppm in some markets. To encourage these regions to bring their fuel
quality to cleaner and more modern specifications, we decided to retain Category 1 diesel fuel, but only as guidance to a
transitional quality fuel. The Committee is serving notice, however, that it intends to retire Category 1 diesel fuel in a future
edition. The second change to the diesel fuel specifications appears in Category 5, which has been modified to encourage
greater use of alternative and synthetic diesel fuel blends.
As countries move toward ever more stringent engine and vehicle emission and efficiency requirements, fuel quality becomes
an ever more important factor in engine and vehicle performance and cleanliness. Sulphur-free and metal-free fuels
remain critical prerequisites for ultraclean, efficient and durable technology, and the best fuel quality, as represented in the
highest numbered categories, will enable the most advanced vehicles, engines and emission control systems to meet their
design potential for high performance, clean operation, maximum efficiency and optimum environmental performance.
We appreciate the many comments submitted on this new Sixth Edition; they have helped make it a better document. We
look forward to working with you to support these harmonised fuel quality specifications for the benefit of consumers and
the environment around the world.

On behalf of vehicle and engine manufacturers from around the world, the Worldwide Fuel Charter (WWFC) Committee is pleased to present the First Edition of the Worldwide Fuel Charter for Methane-Based Transportation Fuels. The WWFC Committee published its first Charter, for gasoline and diesel fuel, in 1998; that Charter is now in its sixth edition. In addition to these Charters, the Committee has published Guidelines for ethanol and biodiesel blend stocks. These documents are available through the associations shown above. The purpose of these Charters and Guidelines is twofold: to inform policymakers and other interested parties about the key role of fuel quality in engine and vehicle operation, durability and emissions, and to promote harmonised fuel quality worldwide in accordance with vehicle, engine and emission control system needs, for the benefit of consumers and the general environment. The use of methane-based fuels for transportation has grown rapidly in recent years, and the quality of these fuels varies widely around the world. As a result, the Committee saw a need to provide information about these fuels and how to match their quality with the needs and capabilities of modern vehicle and engine technologies. This document presents recommended fuel quality specifications for markets with the most advanced motor vehicles and engines as well as for markets with less advanced vehicles and engines. Vehicles and engines work with fuels as a system, so matching fuel quality to vehicle and engine technology will provide the best vehicle and engine performance and minimise emissions and fuel consumption for the various categories of technologies. Matching fuel quality to vehicle/engine capabilities also provides a path to fuel quality harmonisation worldwide and to improved functioning of transportation markets. As an alternative fuel, methane-based fuels have the potential to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance the sustainability of hydrocarbon-based fuels. The key to achieving the best available performance with the least environmental impact is to produce high quality methane-based fuels in a sustainable way and to preserve their quality throughout the distribution system until the fuel reaches the consumer. This document represents our best collective judgment based on experience with these fuels. Technical information and field data will continue to evolve, however, so we will strive to update this document periodically as we learn more.

In light of the EU’s ambitious targets for achieving a low carbon economy by 2030, Concawe has completed a study of the long-term availability of low-carbon feedstocks and fuels, and the associated costs, based on a literature review. This article summarises the outcomes of the Concawe study.

Technologies for upgrading fast pyrolysis bio‐oil to drop‐in fuels and co‐products are under development and show promise for decarbonizing energy supply for transportation and chemicals markets. The successful commercialization of these fuels and the technologies deployed to produce them depend on production costs, scalability, and yield. To meet environmental regulations, pyrolysis‐based biofuels need to adhere to life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) intensity standards relative to their petroleum‐based counterparts. We review literature on fast pyrolysis bio‐oil upgrading and explore key metrics that influence their commercial viability through life cycle assessment (LCA) and techno‐economic analysis (TEA) methods together with technology readiness level (TRL) evaluation. We investigate the tradeoffs among economic, environmental and technological metrics derived from these methods for individual technologies as a means of understanding their nearness to commercialization. Although the technologies reviewed have not attained commercial investment, some have been pilot‐tested. Predicting the projected performance at scale‐up through models can, with industrial experience, guide decision‐making to competitively meet energy policy goals. LCA and TEA methods that ensure consistent and reproducible models at a given TRL are needed to compare alternative technologies. This study highlights the importance of integrated analysis of multiple economic, environmental and technological metrics for understanding performance prospects and barriers among early stage technologies.

SPIRE’s new Vision 2050: ‘Towards the next generation of European Process Industries – Enhancing our cross-sectorial approach in research and innovation’. This vision foresees an integrated and digital European Process Industry, delivering new technologies and business models that address climate change and enable a fully circular society in Europe with enhanced competitiveness and impact for jobs and growth.

Liquid Gas Europe’s recent Autogas Vision includes the results of a recent study by TM Leuven, assessing the societal and environmental impacts of an increase in Autogas (LPG as a transport fuel) market share to 2050.
Despite gains in fuel efficiency, emissions from the transport sector still represent about a quarter of Europe’s GHG emissions and are the main cause of air pollution in cities. And mobility demand continues to increase. Low-emission options using existing infrastructure are urgently needed to address these critical mobility challenges, now. Autogas is the number one alternative fuel in the EU, counting 8 million vehicles and 31,000 fueling stations. Autogas is clean, safe, convenient, and available. It emits less CO2 and far less pollutant emissions, such as NOx. And in many countries, it is considerably cheaper than petrol or diesel. While the market development of electromobility is gearing up for the future, the opportunities to decrease the carbon and pollution footprint of transport needs urgent action today. The TM Leuven study clearly shows that the cumulative emissions reductions under the projected growth scenario to 2050 would equal environmental and societal benefits of 18.7 billion euros. This is more than four times Belgium’s annual GDP. Further, converting existing vehicles to Autogas is affordable for the consumer, and a cost-effective solution to accelerate road transport emissions reduction efforts from today’s car park. And finally, LPG savings do not come at the expense of electromobility but actually complement it. “LPG can support air quality mitigation strategies in the short to medium-term until zero-emission vehicle sales ramp up” says Samuel Maubanc, General Manager of Liquid Gas Europe. “The LPG industry is also investing in and commercializing BioLPG, a renewable fuel with even greater emissions reduction potential for the future and aims to be carbon-neutral by 2050.”

This report, which we have developed in co-operation with the Sustainable Gas Institute at Imperial College, shows our initial results in the form of a database of projects across the “low-carbon gas” space, and we intend to keep this updated over the coming months and years as a record of the progress that the industry is making. The report also reviews the range of targets that have been set for the potential share for renewable gas in the European energy mix by 2050, and we will continue to assess the extent of industry activity relative to these goals.

Much of the background material that was detailed in the original, 2014, IEA Bioenergy Task 39 “The Potential and Challenges of Drop-in Biofuels” report is still very relevant and has been either summarised, reproduced or slightly re-written in the current, updated report. In the intervening years good progress has been made in several of the technologies, some new projects have been announced, with some moving towards demonstration/commercial scale. Although some technologies are currently stalled or on-the-back-burner, the basic categories and operating theories of drop-in technologies have remained largely the same. Although the aviation sector continues to play a leadership role in championing the development of drop-in biofuels the imminent global requirement to reduce sulphur emissions from the marine sector encouraged IEA Bioenergy Task 39 to commission a specific report on Biofuels in Marine Shipping. This report can be accessed and downloaded from the Task 39 website. We hope to soon release a similar, updated report on Biofuels in Aviation in the near future. As is covered in much more detail in this current report, oil refinery integration will be key to the future development of significant volumes of drop-in biofuels. Although the need for better integration of petroleum refineries and drop-in biofuel production was discussed previously, in this update, co-processing, specifically the second, upgrading, stage is highlighted as being key to the future expansion of drop-in biofuels. It is suggested that better utilisation of existing refinery infrastructure for co-processing of biobased intermediates will greatly facilitate the future development and expansion of low carbon drop-in biofuels by creating a commodity market for intermediates produced via either the oleochemical based “conventional”, or the biocrude/bio-oil based “advanced” drop-in biofuel routes. This will enhance the accelerated production of liquid bio-based intermediates that can then be upgraded in bulk at existing refineries. This current report also synergises with other Task 39 work as well as with the work of other IEA Bioenergy Tasks and related work carried out by other IEA TCP’s and organisations such as IRENA, GBEP, etc. IEA Bioenergy Task 39 recently published (www.Task39.org) an “Implementation Agendas” report, that compares-and-contrasts the various policies that member countries have used to encourage the production and use of biofuels. We also publish a database on demonstration level biofuel facilities that is updated annually and can be accessed at http://demoplants.bioenergy2020.eu/. While Task 39 is focused on production of liquid biofuels, the IEA Bioenergy Tasks on Gasification (Task 33) and Direct Thermochemical Liquefaction (Task 34) address the underlying technologies in greater depth, without limiting themselves to liquid biofuels for transportation. Gasification Task – http://www.ieabioenergy.com/task/thermal-gasification-of-biomass/Direct Thermochemical Liquefaction task – http://www.ieabioenergy.com/task/pyrolysis-of-biomass/The future work of IEA Bioenergy over the next triennium will feature an integrated project between these different Task groups.

In the intervening four years since the last “The Potential and Challenges of Drop-in Biofuels” report was published, what has become apparent is that technology/commercialisation cannot function in isolation, particularly during times of relatively low oil prices and when transport related carbon emissions are not costed. Without long-term supporting policies, companies will struggle to fully commercialise drop-in biofuels technologies as it is likely that, for some time, drop-in biofuels will be more expensive than fossil-based transportation fuels. Thus, the development of significant volumes of drop-in biofuels will require significant, long-term and stable policy support. As well as policies, achieving a consensus on how the overall carbon intensity of a drop-in biofuel is calculated is still needed. Currently Task 39 has an ongoing project that is comparing-and-contrasting several of the main life cycle assessment (LCA) models that are used to calculate the sustainability and GHG intensity of various biofuels. This report will be released in 2019 and will form the basis of future work where, as well as assessing the commercial readiness of the various routes to drop-in biofuels production, the carbon intensity of the various processes and products will also be assessed

UPEI 2050 vision contribute to the ongoing consultation process on the EU long-term strategy. The paper presents UPEI’s perspectives: UPEI calls upon governments to adopt a technology neutral approach to the energy transition; ensure a stable policy framework, favourable to investments; define long-term targets rather than market bans; consider social acceptance and affordability; and support innovation in low carbon fuels.

Commission Staff Working Document on the Evaluation of the Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity

The EU set a 10 percent target for renewable energy use in transport for 2020, and raised the target to 14 percent in 2030, with advanced biofuels counting double to the target. Taking double-counting into account, biofuels accounted for 7.1 percent of energy use in transport in 2018 and are forecast to increase to 7.3 percent in 2019, mainly supported by elevated imports. Further increase for 2019 is hampered by lagging domestic production of biodiesel in particular. The EU agreed to a seven percent cap for food-based biofuels, which is forecast at 4.6 percent in 2019. For advanced, nonfood based biofuels, the EU set a climbing target of 0.2 percent in 2022 reaching 3.5 percent in 2030. Use of such advanced biofuels, made mostly from agricultural, forestry and municipal waste, is estimated at currently 0.2 percent and forecast to rise mainly based on tall oil. The EU set a limit of 1.7 percent by 2030 for advanced biofuels produced with waste fats and oils. The blending of these biofuels is estimated at currently one percent. The EU market for wood pellets is expected to continue its growth path during 2019, but further expansion could be limited by individual Member State sustainability requirements.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) report analyzes economic impact of biobased products
industry on U.S. economy. Results show the growing bioeconomy leads to higher revenues,
more jobs, innovative partnerships, and key environmental benefits.
Report Highlights
– Biobased products, a segment of the bioeconomy, contributed $459 billion to the U.S.
economy in 2016, a 17% increase from 2014. The biobased products sector impacts every
state in the nation and is not just confined to states where agriculture is the main industry.
– Strong bioproducts sector growth led to a total of 4.65 million jobs in 2016, an increase of
more than 10% in two years. This includes the 1.68 million people directly employed within
the industry, plus 2.98 million employed in jobs supported by the industry.
– The growing bioeconomy also leads to environmental benefits, which include reducing the
use of fossil fuels and associated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The report shows
potential reductions of GHG emissions of 60%, with analyses indicating that up to 12 million
metric tons of CO2 equivalents may have been reduced in 2016.

The decision by the Commission to register a citizens’ initiative entitled ‘A price for carbon to fight climate change’. The objectives of the proposed citizens’ initiative refer to the following: ‘Our proposal introduces a minimum price on CO2 emissions, starting from EUR 50 per CO2 tonne from 2020 up to EUR 100 by 2025. At the same time, the proposal shall abolish the existing system of free allowances to EU polluters and introduce a border adjustment mechanism on non-EU imports, in such a way as to compensate for the lower pricing on CO2 emissions in the exporting country. The higher revenue deriving from carbon pricing shall be allocated to European policies that support energy saving and the use of renewable sources, and to the reduction of taxation on lower incomes.

Due to lower-cost energy supplies elsewhere, Europe needs resource efficient technologies to safeguard the competitiveness of its energy-intensive industries. The technical feasibility of the CCU value chain components (carbon capture, transportation and utilization) has been widely studied in literature. However infrastructural, regulatory and business strategic issues have received less attention. A review of the relevant policies (e.g. European Emissions Trading Scheme, Renewable Fuels and Waste Directives) has been performed. Stakeholder engagement and the stakeholder influence mapping was used to examine potential climate change, circular economy, renewable energy and regional industrial development policies that can support CO2 utilization value chains. The main contribution of the paper is to outline potential benefits of policies to foster the production and uptake of CO2-derived products such as methanol, polyurethane and mineral construction aggregates. Another outcome is to illustrate the role of key policy-making stakeholders in assessing the suitability of current statutes and the impact of potential changes. An important finding was that the development of connectivity infrastructure is a key missing enabler and more attention to policy on infrastructure is required. Finally, the work examines the justification for a CO2 Utilization Directive, comparable to the Carbon Capture and Storage Directive, but considering the current complexity of the European Union (EU) policy landscape.

This document sets out the results of the work to date undertaken by the Technical Expert Group on Sustainable Finance (hereafter, ‘TEG’) in relation to the development of an EU classification system for environmentally sustainable economic activities (hereafter ‘Taxonomy’). It has six parts: PART A Explanation of the Taxonomy approach. This section sets out the role and importance of sustainable finance in Europe from a policy and investment perspective, the rationale for the development of an EU Taxonomy, the daft regulation and the mandate of the TEG. PART B Methodology. This explains the methodologies for developing technical screening criteria for climate change mitigation objectives, adaptation objectives and ‘do no significant harm’ to other environmental objectives in the legislative proposal. PART C Taxonomy user and use case analysis. This section provides practical guidance to potential users of the Taxonomy, including case studies. PART D Economic impacts of the Taxonomy. This section provides the TEG’s analysis of the likely economic impacts of establishing an EU Taxonomy. PART E Next steps for the Taxonomy. This section elaborates on unresolved issues and potential ways forward for the Taxonomy and the technical work of the Platform on Sustainable Finance. PART F Full list of technical screening criteria. This annex sets out the sector- and economic activity-specific technical screening criteria and rationale for the TEG’s analysis.

COMMISSION DELEGATED REGULATION (EU) 2019/807 supplementing Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the determination of high indirect land-use change-risk feedstock for which a significant expansion of the production area into land with high carbon stock is observed and the certification of low indirect land-use change-risk biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels.

This document presents the numerous benefits the new EU rules will provide, from different angles – environmental, economic, security of supply, consumer, international, and from a longer time scale. The key message is that these changes are good for the planet, good for growth and jobs, and good for consumers. It is no coincidence that we called it the ‘Clean energy for all Europeans’ package.

Directive EU 2018/2001 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources has been officially ratified in December 2018 for the post-2020 framework. It is a new iteration of the Renewable Energy Directive RED, the so-called ‘recast’, work on which began in 2016. The Directive fixes a minimum requirement for greenhouse gas (GHG) savings for biofuels and bioliquids for the period from 2021 to 2030, and sets the rules for calculating the greenhouse impact of biofuels, bioliquids and their fossil fuels comparators. To help economic operators to declare the GHG emission savings of their products, default and typical values for a number of specific pathways are listed in the annexes of the RED-recast (Annex V). The EC Joint Research Center (JRC) is in charge of defining input values to be used for the calculation of default GHG emissions for biofuels, bioliquids, solid and gaseous biomass pathways. An update of the GHG emissions in Annex V has been carried out for the new Directive on the Promotion of the Use of Energy from Renewable Sources (Directive 2018/2001), for the post-2020 framework. This report describes the assumptions made by the JRC when compiling the new updated data set used to calculate default and typical GHG emissions for the different biofuels pathways as proposed in the new directive.

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Renewable Energy Progress Report

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL AND THE COUNCIL
A more efficient and democratic decision making in EU energy and climate policy

In 2018, in relation to the Alternative Renewable Transport Fuels Forum, (AFF) activities and also related to an on-going IEA Bioenergy study of the future cost of biofuels, it was concluded that it would be suitable to make an update of the SGAB report “Technology status and reliability of the value chains”, and broaden it to also include what was seen as emerging technologies. The update of the report was sponsored by DG ENER as a side activity within AFF, and the support of DG ENER is gratefully acknowledged.
The authors, Ingvar Landälv and Lars Waldheim, have in principle used the same methodology as in the previous version, i.e. primarily approaching developers and project owners for information, and which have been complemented by publicly available information as required. Since information has not been obtained to the same extent as in the previous report, in particular from the emerging technologies, more information from public sources has been used in this update. The authors gratefully acknowledge the valuable assistance of Dr Stamatis Kalligeros in the final editing of the report.

The India-EU Clean Energy and Climate Partnership (CECP) aims to further reinforce the cooperation between the EU and India on climate change and energy implementing the Paris agreement on affordable and clean energy. The partnership brings together all relevant stakeholders European and Indian institutions, EU member states and Indian states, businesses and civil society. The partnership facilitates policy dialogue, brings best practices, business solutions and joint research and innovation and looks at financing models for clean energy and climate change.
The 2nd EU-India Conference on Advanced Biofuels was organised by the Directorate General for Energy of the European Commission and the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas of India under the framework of the India-EU CECP.
The conference aimed at facilitating contacts between industry and technology developers from both the EU and India and eventually establishing cooperation and licencing agreements. Cooperation on research and innovation, which includes biofuels, is an integral part of the EU-India agenda.
This short booklet is a collection of the key technologies and value chains which were presented during the event that was attended by more than 220 participants. The short descriptions of the various value chains have been provided by the technology developers themselves.

The purpose of this technical amendment to Commission Delegated Regulation EU 2018/674 is to ensure that L-category vehicles and inland waterway vessels running on different alternative fuels such as electricity, hydrogen and gas are able to refuel across the EU at standardised recharging and refuelling points.

This analysis examines socio-economic and environmental co-benefits related to biofuels production for the transport sector. It has a point of departure that regional transportation biofuel production will require an expanded set of economic activities in that region in order to deliver functional fuels. This supports an expectation that domestic biofuel production demands both expansion of existing socio-technical systems, and the creation of new systems, and that stimulation of employment and economic activities along biomass and transport fuel value chains flow on from such.
A further rationale underlying this work is that Sweden hosts large quantities of biomass, and the country has highly developed bioenergy systems – including systems to produce transportation biofuels. These factors indicative of significant potential to expand Swedish biofuel production based on domestic feedstocks. Current Swedish biofuels is however largely dependent upon imported fuels and feedstocks. Logically, a significant proportion of socio-economic co-benefits, presumed to be associated with biofuel production, cannot accrue in Sweden when this is the case. Improved knowledge of the benefits that Sweden could experience if higher proportions of the national consumption were met by domestic production should be of interest in this instance.
This socio-economic analysis delivers a screening review of job (employment opportunity) creation assessments, and a review of methods used to enumerate other socio-economic and environmental benefits. It is intended that this deliver insights to the relative performance of biofuel systems as compared to the status quo (e.g. systems where fossil fuels are used in transportation, or where biofuels or feedstocks, or both are imported). The review has a principal focus on job creation metrics.
Within this report, the term ‘metric’ is intended to convey the meaning of a standard of measurement by which the efficiency, performance, progress, or quality of a process, or product can be assessed.
The method assessment included examination of a range of different pathways by which analysts calculate or measure parameters such as job creation, wealth creation, ancillary environmental benefits, and socio-economic benefits. This required compilation and synthesis of several types of studies. These include: assessments of national level benefits; benefits delivered by a specific sector, project, or projects; biofuels-related metrics for employment and economic stimulation; measures of contribution to energy security; and valuation of environmental benefits related to both production and consumption of biofuels.

The purpose of this study is to assess the cost-optimal way to fully decarbonise the EU energy system by 2050 and to explore the role and value of renewable and low-carbon gas used in existing gas infrastructure. This is being done by comparing a “minimal gas” scenario with an “optimised gas” scenario. This study is an updated version of the February 2018 Gas for Climate study, with an extended scope of analysis.
The current study adds an analysis of EU energy demand in the industry and transport sectors. It also includes an updated supply and cost analysis for biomethane and green hydrogen, including dedicated renewable electricity production to produce hydrogen, and an analysis on power to methane. Finally, we assessed the potential role of blue hydrogen, natural gas combined with carbon capture and storage (CCS) or carbon capture and utilisation (CCU).

Presentation of the BP Energy Outlook Report

The Outlook considers a number of different scenarios. These scenarios are not predictions of what is likely to happen or what BP would like to happen. Rather, they explore the possible implications of different judgements and assumptions by considering a series of “what if” experiments. The scenarios consider only a tiny sub-set of the uncertainty surrounding energy markets out to 2040; they do not provide a comprehensive description of all possible future outcomes. For ease of explanation, much of the Outlook is described with reference to the ‘Evolving transition’ scenario. But that does not imply that the probability of this scenario is higher than the others. Indeed, the multitude of uncertainties means the probability of any one of these scenarios materializing exactly as described is negligible. The Energy Outlook is produced to aid BP’s analysis and decisionmaking, and is published as a contribution to the wider debate. But the Outlook is only one source among many when considering the future of global energy markets. BP considers the scenarios in the Outlook, together with a range of other analysis and information, when forming its long-term strategy.

Energy derived from second generation perennial energy crops is projected to play an increasingly important role in the decarbonization of the energy sector. Such energy crops are expected to deliver net greenhouse gas emissions reductions through fossil fuel displacement and have potential for increasing soil carbon (C) storage. Despite this, few empirical studies have quantified the ecosystem‐level C balance of energy crops and the evidence base to inform energy policy remains limited. Here, the temporal dynamics and magnitude of net ecosystem carbon dioxide (CO2) exchange (NEE) were quantified at a mature short rotation coppice (SRC) willow plantation in Lincolnshire, United Kingdom, under commercial growing conditions. Eddy covariance flux observations of NEE were performed over a four‐year production cycle and combined with biomass yield data to estimate the net ecosystem carbon balance (NECB) of the SRC. The magnitude of annual NEE ranged from −147 ± 70 to −502 ± 84 g CO2‐C m−2 year−1 with the magnitude of annual CO2 capture increasing over the production cycle. Defoliation during an unexpected outbreak of willow leaf beetle impacted gross ecosystem production, ecosystem respiration, and net ecosystem exchange during the second growth season. The NECB was −87 ± 303 g CO2‐C m−2 for the complete production cycle after accounting for C export at harvest (1,183 g C m−2), and was approximately CO2‐C neutral (−21 g CO2‐C m−2 year−1) when annualized. The results of this study are consistent with studies of soil organic C which have shown limited changes following conversion to SRC willow. In the context of global decarbonization, the study indicates that the primary benefit of SRC willow production at the site is through displacement of fossil fuel emissions.

There is a widespread view that all of light road transport, and much of other transport sectors, should be electrified in order to meet the European Union’s (EU) climate objectives. But there is also a growing awareness that such electrification will be challenging, and that there is no single solution to build a low-carbon transport system. Concawe1 asked Ricardo2 to carry out an extensive study to examine a scenario for nearcomplete electrification of cars and light commercial vehicles on the road in the EU by 2050 (“Full Electrification scenario”), with quantification of GHG reductions, total costs of ownership and infrastructure, battery materials and power requirements. And in addition, to evaluate in the same way a scenario with a combination of electrification and lowcarbon liquid fuels into very efficient internal combustion engine (ICE)-based vehicles (“Low-Carbon Liquid Fuels scenario”). This in-depth study sets out the challenges and opportunities associated with such a range of alternative options.

A presentation covering the potentials of sector coupling for decarbonisation and assessing regulatory barriers in linking the gas and electricity sectors in the EU.

A presentation covering the study examining the energy system and macroeconomic implications of a set of electric (smart, efficient/not smart) – molecule (domestic/imported) constellations.

This study examines how zero-carbon energy systems in Europe can function, taking the European Commission’s long- term strategy towards a Net Zero Economy by 2050 as its starting point.
The study is unique in offering an in-depth analysis of the integration of power, road transport and residential heating sectors across Europe. It looks at six scenarios covering a wide range of zero-carbon technologies and energy carriers for a set of archetypes that represent the different climatic zones of Europe (Northern European vs Mediterranean).
The report finds that several different configurations of fossil-free energy system are feasible in Europe and each comes with socio-economic benefits when compared to a current-policies baseline. But clear infrastructure choices and robust policies are required to steer the transition in ways that keep the economy competitive while securing the best deal for European citizens.
The trio of objectives sometimes known as the ‘energy trilemma’ (sustainability, security and affordability) are generally thought to be in tension. But this report suggests the reverse. They can mutually support each other. For example, deeper decarbonisation means greater investment in European energy infrastructure and clean technologies, which, in turn, reduces spending on fossil fuel imports substantially. This would raise real incomes for households in Europe, boosting employment across the economy.
What stands out from the study are the potential savings in energy spending for households of up to €23 billion compared to a current policies baseline, as well as the net creation of a potential 1.8 million jobs across Europe, if a pathway including deep efficiency and smart electrification is chosen. The report does foresee structural shifts between sectors, away from fossil-fuel reliant industries towards electrical engineering and manufacturing, and so underlines the need for efforts to be made to ensure workers are re-trained for quality jobs in the growth sectors of the future.

Article highlighting the uses of palm oil and the associated issues

Report from The Commission to The European Parliament, The Council, The European Economic And Social Committee And The Committee Of The Regions On The Status Of Production Expansion Of Relevant Food And Feed Crops Worldwide

The engineering design study provides an understanding of the costs and issues surrounding the conversion of an existing biomass power plant into an RNG producing facility utilizing commercial technologies. The deployment of the RNG process provides substantial environmental benefits, reducing criteria pollutants by approximately 99% and producing a very low carbon fuel in the base case and below zero in the case including carbon sequestration technologies. The study quantifies the large greenhouse gas (GHG) benefits achieved by RNG produced from wood wastes from a product standpoint, as well as from the reduced potential for forest fires and open burning of agricultural wastes in the San Joaquin Valley and other areas in California by cleanly processing forest, urban and agricultural wastes. Additionally, the design study confirms the ability to produce large amounts of high quality, low carbon RNG for use in all energy sectors. The cost of integration of these technologies into an existing facility was influenced by specific attributes of the site itself. The learnings will help identify the most advantageous sites in California, and elsewhere, for conversion from biomass power to RNG production.

The aim of this study is to develop a dedicated roadmap for establishing a global PtX industry over the course of the next decades. We explain the need for international PtX production and trade on a global scale, explore potential PtX producing and exporting countries around the world and identify major pillars and milestones of a roadmap towards a global PtX market.

The aim of this study was to provide a realistic assessment of the current and future biofuel production potential of countries in sub-Saharan Africa. This assessment has been carried out with FAO/IIASA Agro-ecological zones models using the latest available spatial environmental data and feedstock requirement information and meets strict sustainability criteria, including the ability of biofuels to significantly reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The sustainability constraints included in the analysis are based on the Roundtable for Sustainable Biomaterials (RSB) criteria, which are considered best-in-class in terms of sustainability standards for bioenergy developments (WWF, 2013).

This report makes the case that achieving the energy transition in the EU will require hydrogen at large scale. Without it, the EU would miss its decarbonization objective. The fuel offers a versatile, clean, and flexible energy vector for this transition. While hydrogen is not the only decarbonization lever, it is an essential lever among a set of other technologies. It makes the large-scale integration of renewables possible because it enables energy players to convert and store energy as a renewable gas. It can be used for energy distribution across sectors and regions and as a buffer for renewables. It provides a way to decarbonize segments in power, transport, buildings, and industry, which would otherwise be difficult to decarbonize.

Annexes to the Final report

This study explores the impacts of alternative emission control interventions for international shipping on the European Season relevant air pollutant emissions, examines their consequence on ambient air quality in Europe and the neighboring regions, and explores the resulting improvements of human health. It estimates the costs of the various policy interventions, and compares them with monetized benefits on human health and other impacts.
It is found that further controls of SO₂ emissions, e.g., through SO₂ emission control areas, could deliver rather fast benefits, and avoid by 2030 up to 4000 cases of premature deaths annually, and 8000 in 2050. In the longer run, by 2050, application of Tier III NOx standards could double the health benefits. Even when using the lower (most conservative) health valuation, all reduction measures examined in this report emerged as cost-effective, with monetized benefits exceeding emission control costs typically by a factor of 6 in 2030 and by a factor of 12 in 2050.
Designation of the Mediterranean Sea as an Emission Control Area could by 2030 cut emissions of SO2 and NOx from international shipping by 80 and 20 percent, respectively, compared to current legislation. These additional emission reductions could avoid 4,100 cases of premature deaths in 2030 and more than 10,000 annual premature deaths in 2050. Even with the most conservative assumptions for health valuation, monetized benefits are on average 4.4 times higher than the costs in 2030 and 7.5 times higher in 2050.

The second edition of the European Aviation Environmental Report provides a scientific and comprehensive overview of the environmental challenges of aviation in the EU. It gives valuable insight on critical matters in aviation and helps us see the progress achieved and where more work needs to be done. More importantly, it sheds light on the need for Europe to pursue its efforts to invest in developing and deploying innovative solutions in the years to come for our planet and ourselves.

Directive 2018/2001 on energy efficiency on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources

Directive 2018/2002 on energy efficiency

Regulation on the Governance of the Energy Union and Climate Action

Desertification is a form of land degradation in drylands. It is a growing threat in the EU. The long period of high temperatures and low rainfall in the summer of 2018 reminded us of the pressing importance of this problem. Climate change scenarios indicate an increasing vulnerability to desertification in the EU throughout this century, with increases in temperatures and droughts and less precipitation in southern Europe. Its effects will be particularly acute in Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece, Cyprus, Bulgaria and Romania.
We found that the risk of desertification in the EU was not being effectively and efficiently addressed. While desertification and land degradation are growing threats, the steps taken to combat desertification lack coherence.
There is no shared vision in the EU about how land degradation neutrality will be achieved by 2030. We recommend the Commission aims at a better understanding of land degradation and desertification in the EU; assesses the need to enhance the EU legal framework for soil; and steps up actions towards delivering the commitment made by the EU and the Member States to achieve land degradation neutrality in the EU by 2030.

Chapter 2 will outline the legislative context relevant to sustainable marine biofuel adoption on the international, EU and Dutch level. Chapter 3 describes pathways for the production of biofuels that can be used as marine fuels and provides a techno-economic assessment for two production pathways. Chapter 4 illustrates how the scenarios for energy demand in the EU international shipping sector were developed. Chapter 5 describes the working of the RESolve biomass model, the assumptions made in model runs and the results of the model runs for biofuel deployment. Chapter 6 presents the conclusions and recommendations of this report and provides an answer to the research question. Chapter 7 contains the annexes and chapter 8 contains the references.

This report presents an assessment of the state-ofplay of two key bioeconomy sectors – biofuels and nonenergetic bioproducts1 – within the BfP member countries and selected countries/regions from the Sustainable Biofuel Innovation Challenge from Mission Innovation (SBIC/MI), whose members provided relevant inputs as part of the activities of this international initiative. Its goal is to provide a picture of the departing point for the BfP, serving as a reference to where member and nonmember countries stand, a sense of scale for the challenge ahead, along with the barriers facing countries. The report also delves into solutions to such barriers, providing an indication on where and how countries could collaborate to achieve common goals using tangible examples where possible.

The aims of this report are to:
• bring together existing evidence on the environmental impact of BEVs across the stages of their life cycle, undertaking where possible comparison with internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs);
• consider how a move to a circular economy could reduce these impacts.

Concawe1 asked Ricardo2 to carry out an extensive study to examine a scenario for near-complete electrification of cars and light commercial vehicles on the road in the EU by 2050 (“Full Electrification scenario”), with quantification of GHG reductions, total costs of ownership and infrastructure, battery materials and power requirements. And in addition, to evaluate in the same way a scenario with a combination of electrification and low-carbon liquid fuels into very efficient internal combustion engine (ICE)-based vehicles (“Low-Carbon Liquid Fuels scenario”). This in-depth study sets out the challenges and opportunities associated with such a range of alternative options.

The Summary Report 2018 provides a comprehensive overview of all G20 countries, whether – and how well – they are doing on the journey to transition to a low-carbon economy. The report draws on the latest emissions data from 2017 and covers 80 indicators on decarbonisation, climate policies, finance and vulnerability to the impacts of climate change. Providing country ratings, it identifies leaders and laggards in the G20.

The reference is a presentation held at the Low Carbon Fuel Conference on 10 & 11 April 2018 in Brussels and deals with the significance of liquid alternative fuels for climate protection.

This study assesses the potential of renewable methane in the transport sector by 2030 in three major European countries: France, Italy, and Spain.

This report addresses advanced biofuels in India and the EU with the main aim being to provide a reliable basis for the understanding of the:
• policies
• existing legislation
• status and reliability of the various value chains and technologies
• basic costs
• various opportunities for financial support
• key technology developers and industry players

India and the EU have developed reliable technologies for crop based biofuels, the so called first generation biofuels or those based on vegetable oils, sugars and grains. Consequently, the technical analysis of this study excludes any crop-based biofuel as out of scope and addresses only advanced biofuels.
The study furthermore only addresses value chains and advanced biofuels that are close to industrial deployment or large-scale demonstration since these can be reasonably expected to reach market deployment in the very near future and can contribute to the national program of India and the policies in the EU.
Via the work undertaken herewith and the overall results of the EU-India Conference on Advanced Biofuels6 this study provides a basis to understand the opportunities and prospects for promoting the deployment of advanced biofuels in both India and the EU. It is clear that Indian technology providers have achieved significant progress in some of the value chains and intensive cooperation already exists between parties from both sides. Realistic options therefore exist for technology providers from both sides in deploying their technologies in the other’s market through joint ventures and licensing agreements.
The main objective of the present study has been to provide a clear view of the landscape of advanced biofuels so as to facilitate the deployment of advanced biofuel technologies in both India and the EU, while at the same time promoting and facilitating cooperation amongst the several stakeholders.

This report compiles the latest evidence on the environmental impacts of using gas as a transport
fuel. The report is based on the most up to date literature, test results and data. It builds on a
previous report by AEA-Ricardo but analyses in more detail issues such as the role of renewable
methane (biomethane and power-to-methane) or the impact of tax policy.

The goal of the study is to analyze the costs related to the implementation of the three paths and, on the basis of this, estimate the required level of investment and define the need for research. Other criteria which are relevant for the implementation are also taken into account, such as safety or the expected market acceptance.

Our main objective was to assess whether EU action to support the commercial-scale demonstration of CCS and innovative renewable energy technologies between 2008 and 2017 through EEPR and NER300 was well designed, managed and coordinated, and whether NER300 and EEPR made the expected progress in helping CCS and innovative renewables advance towards commercial deployment. We conclude that neither of the programmes succeeded to deploy CCS in the EU. EEPR contributed to the development of the offshore wind sector, but NER300 did not achieve the 9 intended progress in supporting the demonstration of a wider range of innovative renewable energy technologies. Adverse investment conditions, including uncertainty in regulatory frameworks and policies hampered the progress of many innovative renewable energy and CCS projects. A key factor in the failure of CCS deployment has been the low carbon market price after 2011. We further found that the design of NER300 limited the Commission and Member States’ ability to respond effectively to changing circumstances. In particular, the chosen funding model lacked justification when the NER300 legal basis was inserted in the Emission Trading Scheme directive and did not effectively reduce the risk for demonstration projects. Project selection and decision-making processes were complex, and other design features constrained the programme’s flexibility. Lastly, we found that coordination and accountability arrangements require improvement. Despite slower than intended progress, the SET-plan provides a basis for better aligning public and private priorities and resources. Relevant Commission departments need to improve their coordination to enhance the coherence of EU support to low carbon demonstration projects. The accountability arrangements for the entities managing NER300 are also not clear enough.

Over the next three decades, the world’s energy system will
become substantially cleaner, more affordable, and more reliable.
Understanding this energy transition is critical for businesses,
investors, and regulators and this is the scope of this report

This report looks at the history, the technologies and the experience of refineries where cellulosic ethanol
production has been attempted. The technical challenges remain, suggesting that there is little likelihood that large new markets for wood and energy crops for biofuels will emerge any time soon. The illusion that cellulosic biofuel production has dramatically increased recently reflects a redefinition of “cellulosic” to include transport fuels made from landfill gas, biogas and corn kernel fibre. Even though large-scale production of cellulosic biofuels appears destined to fail, the development of risky genetically engineered (GE) trees, crops and microbes associated with this quest introduces imminent and serious risks.

This study updates a previous analysis on the economic viability of electrofuels in the EU and assesses the lifecycle GHG performance of these fuels. In particular, we analyze how the accounting of electrofuels in the final RED II impacts the GHG performance of these fuels.
We find that because of high production costs, electrofuels will deliver limited—if any—renewable fuel volumes and GHG reductions in the EU in the 2030 timeframe, even with strong policy support. We also find that the RED II effectively counts twice as much energy toward the renewable energy target as the amount of fossil fuels displaced, which will likely result in a shortfall in total renewable energy usage in the EU and thus an increase in fossil fuel use. Significant GHG savings can only be achieved if EU Member States take measures to ensure that renewable electricity used in electrofuels is fully additional – even then, electrofuels would still only offset 0.5% of projected road transport GHG emissions in 2030 in the EU with very high policy support.

The Working Group “Alternative Liquid and Gaseous Fuels” is part of ProcessNet, a joint initiative of the DECHEMA Gesellschaft für Chemische Technik und Biotechnologie e. V. and the VDI Gesellschaft für Verfahrenstechnik und Chemieingenieurwesen e. V. (VDI-GVC). Its participants are representatives of commercial enterprises, associations and sciences in the fields of fuels, plant construction, oil refineries, bio refineries, combustion engines, automobiles, aviation, energy systems, thermochemical conversion, renewable raw materials, waste and secondary raw materials as well as other sustainable resources.
This position paper is intended to appeal to decision-makers in politics, business and science. With regard to climate protection goals, the paper aims at showing technological ways to achieve the full integration of the transport and heating
sectors into the energy transition by 2050 in a realistic, sustainable and economically justifiable manner. The objective is
to illustrate why advanced liquid alternative fuels will play a key role. Recommendations for action should help to meet
the challenges of the required radical change from fossil fuels to sustainable resources.
In this way, the working group is supporting efforts to achieve the energy transition in linking the areas of mobility,
electricity and heat as a contribution to climate protection, resource conservation and security of raw material supply,
resource efficiency by optimizing material cycles, security of supply through independence from imports, job creation
through regional added value and global technology leadership.

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on
the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources
– Analysis of the final compromise text with a view to agreement

Transition to a low carbon economy requires near zero emissions in the
coming decades and will also need technologies that will “…achieve a balance
between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of
greenhouse gases in the second half of this century …,” as stated in the Paris
Agreement. Therefore, CO2 capture and geological storage (CCS) should be
central to the discussion of mitigating future GHG emissions from fossil fuels
because CCS can remove CO2 emissions from combustion or remove the
carbon even prior to combustion, thus providing a low or zero carbon fuel.
In this report, we find that 14 of 163 submitted nationally determined
contributions (NDCs) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) which specifically mention CCS, and five nations submitted midcentury
strategies (MCS) that include some description of CCS. Those handful
of nations that do mention CCS do so with extensive discussion about barriers
to investments in CCS projects including the cost of CCS, the lack of finance
and the lack of implementation of government policies and incentives.
Our report also finds that the International Energy Agency, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Global
CCS Institute, Deep Decarbonisation Pathways Project, and the EU Joint
Research Centre have all projected the need for CCS to achieve the Paris
Agreement goals.
The contributions of CCS to scenarios that could successfully achieve the Paris
Agreement goals range from 10 to 25 percent of the total GHG emissions
response effort depicted in those scenarios.
This points to the critical need for the rapid scale-up of CCS in the coming
decades which has yet to begin. The pipeline of major CCS projects has dried
up in recent years and no new significant CCS projects are being developed.
Further, because of costs and a range of issues from lack of policy framework,
policy uncertainty, public perception, and potential long-term storage site
stewardship issues, some business leaders in a World Energy Council survey
have expressed negative sentiments about the prospect of deploying CCS.
These difficult challenges point to a fundamental gap between the ambitious
goal of the Paris Agreement and the reality of deployment of CCS projects.
This report also points out that even if nations did not mention CCS in their
nationally determined contributions or in a mid-century strategy, nations
could still benefit from developing CCS as part of their future actions. In
particular, as nations go through the every-five-year global stocktake, it could
be beneficial for nations to analyse for and plan the conditions that would
help in the future deployment of CCS in order to reduce emissions
significantly.

The latest issue of IENE’s periodic publication “Electric Mobility Update”, No. 2, August 31, 2018

The purpose of this study was to ensure robustness and representativeness of the technology assumptions by reaching out to relevant experts, industry representatives and stakeholders, who are in possession of the most recent data in the different sectors.
The study thus undertook to confirm and – if necessary – adjust the assumptions for PRIMES modelling for the technologies relevant for long term (decarbonisation) pathways in the EU that have been compiled by E3M (both in terms of technology pathways selected and costs). This objective was achieved by identifying and reaching out to relevant experts, industry representatives and stakeholders and using internal expertise.

The concept of the bio-based economy has gained increasing attention and importance in
recent years. It is seen as a chance to reduce the dependency on fossil resources while securing a
sustainable supply of energy, water, and raw materials, and furthermore preserving soils, climate and
the environment. The intended transformation is characterized by economic, environmental and
social challenges and opportunities, and it is understood as a social transition process towards a
sustainable, bio-based and nature-oriented economy. This process requires general mechanisms
to establish and monitor safeguards for a sustainable development of the bio-based economy on a
national and EU level. Sustainability certification and standardisation of bio-based products can
help to manage biogenic resources and their derived products in a sustainable manner. In this paper,
we have analysed the current status of sustainability certification and standardisation in the bio-based
economy by conducting comprehensive desktop research, which was complemented by a series of
expert interviews. The analysis revealed an impressive amount of existing certification frameworks,
criteria, indicators and applicable standards. However, relevant gaps relating to existing criteria
sets, the practical implementation of criteria in certification processes, the legislative framework,
end-of-life processes, as well as necessary standardisation activities, were identified which require
further research and development to improve sustainability certification and standardisation for a
growing bio-based economy.

On June 14, 2018, an agreement on the successor to the Renewable Energy Directive (RED) was reached for 2021-2030. The RED II sets a limit of 7 percent on the blending of conventional (food based) biofuels, well above the blended 4.1 percent forecast for this year. This is less stifling than some of the previous proposals but conventional biofuels must compete with other forms of renewable transport energy and current imports of biodiesel and potentially bioethanol are a threat for the domestic producers. Based on the readiness of the technology and the double counting factor, biofuels produced from waste fats and oils have the best outlook for further expansion on the short term. The RED II set ambitious goals for biofuels produced from cellulosic feedstocks, but so far commercial production of these advanced biofuels have been limited. The EU market for wood pellets is expected to continue its growth during 2018-2020, but further expansion could be limited by individual Member State sustainability requirements.

This report provides an overview on the biofuel use mandates in the various EU-28 member states. It supplements the EU-28 Biofuel Annual Report.

The recast of the renewable energy directive (RED recast) considers power to gas (P2G) an advanced transport
biofuel if a 70% greenhouse gas savings as opposed to the fossil fuel displaced is achieved. Power to methane
systems can store electricity as gas and the system can be optimised in sourcing CO2 from biogas to upgrade
biogas to biomethane. The crucial question in this work is whether P2G systems can be sustainable and if they
can improve the sustainability of biomethane systems using traditional upgrading systems. This work evaluates a
comparative lifecycle assessment of grass and slurry (50:50 wet weight equivalent to 80:20 volatile solid weight)
biomethane using P2G and/or amine scrubbing as an upgrading method. The sustainability of P2G upgrading
systems is heavily dependent on the carbon intensity of the source of electricity. Using a 41% decarbonised
electricity mix the sustainability was reduced using P2G and would not be deemed sustainable under criterion
set by the RED recast. Maintaining a maximum of 2% fugitive CH4 emissions, using 74% slurry (wet weight) in a
grass slurry feedstock, allowing for 0.6 t carbon sequestration per hectare per annum in grasslands and using an
electricity mix with 85% renewable electricity the whole system including P2G upgrading could satisfy the GHG
savings of 70%. However, the traditional system employing amine scrubbing had higher levels of sustainability

this study
considers the most significant sustainability issues associated
with liquid biofuels, the methods available for assessing them and
the associated uncertainties, with the aim of supporting future
policy decisions. While the main focus of the study is on the carbon
footprints of different biofuels, other environmental, economic and
social issues related to their production and use are also discussed.

In June 2016, ePURE published a report on Member States’ biofuel policies and markets, detailing the national transposition and implementation status of the Renewable Energy Directive (RED) and the Fuel Quality Directive (FQD). This report updates that status for each country now that the deadline for transposing the so-called ILUC Directive amending both the RED and FQD has passed. The report seeks to provide a detailed overview of the current national biofuel policies across the EU 28 Member States, with a focus on: • The national policy frameworks regulating biofuels, in particular the implementation of the RED and FQD as amended by the ILUC Directive; and • Relevant national fuels (including biofuels) and vehicles market data.

This report aims to demonstrate the viability of ZEVs, identifying the drivers that need to be in place to make them a competitive solution for decarbonisation.

A report attached that is commissioned by the Netherlands Platform Sustainable Biofuels and executed by E4tech on the role of biofuels for the Dutch shipping sector

The AMF Annual Report has recently been streamlined to provide condensed and to-the-point information on the status of annex work and of advanced motor fuels in AMF member countries. A third communication product consists of key messages for policy makers and laypersons that provide a brief description of the main messages from annex work. I hope that these three levels of reports will make AMF even more successful and a source of information for all levels of society.

The objective of this guidance paper is to provide decision support for investments in ships over the coming 5 to 10-year period. The paper focuses on technical parameters and limitations without accounting for local market conditions, considerations and incentive schemes which may have a significant impact on competitiveness and the uptake of alternative fuels and technologies.

Joint declaration of Visegrad 4 plus Bulgaria, Latvia and Lithuania biofuels associations on the new Renewable Energy Directive Recast (RED II)

A map developed by the organisers of Argus Biofuels

This report was commissioned to gather comprehensive information on, and to provide systematic analysis of the latest available scientific research and the latest available scientific evidence on indirect land use change (ILUC) greenhouse gas emissions associated with production of biofuels and bioliquids. This report will provide inputs for the reporting requirements under Article 3 of the European Union’s Directive (EU) 2015/1513 of 9 September 2015 by summarizing and interpreting the available and best available scientific evidence on ILUC GHG emissions associated with the production of biofuels and bioliquids and the latest available information with regard to key assumptions influencing the results from modelling of the ILUC GHG emissions associated with the production of biofuels and bioliquids. It will also analyse the scientific evidence on measures (introduced in the directive or not) to limit indirect land-use emissions, either through promotion of low ILUC-risk biofuels or more general measures. Besides the report will also provide inputs for Article 23 of the revised European Union’s Directive 2009/28/EC (RES Directive) on the latest available information with regard to key assumptions influencing the results from modelling ILUC GHG emissions, as well as an assessment of whether the range of uncertainty identified in the analysis underlying the estimations of ILUC emissions can be narrowed down, and if the possible impact of the EU policies, such as environment, climate and agricultural policies, can be factored in. An assessment of a possibility of setting out criteria for the identification and certification of low ILUC-risk biofuels that are produced in accordance with the EU sustainability criteria is also required.

Research and Innovation (R&I) plays a central role in developing advanced biofuels technologies to help achieve the EU’s climate and energy targets. This study examines the R&I potential for feedstock production, advanced biofuels production, and use of advanced biofuels. The study quantifies R&I potential under future scenarios where EU targets are met. Improving feedstock supply and reducing conversion costs through research and innovation resulting in an increase of feedstock availability by 40-50 %, will contribute to the development of advanced biofuels. With successful R&I and attainment of the 2050 EU targets, advanced biofuels could achieve (i) close to a 50 % share of the overall transport sector energy mix, (ii) achieving 330 Mt of net emission savings, in case they replace fossil fuels, or 65 % of the required emission savings needed, compared to 1990 levels, in order to meet the target of the transport sectors emissions by 60 %1, (iii) a market volume of 1.6 % of EU’s GDP, and (iv) significantly improve energy security. This would result in a net increase of 108 000 jobs, even taking into account the 11 000 jobs reduction in fossil fuel sectors and the reduced employment in other sectors, without impacting negatively EU’s GDP. This is a particularly noteworthy positive impact, considering that it mainly comes from the substitution of currently existing energy demands.

In the extreme case of a transition to an energy system relying heavily on advanced biofuels, achieving EU targets would put considerable pressure on feedstock availability, driving up feedstock prices. Yet, in a system characterized by a balanced energy mix with several renewable options and an important role for advanced biofuels, R&I plays a paramount role in both (i) safeguarding the amount of affordable sustainable biomass and (ii) improving the efficiency of the whole biomass to biofuel process chain, needed for the transition to a bioenergy system. The transition could take more than 15-20 years and require substantial efforts and extensive coordination between stakeholders.

The Proposal for a Directive on the Promotion of the Use of Energy from Renewable Sources (recast) is part of an interdependent package of energy legislation. This IAI study scrutinises the Impact Assessments on renewable energy and bioenergy accompanying that proposal, and their coherence with the proposal in the context of the full legislative package. A number of significant shortcomings in the evidence have been identified, which severely weaken the foundation for this part of the EU’s energy policy. The study refers to the other pieces of energy legislation and their Impact Assessments where directly relevant. It builds on the previous IAI study scrutinising the Inception Impact Assessment on renewable energy1. In particular, this current study identifies shortcomings and inconsistencies in the presented evidence and, where sufficient evidence is available, investigates further to offer alternative approaches.

The report presents an overview of renewable energy development and progress expected by 2020, as forecasted in the EU Member States’ reporting under the Renewable Energy Directive and projected in the EU Reference 2016 and EUCO27 scenarios. The report compares the progress achieved between 2005 and 2015, as reported by EU Member States in their progress reports and the Eurostat SHARES Tool, with the expected results as set out in their national renewable energy action plans. The report goes on to describe in detail each Member State’s overall contribution to the development of renewable energy since 2005. The findings draw on the Member States’ reporting under the Renewable Energy Directive, the progress each country has made in the use of each renewable energy source and the contribution of renewable energy in each Member State to the heating/cooling, electricity and transport sectors. Findings are summarised in standardised tables and graphs, enabling quick comparison between different countries and for the EU as a whole.

The reinvention of kerosene for the outdated fossil lamps has taken its modern form. The most recent alternative to the already existing, efficient climate mitigation solutions are synthetic fossil fuels produced by using renewable energy sources. The purpose of this report is to debunk the myths of that so-called climate change mitigation pathway and the promises it claims. Finally, it aims to develop recommndations on how to avoid the pitfalls of Power to Liquids. This report explores: a) current impact assessments of the synthetic fossil fuel production, b) potential pitfalls of the technology related to the current policy framework, c) recommendations for the alternative paths of climate mitigation.

The reference is the position paper of the Leaders of Sustainable Biofuels (LSB) on the recast of the Renewables Energy Directive (RED II). LSB (i) urges the European Parliament to adopt a dedicated binding target for advanced biofuels produced from Annex IX part A feedstocks, (ii) sees a clear need for separate Annex IX part A and part B in order to support investments in new technologies (Part A), (iii) urges the European Parliament to promote long-term policy stability by not engaging in discussions on the feedstock list based on Annex IX part A, (iv) advises that including the accounting of indirect emissions should not be legally binding as it is based on immature scientific assumptions, and (v) claims that cascading and respecting the waste hierarchy are principles to which Member States should adhere to as much as possible. However, in the case of fighting transport emissions strict legal application of these principles could be counterproductive.

The reference consists of the explicit position of the Leaders of Sustainable Biofuels (LSB) on the amendments to the recast of the Renewables Energy Directive (RED II) proposed by ENVI.

Position paper of FuelsEurope on the Renewable Energy Directive II. FuelsEurope welcomes the Commission’s proposal on the Renewable Energy Directive II (RED II) and recognises that the deployment of renewable energy is one of the main measures to tackle security of supply and climate change. FuelsEurope considers that transport can play an important role in achieving the EU-wide renewable energy target of at least 27% renewables in 2030. Homogeneous policy across the EU will be key in creating conditions that remain predictable and stable over the long term and that prevent fragmentation of the EU single energy market.

The reference is a WWF briefing paper on EU bioenergy policy. It summarises the evidence on the impacts of various types of EU bioenergy use, focusing on the climate aspects. It then assesses the policy proposals put forward by the European Commission and considers what changes to those may be necessary to ensure that bioenergy used in the EU is genuinely sustainable from an ecological, social and climate perspective. The paper does not attempt to cover the entire global biomass sector (much of which consists of traditional subsistence fuelwood in developing countries) and is without prejudice to whatever bioenergy policies may be appropriate in third countries. Instead it considers the specific question of what types of bioenergy should actively be incentivised, for example through subsidies, blending mandates or other policy incentives permitted under EU law.

The reference is a 2-slides presentation of ePURE that addresses the threat imposed by the revised Renewable Energy Directive (RED II) to phase out ethanol, which is one of the EU’s best options for reducing greenhouse gases and decarbonizing transport.

The reference is the position paper of MHPS Europe on RED II for the deployment of Power-to-X technologies. MHPS Europe asks for (i) definitions that do not restrict the use of different feedstocks and technology paths, (ii) the development of a robust Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology for the calculation of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emission savings of these novel fuels which overcomes regulatory disparities in the different markets, (iii) A binding share of renewable energy supplied for final consumption in the transport sector, with the possibility to use other measures targeting volumes, energy content or GHG emission savings to ensure the achievement of that share, (iv) allowing the use of Guarantees of Origin (GoO) and Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs), including through concepts such as “virtual power plants” which can provide real-time monitoring and validation of multiple producers and consumers, while avoiding double counting.

This paper surveys the existing literature on methodologies related to the certification of low ILUC biofuel projects through different measures. It also assesses the potential challenges, risks, and loopholes that could arise from the use of these methodologies. We find that several methodologies lack detailed requirements on “additionality,” which significantly diminishes the credibility of those methodologies and reveals potential loopholes in the proposed measures to avoid ILUC. Additionality is the demonstration that a project reduces GHG emissions below those that would have occurred in a baseline scenario (i.e., in the absence of that project). In the case of biofuels, demonstrating additionality means demonstrating that feedstock production or use is really additional to what would have happened in a baseline scenario without biofuel demand. We conclude that the concept of low indirect impact biofuels, as described in the analyzed methodologies, is still in its infancy stage, and would require substantial supplementary requirements and risk analyses if it were to be included in a new European legislation as an additional sustainability criterion for the production of biofuels and bioenergy post-2020. This paper examines the concept of low indirect impact biofuels, how it is addressed in European legislation, and the existing literature on how it can be implemented and certified through different regional and local measures. We also assess the potential challenges, risks, and loopholes that could arise from the certification of low indirect impact biofuels. The emphasis here is on biofuels feedstock; however, the discussion would be similar for feedstock used for bioenergy or biomaterials in general.

With this research, we seek to identify and describe the opportunity for sustainable energy cropping through fieldwork and literature review, including case studies of early energy crop projects in Europe. Two case studies, supported by fieldwork, consider cropping on land that is marginal for agriculture, and one of the cases also looks at the potential for double cropping. The third case study, based on literature review, considers the environmental benefits that could be achieved through the wet cultivation of peatlands for biomass in Europe. These case studies augment a sparse literature base on the environmental risks and benefits of an emerging and rapidly evolving industry. There is reason to believe that energy crops could potentially deliver environmental benefits when grown on previously disturbed, abandoned agricultural land. While literature studies comparing biodiversity and carbon stocks in energy crop plantations to marginal land are scant, it is clear that in many cases perennial energy crops can improve agricultural land previously used for annual row crops and may offer similar environmental benefits to existing unmanaged grassland. The literature suggests that growing perennial energy crops may rehabilitate agricultural land faster than simple
abandonment.

In this report, Ecofys proposes two methodologies to identify and demonstrate low ILUC risk biofuel feedstock production through the application of yield increase or unused land. The yield increase methodology is based on productivity increases of single target crops but also includes the possibility to apply multi-cropping systems. The implementation and certification of ILUC mitigation measures will come at a financial cost. On the other hand, will resulting additional biomass production also lead to increased revenues. The precise costs and revenues depends on how much additional biomass is produced and what the required investments were to achieve this, which can differ from case to case. In the end, it will be up to economic operators to assess whether a business case exists to pursue low ILUC risk certification.

The reference is a presentation of the study on low iLUC risk biomethane produced from sequential cropping. It illustrates the first positive observations when sequential cropping is implemented and urges for further research into the scalability of sequential cropping, especially in northern Europe.

The reference is a WWF study on palm oil with emphasis on the situation particularly in Germany. It presents the advantages of palm oil that are difficult to beat and the criticism that palm oil receives. The study includes some statistical data on the production and consumption of palm oil. Alternatives/substitution options are presented and analyzed on the basis of ecological challenges that will appear (surface requirements, GHG emissions, biodiversity) through substitution of palm oil by other types of vegetable oils. The study clearly states that no palm oil is not an option either and concludes with a list of recommendations to consumers.

The capture of carbon emissions from Energy-Intensive Industries (EIIs) for utilisation in new products is gaining traction as a potential cost-effective way of addressing industrial carbon emissions in Europe. Collectively, these processes are known as CCU. The extent to which a CCU process can contribute towards climate change mitigation depends on the lifecycle of the product and whether and when the captured CO2 is released into atmosphere.
Furthermore, assessment of different types of CCU must be measured against a robust and transparent counterfactual. This report concludes that treating all forms of CCU as de facto CO2 abatement could have serious detrimental impacts on efforts to reduce emissions, and that each application of CCU must be comprehensively assessed on its ability to contribute to long-term climate mitigation.Building on analysis of the ‘Indicative Sink Factor’ (ISF) of different types of CCU, the report also analyses the potential market size for different CCU products and processes in Europe. The analysis suggests that the emerging markets for CO2 (re)use will only be able to address a small proportion of the emissions that will need to be abated to meet climate targets under EU legislation and the Paris Agreement.Taking into account the challenges around electrification and the limited scalability of CCU, it can be concluded that these solutions must be combined with making available large-scale permanent storage for captured CO2 to meet the required level of reductions, thus enabling the long-term sustainability of these key industries in a low carbon Europe. Given the critical importance of CCS in enabling decarbonisation of Europe’s EIIs, this paper recommends that EU policy focuses on the rapid deployment of CO2 transport and storage infrastructure to support these important sectors. A failure to provide such enabling infrastructure in the short term will increase CO2 liability risk and undermine investments in jobs and economic activity.

This study aims to improve our understanding of the potential contribution that CO2-based synthetic fuels could make towards the European Union’s (EU) climate mitigation goals. We project potential volumes of these fuels that could be produced in EU Member States based on a financial analysis and deployment model, taking into account technology readiness, potential subsidies or other policy support, and expected changes in renewable electricity prices. We then assess expected impacts of CO2-based synthetic fuel production on electricity generation and consumption in the EU. We estimate the GHG intensity of CO2-based synthetic fuels, including both direct emissions from synthesizing the fuels and indirect emissions resulting from increased demand for electricity from the grid. Lastly, we estimate the total GHG reductions that could potentially be achieved by CO2-based synthetic fuels across the EU, compared to climate goals.

The objective of this working paper is not to add yet another data input to this already complicated prognosis, bioenrgy. Rather, it addresses itself to a number of crucial questions in view of biomass’ large demand potential in 2030 (IRENA, 2014a), as well as the uncertainties concerning supply in a sustainable, affordable way and how this might be ensured. This working paper starts by describing the methodology IRENA applied to estimate the biomass supply potential and costs (Section 2). It continues by presenting the current bioenergy market situation (Section 3). Section 4 compares the total biomass demand estimates according to REmap 2030 with these supply estimates. Section 5 discusses the uncertainties in realising the demand and biomass supply growth estimates between now and 2030. Section 6 discusses the biomass supply cost estimates. Section 7 outlines the sustainability issues around biomass. In view of the uncertainties in bioenergy growth and sustainability, Sections 8 and 9 identify the technology options and hedging strategies, as well as policy needs, needed to strengthen bioenergy use and supply growth. The working paper concludes with Section 10, which outlines the next steps for improving expanding the bioenergy work of IRENA based on the findings of this paper.

This report attempts to give a more precise estimate of the bioenergy potential from land pledged to the Bonn Challenge, concentrating on the pledges made so far in Africa. It poses the following research question: What is the sustainable potential of biomass for energy from restored degraded land pledged to the Bonn Challenge by African countries? It takes an overall view of the pledges in this light but considers Kenya and Rwanda in more detail because more data are available for these countries.The analysis shows that around 6 EJ of primary energy per year could in theory be sustainably extracted from SRWC cultivated on land pledged for restoration under the African Forest Landscape initiative. This amounts to about three-quarters of the land ultimately to be pledged. This proportion would account for 87% of TPES projected in 2050 for the 15 countries studied. However, this assumes bioenergy crops will be planted on the entire pledged area and that the most productive (highest yielding) land will be selected to plant such crops.

This report outlines the principal findings of the latest analysis by IRENA of options available for road transport. These include a range of biofuel, biogas and electrification options. These results for renewable solutions for road transport are preliminary findings in what is a fast moving and dynamic situation for advanced biofuels and electrification of transport. The analysis will be updated in 2013 and integrated into an assessment of the cost of renewable solutions for air and sea transport to provide a more complete picture of the costs for the transport sector. This will also include additional data that is likely to emerge over the coming year from the first-of-a-kind advanced biofuels plants that are just starting up, and from more widespread distribution of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) and pure electric vehicles (EVs). The analysis summarised in this paper represents a static analysis of costs. Yet finding the optimal mix of renewable transport solutions in a country’s transport energy mix requires dynamic modelling, not just of the transportation system, but of the energy system as a whole.This analysis of the costs of renewable solutions for road transport – based on the latest available data and information – supports the transparent assessment of the role different renewable solutions for road transport can play in decarbonising the transport sector, improving energy security and promoting economic growth.

The reference is a technology brief that summarises the current status and applications of renewable energy solutions for shipping, along with the barriers and opportunities for further deployment. It provides recommendations to policy makers to promote realistic renewable energy solutions that can support efficiency and reduced emissions in the important, growing shipping sector.

The reference is a technology briefing with respect to biogas for road vehicles prepared by IRENA. The reference elaborates on process and technology status, costs, performance, sustainability and potential and barriers. It concludes by presenting a few best practice examples.

The reference is a technology briefing with respect to biofuels in aviation prepared by IRENA. The reference describes the four certified pathways to produce bio-jet and elaborates further on those options. More specifically, it states that currently the vast majority of biojet fuels are derived from oleochemical feedstocks and use the HEFA pathway. This will likely remain the main conversion route over the next five to 10 years, as methods using biomass, lignocellulosic and algal sources, and other advanced bio-jet technologies, are still maturing. Thermochemical technologies are the most likely to provide the large volumes of advanced bio-jet required, partly because the intermediates produced biochemical routes to bio-jet are worth considerably more in chemical, lubricant and cosmetic markets. The refence concludes with the view that without specific interventions and incentives directed towards bio-jet production and use, current policies in jurisdictions such as the U.S. will favour the production of renewable diesel over bio-jet.

Investment is the lifeblood of the global energy system. Individual decisions about how to direct capital to various energy projects – related to the collection, conversion, transport and consumption of energy resources – combine to shape global patterns of energy use and related emissions for decades to come. Government energy and climate policies seek to influence the scale and nature of investments across the economy, and long-term climate goals depend on their success. Understanding the energy investment landscape today and how it can evolve to meet decarbonisation goals are central elements of the energy transition. Around two-thirds of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions stem from energy production and use, which puts the energy sector at the core of efforts to combat climate change. This report presents the perspectives on a low-carbon energy sector of the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA).

This working paper draws on IRENA’s engagement with these experts and expands on the transport findings published in IRENA’s report REmap: Roadmap for a Renewable Energy Future, 2016 Edition (IRENA, 2016a).
REmap is a global renewable energy roadmap that explores the possibility of significantly increasing the share of renewables in the global energy system by 2030. The paper also proposes an action agenda that can contribute to increasing renewable energy use and the sustainability of the transport sector. This working paper explores pathways for renewable energy and proposes an action agenda to inform national policy makers and technology experts of the areas requiring further work to increase the uptake of renewables in transport sector. It builds on the important inputs of the Transport Action Team members and a growing body of work at IRENA beyond REmap, including: technology briefs that include the latest technology and cost information for emerging renewable energy and transport technologies. This working paper is the result of these broad engagements. It is based on quantitative, countrybased studies and multiple stakeholder webinars focused on technology solutions, such as emerging biofuel technologies and electric mobility (IRENA 2015a,b).

In their recent report to the G20, IRENA and IEA have shown that bioenergy supply should expand to constitute about three-eighths of all renewable energy produced in the year 2050 (IEA/IRENA, 2017). But investment in bioenergy, particularly in plants to demonstrate the production of liquid biofuels from wood and grasses at scale, has been lagging behind what is needed. This is largely due to low oil prices and low carbon values in the market place, which make it difficult for liquid biofuels to compete with petroleum-based diesel and gasoline in the transport sector, although such biofuels are key to renewable energy supply for aviation, marine shipping, and heavy freight transport.
However, there are several technologies for advanced liquid biofuels which offer real potential to compete within the next two decades, assuming a substantial carbon value is put in place to meet the goals of Paris to keep global warming well below two degrees Celsius. Prospects for these advanced technologies, which make possible the use of a wide range of lignocellulosic resources – including rapidly growing grasses like energy cane and short rotation coppice wood from agroforestry – can be firmly supported by a realistic value of carbon in the marketplace. Advanced biofuels from lignocellulosic feedstocks do not appear cost effective at today’s oil prices and today’s market value for carbon. But both oil prices and carbon values are expected to increase over time. And ongoing RD&D efforts will bring down the costs of advanced biofuel technologies. So advanced liquid biofuels may well be extremely cost-competitive by the middle of the century – or sooner.

Electro or e-fuels (or power to liquid/gas) are electricity-based gaseous or liquid fuels which can be used in internal combustion engines. According to a new report by Cerulogy for T&E, e-fuels only have meaningful climate benefits if strict sustainability criteria are observed throughout the production process. The key factors determining the sustainability of e-fuels are the source of electricity (it must be renewable), the source of CO2 (ideally air capture) as well as impacts on land and water.

This How2Guide for Bioenergy (hereinafter the H2G.BIO) is designed to provide stakeholders from government, industry and other bioenergy-related institutions with the methodology and tools required to successfully plan and implement a roadmap for bioenergy at the national or regional level.
As a guide addressed to decision makers in developing, emerging and developed economies, the H2G.BIO does not attempt to cover every aspect of bioenergy conversion technology and deployment, or to be exhaustive in its reference to biomass resources and technologies at the country and regional levels. Rather, the aim is to provide a comprehensive list of steps and issues to be considered at each phase of bioenergy roadmapping and deployment. The guide draws on pre-existing work as well as on new evidence collected specifically for the production of this document.

The reference presents different bioenergy solutions that are suitable for immediate scale-up. Examples are: (i) biomethane from waste and residue feedstocks, (ii) waste and residue HVO in heavy-duty road freight and HEFA in aviation, (iii) higher ethanol blends and unblended ethanol in road transport, (iv) bioenergy based district heating networks in urban areas, (v) medium-scale biomass heating systems in commercial and public buildings, (vi) maximising the efficiency of bagasse co-generation in the sugar and ethanol industry, (vii) energy recovery from municipal waste solutions and (viii) the conversion of existing fossil fuel infrastructure for bioenergy use.

The reference pinpoints the different characteristics between biomass feedstocks and fossil fuels and analyses the three technologies of biomass processing (fuel preparation, pretreatment, conversion) prior to conversion to energy in order to optimise the efficiency and the economics of the bioenergy pathway.

The European Commission’s proposal for a recast Renewable Energy Directive for the period 2021-2030 (RED II) includes a 6.8% target for renewable energy to be used in transport. This target can be met by advanced biofuels, renewable electricity, waste-based fossil fuels, and renewable fuels of non-biological origin (such as power-to-liquids). Food-based biofuels are not eligible to be used towards the transport target. The proposal defines a list of eligible feedstocks that can be used to produce advanced biofuels, including many types of materials often referred to as “wastes” and “residues,” such as municipal waste, wheat straw, forestry residues, and inedible animal fats. Alternative fuels must reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by at least 70% to qualify, but the Commission’s proposed GHG calculation methodology does not include indirect effects. Indirect land use change (ILUC) has been estimated to substantially reduce and in some cases eliminate the GHG savings associated with biofuels made from food, such as corn ethanol and rapeseed biodiesel. The magnitude of indirect emissions that would be caused by eligible advanced biofuel feedstocks in the RED II proposal has been less well understood. This study estimates indirect emissions for many of these feedstocks and finds that, if indirect emissions accounting were included in the GHG calculation methodology for the RED II, several pathways currently listed as eligible are not likely to meet the 70% GHG reduction threshold. Similarly to food-based biofuels, some eligible feedstocks may not offer any GHG savings at all. This study also assesses the total GHG savings that could be achieved by the policy in 2030 if the transport target were changed to a GHG reduction target, similar to the target in the EU’s Fuel Quality Directive (FQD). This analysis shows that, for the same total amount of renewable energy delivered, a GHG target would drive greater GHG reductions compared to the energy target in the Commission’s proposal.

This study seeks to understand why policy support for these advanced technologies has not resulted in greater deployment of facilities and scale-up in production. For the purpose of this study, we focus on alternative fuels, including both biofuels and non-biological low-carbon pathways, that rely on emerging technologies and non-food feedstocks and that can offer high GHG savings compared to petroleum; we refer to these pathways as advanced alternative fuel (AAF). The first section of this report briefly reviews barriers to commercialization of AAF, in particular economic and market challenges. The second section reviews existing EU and U.S. policies promoting AAF and evaluates the effectiveness of policy elements in scaling up production capacity. We analyze a number of policy frameworks, including renewable energy targets, GHG emission reduction targets, tax incentives, subsidies, and grant programs at the EU level and in member states, and at the U.S. federal level as well as in the state of California. The third section summarizes and discusses the lessons learned from the experiences of these jurisdictions in promoting AAF. The fourth section introduces principles for effective policy design for supporting investment in AAF production developed from these lessons learned.

This report sets out a path to energy system decarbonisation based on high energy efficiency and renewable energy. It provides evidence showing how the transition is occurring, and how the deployment of renewables is making energy supply more sustainable.
This report also demonstrates that decarbonisation is both technically feasible and can be achieved at a lower cost and with greater socio-economic benefits than business as usual.
This report identifies six focus areas where policy and decision makers need to act:
1. Tap into the strong synergies between energy efficiency and renewable energy;
2. Plan a power sector for which renewables provide a high share of the energy;
3. Increase use of electricity in transport, building and industry. Urban planning, building regulations, and other plans and policies must be integrated, particularly to enable deep and cost-effective decarbonisation of the transport and heat sectors through electrification;
4. Foster system-wide innovation;
5. Align socio-economic structures and investment with the transition;
6. Ensure that transition costs and benefits are fairly distributed.

This article takes stock of the world’s largest low-carbon technology demonstration programme – the EU’s NER
300. The programme has been marked by delays and many withdrawn projects since becoming operational in
2010: CCS projects have failed and not reached final investment decisions; wind and solar projects have succeeded,
whereas bioenergy projects have seen successes as well as failures. These outcomes can be explained by
specific design features in the program that placed large-scale projects at a disadvantage, and by the wider
context of EU climate and energy policies providing inadequate market-pull incentives for CCS and biofuels. The
design and policy challenges identified are related more to political feasibility than to lack of knowledge of what
is needed to trigger innovation. The proposal for a follow-up Innovation Fund is assessed against the lessons from
NER 300.

This study in particular aims to determine the carbon footprint of natural gas from the source to a defined point of use. The resulting carbon footprint will, therefore, be based on the latest and most reliable data available. The goal of the present study is the determination of the carbon footprint of natural gas distributed in Central EU based on best available data, and the comparison of the results with those of the EXERGIA study. Research of current best available data is focused on the major supplying countries for Central Europe: The Netherlands, Norway and Russia. Moreover, Germany as the main consumer and an important transit country of natural gas will be considered. The input data is relevant for those countries and necessary for the calculation of the CF. Moreover, it includes a description of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which occur on the life cycle stages production, processing, transport, storage and distribution of natural gas. In the course of the impact assessment the effects on climate change (the only impact category) and the results will be interpreted and evaluated.

The reference is presentation of DBI dealing with GHG emissions modelling for natural gas in the region Central EU. A comparison between the carbon footprint values of natural gas consumed in Central EU with the values computed by EXERGIA is also included.

One approach to solving today’s energy challenges is to use modern bioenergy practices to harness the solar energy captured by photosynthesis. Bioenergy
derived from plants can play an essential role in satisfying the world’s growing energy demand, mitigating climate change, sustainably feeding a growing population, improving socio-economic equity, minimizing ecological disruptions and preserving biodiversity. There is broad consensus that modern bioenergy will be necessary to achieve a low-carbon future. The idea that the large-scale use of bioenergy compromises efforts to meet these challenges is unsupported by the current scientific evidence when bioenergy practices are implemented properly. So says the new report “Bioenergy & Sustainability“, a SCOPE series assessment,
led by researchers associated to the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) Programs on Bioenergy, Biodiversity and Climate Change, and developed under
the aegis of the Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE) and a Scientific Advisory Committee. This report combines a comprehensive analysis of the current bioenergy landscape, technologies and practices with a critical review of their impacts. Experts from over 80 institutions contributed to the extensive evaluation of the current status of bioenergy resources, systems and markets and the potential for sustainable expansion and wider adoption of this renewable resource. What “Bioenergy & Sustainability” proposes is not only improving energy security for over 1.3 billion people with no access to electricity and lifting rural areas out of poverty, but ultimately securing a sustainable and equitable future.The resources and technologies for the transition from fossil to renewable energy are within our reach, but achieving the critical contributions needed from modern bioenergy call for political and individual will. The report finds that land availability is not a limiting factor. Bioenergy can contribute to sustainable energy supplies even with increasing food demands, preservation of forests, protected lands, and rising urbanization. While it is projected that 50 to 200 million hectares would be needed to provide 10 to 20% of primary energy supply in 2050, available land that does not compromise the uses above is estimated to be at least 500 million hectares and possibly 900 million hectares if pasture intensification or water-scarce, marginal and degraded land is considered. As documented in the 21 chapters of the report, the use of land for bioenergy is inextricably linked to food security, environmental quality, and social development, with potentially positive or negative consequences depending on how these linkages are managed.
Building on over 2,000 scientific studies and major assessments, this 700-page e-publication outlines how:
● Development of bioenergy can replenish a community’s food supply by improving management practices and land soil quality
● New technologies can provide communities with food security, fuel, economic and social development while effectively using water, nutrients and other resources
● The use of bioenergy, if done thoughtfully, can actually help lower air and water pollution
● Bioenergy initiatives monitored and implemented, hand in hand with good governance, can protect biodiversity, and provide ecosystems services
● Efficiency gains and sustainable practices of recent bioenergy systems can help contribute to a low-carbon economy by decreasing greenhouse gas emissions and assisting carbon mitigation efforts
● With current knowledge and projected improvements 30% of the world’s fuel supply could be biobased by 2050 The report’s authors see both practical and ethical imperatives to advance bioenergy in light of its potential to meet pressing human needs not easily addressed by other renewable energy sources. At the same time, they acknowledge that just because bioenergy can be beneficial does not mean that it will be. Research and development, good governance and innovative business models are essential to address knowledge gaps and foster innovation across the value chain. With these measures, the report argues, a sustainable future is more easily achieved with bioenergy than without it, and not using the bioenergy option would result in significant risks and costs for regions,
countries and the planet.

The key conclusions in the Road Transport 2030 update report
 The question to be answered in this report regards the alternatives enabling a 40 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 (and up to 2050). The level of the base year 2005 is approximately 11.7 Mt CO2. In the basic scenario of this update, the 2030 carbon emissions are approximately 9.2 Mt, i.e. approximately 21 percent below the base year. Emissions should therefore be reduced a further 2.2 Mt, i.e. approximately 19 percent. In the basic scenario, the actual share of biofuels (excluding the double counting required by the present distribution obligation) is approximately 14 percent, and
the share of electricity is very limited.
 The updated version examines five different scenarios. It also introduces two novel scenarios: an optimistic ‘electricity max’ scenario with 400,000 battery electric vehicles and 200,000 plug-in hybrid vehicles, and a ‘natural gas max’ scenario with 200,000 natural gas passenger vehicles, 50,000 vans and a 10 percent biogas share in the mileage of heavy duty vehicles. In order to reduce carbon emissions by 40 percent, both scenarios require liquid drop-in biofuels that can be used in high blends. In all scenarios, including ‘electric max’ with its emphasis on electric cars, the demand for biofuels is bigger than present usage and present production capacity in Finland. In addition to changes in the vehicle fleet, ‘electricity max’ and ‘natural gas max’ scenarios would imply major changes in the distribution infrastructure for alternative power sources, for which there will be costs.
 Published in November 2016, the government’s energy and climate strategy set the target for 50 percent reduction in transport emissions by 2030. Also, the share of biofuels should be at 30 percent (actual energy share); the target for electric vehicles was 250,000 and for natural gas vehicles 50,000.
 Compared to the 21 percent reduction of the basic scenario of this survey, 250,000 electric passenger cars would reduce emissions by an additional nearly 5 percent. Similarly, increasing the share of biofuels from the present 13 percent to 30 percent would reduce CO2 emissions by approximately 12 percent.
In this respect, it can be argued that both advanced biofuels and carbon-free electric vehicles will definitely be necessary for achieving 40 or 50 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
 The relative cost impacts of different decisions mainly depend on external factors, such as prices of crude oil and electric vehicles. Also, carbon emission pricing and the measures for 2030 implemented in the EU’s climate policy have an influence in the situation. National level measures can also be implemented with regard to the price development of domestic biofuel production. When moving towards low-carbon and smart transport, the importance of tax decisions is significant. The estimated price for domestic biofuels is approximately 1,000 to 1,200 €/toe (pre-tax price 0.82 to 0.98 €/litre, whereas the price of fossil diesel fuel is 0.47 €/l).
 The cost impacts have been assessed from the viewpoint of distribution prices of fuels as well as annual costs per vehicle category (passenger car and transit bus). As regards passenger cars, all powertrain and fuel alternatives were assessed in the light of present taxation. A petrol car was used as a reference point. The price of avoided CO2 tonne with present prices and taxes was 50 to 300 €/tCO2 for biofuels (liquid and gas), 800 to 2,500 €/tCO2 for plug-in hybrids, and 200 to 1,400 €/tCO2 battery electric vehicles. As regards other fuels than biofuels, annual mileages of 17,000 or 30,000 km had a huge impact on the results. The price of avoided CO2 ranged from -200 to +1,800 €/tCO2 for fossil diesel fuel, and from -100 to +180 €/tCO2 for natural gas. The carbon reduction potential was, however,
limited for both of them. As regards diesel vehicles, air quality impacts in urban areas will also have to be taken into account. If the purchase price (with taxes) of electric vehicles would drop to the level of petrol vehicles, the electric vehicle would be very cost-efficient due to lower costs of use. Electric buses are already quite competitive due to their high utilisation rate.
 The general equilibrium model was used for calculating and assessing the national economic impacts. There were two versions made of the ‘electricity max’ scenario, differing in regard to price development: a) ‘electricity max’ basic version in which electric cars are still more expensive than combustion engine vehicles in 2030; and ‘electricity max 2’ in which the price of electric cars drops to the same level with combustion engine vehicles already in 2025. The first version is the most expensive as regards the impact on GDP, whereas the second version is the least expensive. In regard to the differences in the scenarios, the price development of new electric vehicles is essential even if the required investments in the infrastructure affected results slightly. The calculations show that the possible large-scale promotion of electric vehicles should only be started when the prices have dropped and the vehicle’s (battery) performance has improved. The total impact of different scenarios’ on GDP ranged from -2.7 to +0.1.

This paper presents the main experiences gained and conclusions drawn from the demonstration of a first-of- its- kind wood-based biomethane production plant (20-MW capacity, 150 dry tonnes of biomass/day) and 10 years of operation of the 2–4-MW (10–20 dry tonnes of biomass/day) research gasifier at Chalmers University of Technology in Sweden. Based on the experience gained, an elaborated outline for commercialization of the technology for a wide spectrum of applications and end products is defined. The main findings are related to the use of biomass ash constituents as a catalyst for the process and the application of coated heat exchangers, such that regular fluidized bed boilers can be retrofitted to become biomass gasifiers. Among the recirculation of the ash streams within the process, presence of the alkali salt in the system is identified as highly important for control of the tar species. Combined with new insights on fuel feeding and reactor design, these two major findings form the basis for a comprehensive process layout that can support a gradual transformation of existing boilers in district heating networks and in pulp, paper and saw mills, and it facilitates the exploitation of existing oil refineries and petrochemical plants for large-scale production of renewable fuels, chemicals, and materials from biomass and wastes. The potential for electrification of those process layouts are also discussed. The commercialization route represents an example of how biomass conversion develops and integrates with existing industrial and energy infrastructures to form highly effective systems that deliver a wide range of end products. Illustrating the potential, the existing fluidized bed boilers in Sweden alone represent a jet fuel production capacity that corresponds to 10% of current global consumption.

The reference is the position paper of Copa Cogeca on the recast of RED II. The cooperative reports that the RED II proposal is lacking in ambition in terms of promoting access to the organic carbon market and therefore undermines the achievement of the EU’s climate, energy, bioeconomy and circular economy objectives. Overall, Copa and Cogeca reject the proposal for a RED II Directive in its current form and present the following proposals to the European Council and Parliament so that the initial Commission proposal can be amended. Copa and Cogeca ask for the promotion of the use of feedstocks of biological origin in all bioenergy sectors under the RED II Directive.

The project reported here was made in co-operation between Ecotraffic and Volvo Technology. The scenarios, fuel and driveline studied were largely established in discussions between these two parties. The project was funded by the Swedish emission research programme (EMFO) administered by the Swedish Road Administration. The main scope of the project was to gain more knowledge about well-to-wheel efficiency of the use of biofuels in heavy-duty vehicles. The most general conclusion that can be drawn about the energy converter is that if the most efficient engine type is used, i.e. the diesel engine, the differences between the tankto-wheel (TTW) efficiency for most fuels becomes quite small. In order to apply such technology, a considerable development work would be necessary. It is plausible, that for some of the fuel options, as high efficiency as for he diesel-fuelled diesel engine might not be achieved due to some intrinsic fuel properties or practical reasons. On the other hand, it is also possible that some of the fuels could have properties that might be utilised for improving the efficiency to an even higher level than the diesel baseline. Examples here could be the ―internal cooling‖ possible with direct injection of alcohol fuels and the specific combustion properties of DME. Likewise, the utilisation of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) might also be optimised for these fuel options and possibly, also for other fuels.

The objective of this report is to provide an introduction and overview of the current maritime shipping sector and describe how biofuel developers can introduce alternative fuels, in light of the sector infrastructure and how it is regulated. To describe and analyze the potential of biofuels for the maritime sector, a technical assessment of biofuels for marine engines, taking into account the entire supply chain from field to ship, is performed.
This report is written from a biofuel developer or manufacturer point of view. The approach can be formulated as “If you were a biofuel developer and would like to develop marine biofuels, what fuel properties would be needed and how would they compete with current fuels given fuel prices and emission regulations?”
The report includes an overview of the current status of the shipping sector; the classes of ships built and in operation, the different marine propulsion technologies, and the fuels available on the market for ship propulsion. Of particular interest are current and near future regulations on the use of marine fuels in the newly created emission control areas (ECAs)1, introducing mandates on fuel sulphur levels, as well as the fuel specifications needed in order to comply with these. These regulations, motivated by a need to reduce harmful particle emissions from marine diesels, are also an avenue by which biofuels can enter the market as low-carbon, low-sulphur fuels.

This study by Ecofys, a Navigant company, explores the role of gas in a fully decarbonised energy system by 2050. We conclude that it is possible by 2050 to scale up renewable gas (biomethane and renewable hydrogen) production in the EU to a quantity of 122 billion cubic metres by 2050. We also conclude that using this gas with existing gas infrastructure, smartly combined with renewable electricity in sectors where it adds most value, can lead to €138 billion societal cost savings annually compared to decarbonisation without a role for renewable gas.
This study has been commissioned by Gas for Climate, a consortium of seven gas transport companies (Enagás, Fluxys, Gasunie, GRTgaz, Open Grid Europe, Snam and Teréga) based in six EU Member States plus two renewable gas producing organisations (European Biogas Association and Consorzio Italiano Biogas). The group shares the vision that renewable and low carbon gas, transported, stored and distributed by the existing gas infrastructure, can help to achieve a net zero carbon European energy system by 2050 in a cost-effective way.
This study starts from the perspective that all gas consumption in Europe must, by 2050, be net zero carbon. This means that it is produced from renewable sources and that any remaining natural gas consumption will be combined with carbon capture and storage or capture and permanent utilization.
Ecofys analyses how much renewable gas Europe can produce and what the societal value is of using this gas in existing gas infrastructure in various sectors of the economy. Based on conservative assumptions, we conclude that it is possible to greatly increase the production and use of renewable gas in the EU. Keeping the existing gas infrastructure in place to enable the transport, storage and distribution of this renewable gas significantly lowers the total EU energy system costs.

The SCAB decided that it was necessary to establish the actual state of the art of advanced and renewable fuels technologies addressing all value chains as well as their current status of development beyond any doubt. Furthermore, it was aimed to collect directly information from the various organisations developing the technologies in order to avoid ambiguity and establish the status based on their direct input. This report addresses the status and reliability of the advanced biofuels sector by referring to plants in operation, or in some cases close to being in operation. As the title of this report expresses the following information is intended to give STATUS and RELIABILTY information for various conversion pathways of biomass feedstocks to advanced biofuels. These conversion pathways have been grouped under four sections.
1. Thermochemical conversion
2. Biological conversion
3. Power to Gas or Liquid conversion
4. Algae development
This report does not have the intention of being complete. This means that the report gives examples where information has been validated but does not imply that all and every developer is included, and there were technologies in a variety of development stages for which the information was not sufficient and which therefore was omitted.

The hydrotreating of vegetable oils (HVO) and animal fats is a new process. It is based on oil
refining know-how and is used for the production of biofuels for diesel engines. In the process,
hydrogen is used to remove oxygen from the triglyceride vegetable oil molecules and to split the
triglyceride into three separate chains thus creating hydrocarbons which are similar to existing
diesel fuel components. This allows the blending in any desired ratio without any concerns
regarding quality.

European transport decarbonisation policy in the period from 2020 to 2030 is still under discussion, and has been the subject of much debate. This report explores what different possible transport policy scenarios could achieve in terms of their contribution to policy goals, such as greenhouse gas (GHG) savings and renewable energy penetration.
This study undertook detailed modelling of the impacts of different types of target, (GHG targets, renewables targets, advanced (referred to as second generation, or 2G here) biofuels targets, or no EU-wide targets), on expected GHG savings, renewables contribution and the cost of carbon savings for biofuels. It also qualitatively assessed the expected environmental impact of alternative or complementary policy approaches, such as inclusion of transport in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme and changing car CO2 standards from a tank-to-wheel (tailpipe) basis to a well-to-wheel basis.

Several key conclusions are made about how effectively different transport policies can contribute to policy goals:

• Renewable energy or greenhouse gas targets for transport are the only options considered that allow transport to contribute significantly towards 2030 energy and climate goals
• The absence of EU-level targets would lead to declining biofuels volumes, and a lack of investment in 2G biofuels
• Either a GHG or energy based-target, together with an 2G biofuel sub-target, could be an effective approach – the level at which the target is set, and the success of implementation of each is what would create any difference between the two. Biofuels make a contribution of around 11% to EU transport energy in 2030 in scenarios with targets modelled here.
• Blending limits are the main factor that could limit ethanol use. Continued roll out of E10 and introduction of E20 would require other actions alongside EU biofuels targets

Empyro has been established with the aim to demonstrate the fast pyrolysis technology of BTG Bioliquids on a commercially relevant scale of 25 MWth. Preparations already started in 2009, but the actual construction of the pyrolysis oil production plant just began early 2014. Regarding plant capacity, 5 t/hr of clean wood will be converted into about 3.2 t/hr of pyrolysis oil. Excess heat generated from the combustion of the byproducts (gas and char) is used for the generation of steam. Subsequently, this steam is used to provide the heat for the biomass dryer, and to run a steam turbine for generating electricity. Finally, any excess steam is sold to AkzoNobel. Commissioning of the plant started early 2015, and first batches of oil have been produced. Gradually, the production capacity will be increased to its maximum of over 20 million liters of pyrolysis oil annually. A guaranteed long-term off-take of the pyrolysis oil is of utmost importance. Agreement has been reached with FrieslandCampina on a 12-year delivery contract for the majority of the oil (>75%). They will utilize pyrolysis oil to substitute natural gas and generate 40 t/h of 20 bar(g) process steam for use in the milk powder production. The new boiler has been installed on their site, and commissioning will take place in Q2/Q3-2015. The pyrolysis oil will replace 12 million cubic meters of natural gas, the equivalent annual consumption of 8,000 Dutch households, which saves up to 20,000 tons of CO2 emissions per year.

The Sub-group on Advanced biofuels (SGAB), to the Sustainable Transport Forum (STF), is chaired by the EC and has some thirty members that represent biofuel, fuel, vehicle and transport industries, while other stakeholders such as national authorities, Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) and others are welcomed as observers. SGAB, which had its first meeting in December 2015 and the end meeting in October 2016, had a main defined deliverable to give a recommendation on targets for advanced biofuels in 2030. This report has the ambition to present overall economics for production of various advanced biofuels. With a few exceptions, this industry is just starting its path to commercialization and data based on years of operating experiences and construction of a series of plants therefore do not exist for most of the fuels covered by this report. This report does not have the ambition to draw “the final conclusion” of all good work generated in the field of advanced biofuels during the last couple of years. It will however claim to draw well based conclusions on the topic “Cost of Advanced Biofuels”. Chapter 2 describes how information has been gathered and reviewed. Results of this work are compared with other relevant work in the field of advanced biofuels. This is done on a fuel by fuel basis in the chapters thereafter. The overall results are presented in the Summary chapter. Production cost of biofuels are there presented as cost of energy and data are presented as a span. It will give a well-founded base for how much production cost of advanced biofuels differs from cost of today’s main fuels, gasoline and diesel and can therefore be used when investigating what level of incentives would be needed in order to introduce advanced biofuels into the market.

The hydrotreating of vegetable oils (HVO) and animal fats is a new process. It is based on oil
refining know-how and is used for the production of biofuels for diesel engines. In the process,
hydrogen is used to remove oxygen from the triglyceride vegetable oil molecules and to split the
triglyceride into three separate chains thus creating hydrocarbons which are similar to existing
diesel fuel components. This allows the blending in any desired ratio without any concerns
regarding quality.

Liquid biofuels are made from biomass and have qualities that are similar to gasoline, diesel or other petroleum-derived fuels. The two dominant liquid biofuels
are bioethanol and biodiesel (i.e. 80% and 20% of the market, respectively), that together meet about 3% of the global transport fuel demand and are produced
using 2-3% of the global arable land. Bioethanol can be produced from sugarcane, corn, sugar beets, wheat, potatoes, sorghum and cassava. In 2011, the largest producers of bioethanol were the United States (63%), using corn, Brazil (24%), using sugarcane, and China (2.5%). Biodiesel is made from vegetable oils, derived from soybeans, rapeseed, palm seeds, sunfl owers, jatropha, as well as from animal fat or waste oils. The largest producers of biodiesel in 2011 were the European Union (43%), the United States (15%), Brazil and Argentina (each around 13%). The advantage of biofuels is that they can substantially reduce greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions in the transport sector (i.e. between 70% and 90% compared to gasoline) with only modest changes to vehicle technology and the existing
fuel distribution infrastructure. The disadvantage is that, apart from sugarcane ethanol, the large-scale production of liquid biofuels based on today’s technology
and feedstock would compete with food production for arable land and water, with limited expansion potential in certain cases. Also of concern would be the
conservation of biodiversity and the risk of important land-use changes. The use of shared international standards is crucial to ensure that liquid biofuels are produced in a sustainable manner, minimising these possible negative environmental and social impact due to land-use change and competition for food.
In several countries, research is currently working on the development of advanced biofuels (i.e. second and third generation biofuels), which are produced
from non-food, cellulosic biomass, such as woody and straw residues from agriculture and forestry, fast-rotation plants, non-food crops (possibly grown
on marginal, non-arable land), organic fraction of urban waste and algae-based feedstock. These kinds of feedstock require advanced, capital-intensive processing
to produce biofuels, but they promise to be more sustainable, off ering higher emissions reductions and less sensitivity to fl uctuations in feedstock costs. While
the production cost of advanced biofuels is still high, improvements in process effi ciency and cost reductions are expected from ongoing demonstration projects
in many countries, where there are a number of small plants in operation and/or large plants under construction or planned. Biofuels have been produced since the 1970s, but the market has expanded in the last ten years with a six-fold increase in production. This growth has been driven by mandates and tax incentives for blending biofuels with fossil fuels for energy security and emissions mitigation reasons. In general, today’s biofuels are not yet economically competitive with fossil fuels, with the sole exception of sugarcane ethanol, which enjoys an untaxed retail price as low as USD 0.6-0.65 per litre of gasoline equivalent (lge). In terms of market potential, the International Energy Agency (IEA) projects that sugarcane ethanol and advanced biofuels could provide up to 9.3% of total transportation fuels by 2030 and up to 27% by 2050. However, this would require at least a three- to fi ve-fold increase in land use for biofuels production and signifi cant yield improvements in developing countries. The future of biofuels hinges on a number of factors. The economic viability will depend largely on the price of biomass and oil-based fuels. A large-scale production of biofuels would increase feedstock demand and prices, requiring a global market—a situation similar as that for oil today. However, technical advances in the production of advanced biofuels from cellulosic feedstock could make available a broader range of non-food biomass (e.g. agriculture and forestry waste), which could ease feedstock supply and prices, and address certain sustainability issues. Policy measures should be very selective in promoting only those biofuels technologies that substantially reduce emissions reductions, avoid adverse land and water uses, and have positive social impacts.

European transport decarbonisation policy in the period from 2020 to 2030 is still under discussion, and has been the subject of much debate. This report explores what different possible transport policy scenarios could achieve in terms of their contribution to policy goals, such as greenhouse gas (GHG) savings and renewable energy penetration.
This study undertook detailed modelling of the impacts of different types of target, (GHG targets, renewables targets, advanced (referred to as second generation, or 2G here) biofuels targets, or no EU-wide targets), on expected GHG savings, renewables contribution and the cost of carbon savings for biofuels. It also qualitatively assessed the expected environmental impact of alternative or complementary policy approaches, such as inclusion of transport in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme and changing car CO2 standards from a tank-to-wheel (tailpipe) basis to a well-to-wheel basis.
Several key conclusions are made about how effectively different transport policies can contribute to policy goals:
Renewable energy or greenhouse gas targets for transport are the only options considered that allow transport to contribute significantly towards 2030 energy and climate goals
The absence of EU-level targets would lead to declining biofuels volumes, and a lack of investment in 2G biofuels
Either a GHG or energy based-target, together with an 2G biofuel sub-target, could be an effective approach – the level at which the target is set, and the success of implementation of each is what would create any difference between the two. Biofuels make a contribution of around 11% to EU transport energy in 2030 in scenarios with targets modelled here.
Blending limits are the main factor that could limit ethanol use. Continued roll out of E10 and introduction of E20 would require other actions alongside EU biofuels targets

China now has the largest economy in the world. As a result, it will face an ever-increasing energy demand for the foreseeable future. In 2013, China surpassed the USA as the largest net importer of petroleum and other oil based liquids. It also accounted for more than a quarter of the world’s growth in oil consumption. Oil demand is primarily driven by a growing economy with one indication being China’s current status as the world’s biggest car market with sales of new vehicles expanding due to the country’s growing middle class. However, this increasing demand for fossil fuels has also contributed to the country’s increasing energy security concerns. As a result, China has taken steps to secure energy supply through various strategies such as intensive domestic exploration, investment in overseas oil companies, securing long-term contracts with suppliers of fossil fuels, such as natural gas from Russia and investing heavily in renewable forms of energy.
At the same time as China’s economy has rapidly grown it has also become the world’s largest CO2 emitter and faces growing concerns over air pollution. Thus, climate change mitigation and pollution abatement, particularly in its cities, have also become important policy drivers for the country. This is indicated by China’s signing of the recent UNFCCC COP21 agreement and the country’s 13th five-year plan that was released in March 2016. This most recent five-year plan described a large number of binding commitments to aid in environmental reform.
Since the oil crisis of the 1970’s energy security and climate change mitigation requirements have been the main motivators behind most countries’ desire to develop biofuels. Although climate change and energy security are also of concern to China, it is not clear which of these drivers has been the primary motivator for biofuels development. However, the policies that China has implemented so far to help develop biofuels have resulted in the country becoming the world’s third largest ethanol producer. The country currently produces about 3 billion litres of ethanol and about 1.14 billion litres of biodiesel per year. Although the Chinese government has set ambitious targets to increase annual biofuels production to12.7 billion litres of ethanol and 2.3 billion litres of biodiesel by 2020, it is highly unlikely that these targets will be met. It is worth noting that biofuels development and use received little attention in the country’s recently released 13th five-year plan. Unlike other forms of renewable energy, no exact output targets were given for biofuels.
Unlike stationary power, which can be derived from multiple sources including solar, hydro and wind, transportation has limited options available for decarbonisation. Although biofuels can potentially alleviate energy security concerns and make an important contribution to reducing transportation emissions and air pollution, it seems that the most recent central government policies have primarily focussed on the development of “new energy vehicles” (electric and hybrid vehicles). However, it is worth noting that electric vehicle expansion based on coal-derived electricity will have a limited impact on emissions.
China’s biofuels policies have mainly focused on ethanol production with about 99% of the ethanol produced in China based on conventional starch-based feedstocks. Current ethanol production has been developed within a highly regulated environment as no facilities can be built unless government approval is obtained. All ethanol production and distribution is controlled by state-owned oil companies and only state approved companies can carry out blending and receive incentives and subsidies. Although an E10 mandate is in place in four provinces and 27 cities, no blending can take place outside of these areas. The price of the ethanol that blenders have to pay producers is fixed at 91.1% of the price of gasoline. As a result, there are no incentives in place for consumers to preferentially purchase ethanol containing fuels as the blended fuel costs the same price as the unblended fuel.
After the initial development of ethanol production facilities based on stale grain reserves in 2007, the government banned further bioethanol development based on grains. Instead they encouraged the production of so-called 1.5 generation feedstocks such as cassava, sweet potato and sweet sorghum. A further two ethanol facilities were supposed to be developed based on cassava and one based on sweet sorghum. These 1.5 generation crops were supposed to be predominantly grown on marginal lands. However, this approach has had limited success, with land and water availability proving to be significant challenges while these supposed biofuels feedstocks still compete with food production. The commercial development of so-called second generation/advanced biofuels based on cellulosic feedstocks has been limited to small volumes. Currently there is only one demonstration/commercial scale facility using corn cobs as the feedstock. However, it appears that there is considerable potential for further cellulosic ethanol production based on a range of agricultural residue feedstocks. Preliminary assessments of agriculture residue availability indicate that there should be significant quantities available for ethanol production, even based on conservative estimates. However, far more detailed studies need to be carried out to determine realistic availability within an economically viable radius. At the same time, a detailed assessment of the likely supply chain challenges that might be encountered in China needs to be carried out. (i.e. small-scale farming versus large-scale commercial farming; manual harvesting versus mechanical harvesting; topographical factors such as terrace farming; and the viability of large-scale collection of rice straw). These further analyses will be better able to distinguish between the theoretical and actual potential of making advanced/second generation bioethanol in specific locations.
Although several international companies such as DuPont, Beta Renewables and Novozymes have announced plans for construction of commercial scale cellulosic ethanol facilities in China, in partnership with existing ethanol producers, the current low price of oil has delayed these developments. Thus, it is unlikely that the commercial development of cellulosic ethanol will occur in time to meet the government’s ethanol targets for 2020. However, this conversion technology is probably the best opportunity for the country to expand ethanol production, in addition to achieving its climate change mitigation and emission reduction targets for transport.
Unlike the ethanol industry the biodiesel industry has developed slowly, is dominated by small-scale private businesses and is largely unregulated. No mandate for biodiesel blending exists, except for a small trial in two counties in Hainan province. There are also limited incentives to carry out biodiesel blending. The vast majority of the biodiesel that is produced is used by industry, with only about 30% used for transport. Market penetration for biodiesel has been very limited as state-owned oil companies own 90% of the gas stations and they have not encouraged biodiesel use.
Virtually all of the biodiesel that is produced is based on used cooking oil as the feedstocks. Although large volumes of so-called “gutter oil” are produced in China, competition from illegal re-use in food applications has resulted in supply availability challenges. The central government’s strategy of developing 1.5 generation oilseed-bearing trees and crops such as Jatropha as the feedstocks has had limited success to date. Although biodiesel production targets are modest and could possibly be achieved, further expansion is likely to be limited. Although there is approximately equal demand for gasoline and diesel in China’s transportation supply chain, biodiesel market penetration and production targets have been very low compared to ethanol. Early indications are that compressed natural gas vehicles, particularly for haulage, may be preferentially developed ahead of biodiesel. Although imported biofuels could potentially be used to meet government targets this is likely to remain limited as current regulations do not allow any imported ethanol to be used for transport. The experience in other jurisdictions such as Brazil, the EU and the US has shown the essential role the supporting policies play in creating demand, stimulating production and facilitating research, development and commercialisation of biofuels. Although the Chinese government has implemented some policy support for biofuels, these policies have primarily focused on ethanol, have lacked integration and have had a limited impact on the development of biofuels. For example, the most recent 13th Five-year Plan makes limited mention of biofuels implying that biofuels will likely play only a minor role in China’s decarbonisation of its transport sector.

In the Netherlands this vision of a sustainable fuel mix has been compiled in the first half of 2014 following intensive collaboration between more than 100 organisations. Around the world, a number of major transitions are taking place with regard to energy provision (sustainability and energy conservation) and the use of fuels. This vision brings together climate-related mobility objectives and social issues relating to sustainable energy, energy conservation, green growth, living conditions (air quality and noise pollution) and safety in a global context. The driving factor in the Netherlands is the Energy Agreement signed under the auspices of the Social and Economic Council (SER) in September 2013, in which ambitious Tank-to-Wheel (TTW) objectives1 were agreed in order to reduce the CO2 missions of the mobility and transport sector. It is important that the activities conducted for this purpose also help to reduce Well-to-Wheel (WTW) carbon emissions, and closer examination must be conducted into the relationship with other measures unrelated to fuel or vehicles, such as behavioural change, logistic efficiency, and better use of infrastructure. Achieving the Energy Agreement’s objectives whilst simultaneously stimulating green growth will be a major challenge that requires courage, decisive action, co-operation, consistent strategies, and the willingness to invest. To realise this goal, there must be approximately 3 million zero-emission vehicles in the Netherlands by 2030. In order to satisfy the objectives and simultaneously reap the benefits of green growth and improvements in living conditions, these developments must be initiated immediately. The shipping sector (both inland and ocean shipping)2 have set themselves the objective of achieving a 50% reduction in CO2 by 2050 in comparison with 2020 levels. This objective, which was later repeated in “Groen en Krachtig Varen” (Eng: Powerful and Green Shipping), the environmental brochure of the KVNR3, matches the Energy Agreement objectives for the energy sector. The aviation sector is establishing ambitious and far-reaching sustainability goals in accordance with stringent international certification criteria. A substantial proportion of the rail sector already runs on electric power. The result of this process is an adaptive and targeted multi-track strategy that will make the Netherlands a European front-runner in sustainable mobility and a pioneer in a number of promising niches.

The Netherlands is committed to switching to electric propulsion in transport sectors in whichelectricity is a promising alternative. Electric motors will be combined with sustainable biofuels and renewable gas4 as a transitional option and a long-term solution for heavy transport. Bothavenues will be supported by continual efforts to improve efficiency.

For the shipping sector, the Netherlands is committed to implementing efficiency measures in combination with a transition to LNG and use of sustainable biofuels5 for short-sea and inlandshipping.In the aviation sector, improvements in efficiency are being made by means of innovative aircraft technology, operations and infrastructure, as well as continued development and application of sustainable biokerosine sourcing, production and distribution.

For the rail sector, the Netherlands is dedicated to expanding the use of sustainable electricity, as well as replacing diesel trains with LNG- and bio-LNG-powered trains (depending on the technical and economic feasibility).

The periodic strategy updates that take place every three or four years create opportunities tointroduce new technologies and additional instruments.

The transition to a sustainable energy mix requires:

Made-to-measure support: Support will be tailor-made to suit specific product-marketcombinations and the specific development phase that the product is in. After all, products that are market mature require different support to products in the R&D stage.

Co-operation between all relevant policy areas at all scale levels within an international context: Every policy type has a different scale level (regional, national, European, global) that variesaccording to the mode of transport in question. Measures for road transport are predominantly applied at the national level, inland and short-sea shipping at the European level, and aviationand deep-sea shipping at the global level.

Swift investments to realise maximum benefits: Although 2030 and 2050 are a long way away, opportunities exist today to develop niche and early markets in order to optimally position the Netherlands for the future large-scale roll-out of technology for green vehicle transport andsustainable fuels. In a number of areas, the Netherlands can be a frontrunner.

Promising green growth projects6 further build upon the Netherlands’ strong position and its specific circumstances, such as the high degree of urbanisation. Sustainable mobility links five of the current nine innovation agendas. Promising niche markets – for both existing market players and newcomers/start-ups – in the green-growth sector with the potential for market leadership include:

Electric transport: development and application of products and services regarding recharging infrastructure, smart grids, energy storage, and special vehicles/components.

Hydrogen: pilots and market-introduction studies on fuel-cell cars and other vehicles (buses, refuse lorries etc.); development regarding the production and distribution of sustainablehydrogen fuel as a long-term solution. (The hydrogen economy is important for industriesrelating to hydrogen-fuel-cell technology, system integration, the production and distribution ofhydrogen, and the supply industry.)

Renewable gas: front-runner in R&D and pilots relating to the distribution and production ofrenewable gas for light vehicles and LNG/bio-LNG for heavy vehicles and shipping and certainsegments of the rail sector.

Biofuels: front-runner in the development and distribution of sustainable biofuels7.

With an action plan made up in 2014 and a coalition of the willing, we will begin to make this vision a reality. To achieve this vision, the following points must be put on the agenda: Strategy development and action plan: Strive to be a front-runner in specific niche markets that offer opportunities for green growth and contribute to the pioneer projects. Form coalitions and examine possible synergy between the sustainable fuel mix, smart grids, energy storage and power-to-gas. Gear development policy towards businesses that will be willing and able to play a key role in the sustainable fuel and vehicle mix (the pioneers).Encourage existing sectors – such as shipbuilding or fossil fuel / biofuel production and distribution – to focus on making fuels more sustainable. Condense the vision and strategy into an action plan.Source-based policy: Collaborate at the EU level to establish CO2 requirements for vehicles (fleet averages of car manufacturers) that are based on the 60% CO2 reduction objective for 2050.Collaborate at the EU level to reduce greenhouse gas emissions within the fuel chain – preferably within the EUFuel Quality Directive (FQD) – and reformulate the EU Renewable Energy Directive after 2020 (following the renewable energy in transport objective), ensuring that it encompasses all fuels and that direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions constitute the guiding factor. This will help to introduce renewable energy in all market segments of the fuel sector. It is also in line with the recommendations made by the Corbey commission. Focus on realising the commercial availability in the Netherlands of vehicles with zero CO2 exhaust emissions by 2035, in addition to examining how these efforts can be realised at the EU level. Work towards the implementation of fuel-blending obligations in the shipping sector for sustainable biofuels ortowards other renewable energy objectives, and put the standardisation of CO2 emissions and methane slip onthe agenda. R&D and innovation: Develop and reinforce the market introduction of and market-development programmes for various forms of electric propulsion in passenger and freight vehicles, including loading and hydrogen-tank infrastructure and related services, as well as connection to the energy network.Develop programmes for sustainable fuel production by means of cascading and biorefinery.Work on the development of the bio-based economy. The bio-based economy can contribute to the development of advanced bio fuels with a low environmental impact. Facilitate a testing ground for efficiency improvements for the deep-sea shipping sector and for the bulk consumers in the short-sea and inland shipping sector. Support the innovation, investment and sustainability ambitions of the aviation sector to realise efficiency improvements and sustainable biofuels by means of further development of the Bioport Holland Concept.Financial incentives (fiscal or otherwise):

Work at both the national and EU level on a fairer CO2-dependent incentive relating to vehicles, vessels and aircraft as well as fuel/energy carriers, with further examination in the long term of the entire chain and not just the specific attributes of the vehicles themselves. To this end, make long-term agreements in order to provide financial security. Create a public-private infrastructure fund for charging points for battery-powered electric cars, renewable gas and hydrogen fuel stations, and LNG bunker stations. Incentivise the transition from existing diesel ships to LNG ships or more sustainable technology and applications. Conclude a covenant regarding the financing of sustainable investments.Supporting measures: Support purchasing consortia with tendering experience.Support regional initiatives, learn from these experiences, and roll the successful initiatives out at the national level. Encourage collaboration and coalition-forming between businesses in order to reinforce their growth potential and to give the Netherlands an optimal platform to present itself as a leading player in the field of sustainable mobility.

After several years at high levels, oil prices dropped by more than half between June 2014 and January 2015. This realignment has caused companies and countries to reconsider their energy choices. They have to account not just for current lower prices, but also for the economic implications of uncertain and volatile oil prices, and for what this means for longer-term trends. This note addresses some of these issues, building on the findings and recommendations of Better Growth,
Better Climate: The New Climate Economy Report, published last September by the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate. The report found there were many actions countries could take to promote better growth, while also reducing GHG emissions from energy use. The overall conclusion of this note is that opportunities for structural change in economies and energy systems remain even with a situation of lower oil prices.
1. Low oil prices offer welcome short-term economic relief for consumers, but medium- and long-term prices remain uncertain. Energy price volatility is high and hurts economic growth. Overall, cheaper oil provides a stimulus to the world economy, but with uneven effects. The world now uses 90 million barrels per day, so an oil price of, say, US$60 instead of $100 would save consumers US$1.3 trillion per year. Despite losses to oil producers, globally the net effect is positive. Modelling by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) suggests that if prices stay low, global GDP will be 0.3–0.7% higher in 2015, and 0.2–0.8% higher in
2016 than it would be otherwise. Countries cannot bank on future low fossil fuel prices. While it is tempting to think lower prices are here to stay, history tells us that large price swings are a poor guide to what happens next. Even now, forecasts for the next five years vary between troughs as low as US$20/barrel, to a steady return to $100/barrel levels. For 2016 alone, recent expert polls show guesses in the range of US$59–85/barrel. The sharp drop in prices has a sting in its tail: price volatility hurts the economy. While uncertainty is a fact of life, oil is special: its market value is 5% of world GDP, its price can move by 50% within a matter of months, there are few short-term options to reduce consumption, and it has widespread knock-on effects on other key inputs to economic activity. Energy price volatility is therefore a major concern. It hurts the economy, delaying business investment, requiring costly reallocation of resources, reducing consumer expenditure, and slowing job growth. Thus, even as consumers enjoy the benefits of low oil prices, volatility is now a top concern of energy leaders worldwide. Conversely, reducing exposure to energy price volatility has economic value. Countries can do so by discouraging wasteful consumption, increasing energy efficiency, and expanding non-fossil energy supply.
2. Low oil prices offer an opportunity: countries can seize the day to improve energy pricing and reform subsidies to achieve long-term benefits. The “true cost” of fossil fuels is higher than what consumers pay. Distorted energy prices stand in the way of a better growth and development path for many countries. Price controls undermine investment in much-needed infrastructure and can threaten the build-out of energy supplies. Subsidies for fossil fuel consumption reached
US$550 billion in 2013, encouraging waste while straining public finances. Few countries have energy prices that fully reflect the harm of pollution to public health and the environment, while most also lack the carbon prices that can underpin structural change towards a lower-carbon economy. Whether oil prices are high or low, there are benefits from correcting these various deficiencies. Lower oil prices can open up a space for reforms. There is momentum around the world to improve energy pricing: 27 countries are reforming energy subsidies, including Egypt, Indonesia, Ghana, and India, while Morocco and Jordan are among those considering additional steps; 40 countries and over 20 sub-national jurisdictions now apply or have scheduled the introduction of a carbon price, while another 26 are actively considering them. Many countries are stepping up efforts to tackle air pollution. These policies have strong long-term benefits, but often founder on short-term resistance and transition costs. The current low fossil fuel prices create an opportunity to overcome such difficulties. Consumers accustomed to high prices, but now paying less, may be more open to reform.
3. Despite low oil prices now, there are good reasons to continue to expand investments in renewable energy for electricity production. A long-term focus still favours steps to reduce dependence on fossil fuels (which would also reduce GHG emissions), but decision-makers need to take a fresh look at their options and recognise the changes in the landscape. Cheaper oil does not compete directly with renewable energy for electricity production, but can bring lower natural gas and coal prices, with wider impacts. Oil itself barely features in electricity production globally, and technologies such as solar photovoltaics and wind energy are therefore not affected by the oil price itself. However, lower natural gas prices associated with cheaper oil can change electricity choices: strengthening the near-term case to switch from coal to gas and reducing electricity prices, while making renewable energy source less cost-competitive in the short run. In the long term, however, a shift to gas cannot depend on the indirect impact of lower oil prices, but would require lower fundamental costs and improved availability of natural
gas itself. Achieving GHG benefits in such a scenario, in turn, depends on getting policy right, from steps to reduce methane leakage, to continued support for the deployment and development of fully CO2 -free energy. Costs of renewable energy are falling and have low volatility, making these sources of energy an attractive
option regardless of short-term oil price movements.
• Oil prices offer less guidance to choices about electricity than is often assumed. Continued low gas and coal prices are not assured, and the link to oil is weakening in key geographies.
• The costs of solar and wind power continue to fall fast, and these energy sources have little if any operating cost (and therefore low volatility once built). Renewable energy can thus effectively lock in the cost of energy production for 20 years or more. By contrast, fossil fuel prices have no such trend, are uncertain
even five years ahead, and also have significant short-term volatility.
• The best wind power and solar photovoltaic (PV) projects can already compete even with cheaper natural gas. There are steps countries can take now to reduce the cost of renewable energy solutions further, notably by enabling lower-cost finance.
• Renewable energy can mitigate pressing problems that do not show in the market price for energy, including energy security concerns, air pollution, as well as exposure to future fossil fuel price volatility.
Overall, oil itself is less important for electricity markets than commonly thought, and renewable energy continues to be an attractive strategic option even with lower current fossil fuel prices. However, using modern renewable energy is not without challenges. To benefit, countries need to start the process of “learning by doing”, putting in place local supply chains, new financing models, stable policy to attract investment, and the know-how for grid integration.
4. In the longer term, low-carbon policy could help maintain lower fossil fuel prices. Large consumers can gain from lower fossil fuel prices in low-carbon scenarios. Energy efficiency and alternatives to fossil fuels (renewable or nuclear) have already taken the pressure off fossil fuel markets. In the longer run, ambitious low-carbon policy could reduce fossil fuel prices by as much as 30–50%. To capture this benefit, the large consuming economies of the world would need to act in concert. They also would need to continue such policies even as the prices of those fuels fall to lower levels. The current low prices present an opportunity to avoid future “stranding” of assets. Producers are now cutting back on investment in the development of high-cost oil resources that are no longer viable under lower oil
prices. This creates an opportunity both to avoid future “stranding”, and to avoid commitment to future fossil fuel use that follows from the development of these resources.

The Reference Scenario analyses key policies aiming at reducing GHG emissions (e.g. EU ETS, CO2 standards for light duty vehicles), at increasing the RES share (e.g. RES targets and implementing policies), and at improving energy efficiency (e.g. Energy Efficiency Directive, Ecodesign). The increase in RES and improvements in energy efficiency also lead to the reduction of GHG emissions. The modelling captures these policy interactions. Furthermore, the scenario analysis also provides indicators related to competitive energy provision for businesses and affordability of energy use, as these are key aspects for economic and social development. In the Reference Scenario, GHG emissions decrease in most sectors of the energy system. This is particularly the case in the power generation sector as various decarbonisation technologies reach maturity, despite the increase in gross electricity demand. As a result, the EU energy system sees a strong reduction in the carbon intensity of power generation. Non-CO2 emissions trends are diverse, with substantial decreases in e.g. waste and HFCs and small decreases in agriculture. LULUCF is currently an emission sink, although this is projected to decline. The Reference Scenario projects an increase in renewable energy shares over the projected period. This is first driven by dedicated RES policies and later in the period by the long-lasting effect of current policies, technological progress and better market functioning. Additionally the energy system is characterised by a continued decoupling of GDP growth and energy demand growth: while the economy grows by 75% between 2010 and 2050, total energy consumption reduces by 15% in the same time period. Focusing on the short to medium term, the Reference Scenario shows that the period between 2010 and 2020 sees substantial changes in the energy system. This is notably driven by the legally binding targets of the 2020 Energy and Climate package, the CO2 standards for cars and vans, and the Energy Efficiency Directive. The projection shows that the combined measures achieve 18.4% energy efficiency gains. The EU 2020 RES share is 21.0%, while GHG emission reductions would reach 25.7%. Adopted policies are found to be sufficient to achieve the EU level 2020 target for effort sharing sectors. Regarding the medium to long term, GHG emission reductions are projected to reach 35.2% in 2030 and 47.7% in 2050. Although emissions reduce substantially, the decrease is less than the target agreed for 2030 and the objective for 2050. The RES share reaches 24.3% in 2030. The ETS, which leads to continued reductions of allowances over the projection period and increasing carbon prices, is a significant driver to RES penetration and further emission reduction. The influence of energy efficiency policies, the CO2 standards for cars and vans, etc. continues beyond the 2020 horizon, with energy savings of 23.9% projected for 2030. The changes that the power generation sector undergoes entail considerable capital intensive investments. These include investments into the transmission and distribution systems not least because of the development of the ENTSOE Ten Year Development Plan until 2030. Investment costs have an upward effect on electricity prices – and on energy system costs – in the transitional period until 2030. Beyond 2030, however, electricity prices stabilize and even decrease. A general effect on total energy system costs is that they become more capital intensive
over time. After the structural adjustments in order to cope with the 2020 targets and policies, of which the effects continue in the longer term, total energy system costs grow slower than GDP. This leads to a decreasing ratio of energy system costs to GDP in the period 2030-50.

Four high-priority approaches were identified throughout the course of study that have the potential to reduce CO2 emissions from commercial aviation, particularly from those aircraft that produce the bulk of the emissions: large single- and twin-aisle aircraft. However, developing new technology for large commercial aircraft requires substantial time and resources. Aircraft–propulsion integration and gas turbine engines are both well-established approaches that need to be pursued. In contrast, the funding situation for the other two approaches, turboelectric propulsion and SAJF, is somewhat problematic. It is not clear when turboelectric propulsion technology will advance to the point that it provides the performance needed for practical application in commercial aircraft. It is also uncertain when SAJF will be able to compete economically with petroleum-based fuels, especially considering the capital costs of founding a new industry and the fluctuating prices of conventional jet fuel. Given the immediacy of the issues, however, research supporting all four approaches is prudent both to reduce current CO2 emissions and to alleviate the potential adverse consequences of future aviation growth worldwide.

A UK Competition on advanced biofuels would place the UK on the global map of nations supporting their commercialisation. Current status of development of the sector means that there is potential for additionality from UK public funding to the sector, which could support the development of UK industry related to the sector and the deployment of technology in the UK, and attract international players to the UK. This feasibility study concludes that there is opportunity for a UK Competition to support one or more advanced biofuel demonstration project, within the proposed £25M budget. However, the funding available may not be able to support some of the more cost intensive technologies and may be restricted in terms of the large scale demonstration activities it could fund (TRL 7). As a result, the Competition should invite applications for activities at both TRL 6 and 7, and this may be most effectively done through a two stage application process. All scales of demonstration may deliver against the Competition objectives, where proposals demonstrate exploitation of intellectual property for UK benefit and potential for future commercial deployment of the technology in the UK and elsewhere, but their contribution towards the 2020 RED targets would be limited. The Competition would be an important means to promote the UK’s participation in the global advanced biofuels market, which could contribute up to £260M – £520M per year to the UK economy in 2030, and initiate the deployment of the technology in the UK.

This Directive lays down rules on calculation methods and reporting requirements in accordance with Directive 98/70/EC. This Directive applies to fuels used to propel road vehicles, non-road mobile machinery (including inland waterway vessels when not at sea), agricultural and forestry tractors, recreational craft when not at sea and electricity for use in road vehicles.

The file is a Biofuels matrix put together by UPEI in March 2018 that gives a concise overview on the (i) taxation system, (ii) mandatory blending and (iii) legislation for advanced biofuels in several countries (Belgium, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Netherlands, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, UK).

The reference is about the proposed long-term trajectory for low-carbon liquid fuels for Europe (refining industry’s Vision 2050) by FuelsEurope. Transitioning gradually to new feedstocks such as renewables, waste and captured CO2, and with the right policy framework in place, this vision offers a cost-effective option for cutting CO2 emissions in transport using the existing and widespread infrastructure already in place, enabling to reducing emissions of all vehicles in circulation and including all transport sectors, HDV, marine and aviation.

The aim of this Report is to feed the debate on how to most effectively overcome such hurdles with the support of the EBTP. Even though the EU2020 targets are far from being met, the development of advanced biofuels capacities is slowing down. In January 2014 the European Commission presented the 2030 framework for climate and energy policies. One main change compared to the 2020 targets is that the Commission does not anymore include targets for renewable energy or the greenhouse gas intensity of fuels used in the transport sector or any other sub-sector after 2020. Previously, the Commission has already indicated, that food-based biofuels should not receive public support after 2020. The focus of policy development should be on second and third generation biofuels and other alternative, sustainable fuels, which is reflected in the 2030 decision. This report aims at spotlighting country-specific bottlenecks hindering more active engagement of the industry to realize the potentials of advanced biofuels.

Biomass has the potential to make a significant impact on domestic fuel supplies and thus help meet the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) renewable fuels goals (CRS 2007). This study is part of an ongoing effort within the Department of Energy to meet the renewable energy goals for liquid transportation fuels. The objective of this report is to present a techno-economic evaluation of the performance and cost of various biomass based thermochemical fuel production processes. This report also documents the economics that were originally developed for the report entitled “Biofuels in Oregon and Washington: A Business Case Analysis of Opportunities and Challenges” (Stiles et al. 2008). Although the resource assessments were specific to the Pacific Northwest, the production economics
presented in this report are not regionally limited. This study uses a consistent technical and economic analysis approach and uniform assumptions to evaluate different biomass based fuel production technologies. Figure ES-1 shows the five fuel products studied. The gasification-based fuels are mixed alcohols, methanol, Fischer-Tropsch (FT), dimethyl ether (DME), ethanol via acetic acid synthesis and hydrogenation, and gasoline via methanol-to-gasoline (MTG). The liquefaction-based technologies are fast pyrolysis oil and hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) oil and subsequent upgrading to gasoline and diesel. Some fuel products are fully compatible with the current fuel infrastructure, such as renewable gasoline and renewable diesel; some are not, such as DME and methanol. The gasification based processes were evaluated using currently existing technology. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine opportunities for cost reduction through process improvements. No commercial systems yet exist for liquefaction based technologies which produce infrastructure compatible fuels. Thus, the liquefaction based systems were analyzed on a future potential basis. The major performance and cost analysis results are summarized in the following tables. All values assume $60/dry short ton wood (delivered to the plant) and are presented in year 2008 dollars. The gasification-based conversions to currently used liquid fuels (ethanol via mixed alcohols, ethanol via acetic acid, FT diesel, and, gasoline via methanol) are shown in Table ES-1. The production costs for these fuels using existing gasification and fuel synthesis technologies exceed current market prices. However, opportunities exist to reduce these costs as shown in the potential imrovements. For example, reducing syngas cleanup costs by combining tar cracking and methane reforming applies to all gasification cases. Both mixed alcohol catalysts and MTG catalysts have room for improvement. However, FT and the methanol portion of MTG and acetic acid catalysts are mature technologies and
have limited opportunity for improvements. Co-production of by-products can improve economics if the co-product is more valuable than the fuel, such as acetic acid in the ethanol route. The thermal efficiency for ethanol from acetic acid is somewhat inflated by the use of externally purchased CO for the methanol to acetic acid step and purchased H2 for acetic acid hydrogenation to ethanol. This value would likely be lower if CO and H2 were obtained directly from the syngas.The results for non-standard liquid fuels (methanol and DME) based on biomass gasification are listed in Table ES-2. Here too, gasification to these fuels using current technology results in high production costs. Potential areas of improvement include: reduction in syngas cleanup costs by combining tar cracking and methane reforming. Methanol catalyst is a mature technology with little room for major improvements. Improved one-step syngas to DME catalyst may reduce costs. The results for the liquefaction systems assuming potential improvements are listed in Table ES-3. Fast pyrolysis systems are commercially available, however, upgrading the oil to finished gasoline and diesel has only been proven at the research level. HTL oil systems have been demonstrated on the pilot scale, but are not yet commercially available. Also, upgrading HTL oil has not yet been demonstrated.

The conclusions of this study are presented in chapter 8. Section 8.1 explores the results of
the study by fuel properties, discussing which properties are expected to be critical for
future blend ratios of bio kerosene, but also discussing properties which are not likely to be
critical for blending but where the relationship between the blend ratio and the property
was considered worth pointing out. The latter are not relevant for blending bio kerosene,
but are potentially of interest for others. Section 8.2 explores the same results by fuel type,
discussing which role the individual kinds of bio kerosene are likely to play in future blending
activities.
One particularly critical property is aromatics content. It is critical not only because several
bio kerosene production pathways result in fuel that is virtually aromatics-free, but also
because the role of aromatics is a two-faced one, with aromatics being currently necessary
to preserve the tightness of fuel systems but on the other hand being undesirable from a
fuel burn and emissions point of view. This specific role of aromatics is discussed in section
8.3.

The aviation industry is responsible for 2% of anthropogenic CO2 emissions each year. Where other industries can reduce CO2 with e.g. electrification, the aviation industry is bounded to long-term infrastructure and airplanes which will fly on hydrocarbon type fuels for the coming decades. Sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) is the only significant short-term sustainable solution. SAF is physically identical to fossil jet fuel, however made from certified sustainable biomass. Unlike biodiesel, SAF is a so-called drop-in fuel and is therefore fully compatible with existing infrastructure, distribution systems and engines without any modifications.
Besides the fact that SAF can be easily blended and used with conventional jet fuel infrastructure, it provides a number of other significant benefits. On an EU level it increases the energy independency. More locally, on a member state level, SAF provides environmental benefits to the surroundings of airports and helps to achieve national emissions targets. Also, airlines benefit from the use of SAF, as they are less bounded to incumbents and can stabilize the current price swings.
The development of SAF over the recent past has been substantially. Since the first flight in 2011, more than 1500 flights have been executed on SAF. SAF can be produced with the use of different technological pathways, the current furthest developed pathway, is the HEFA pathway. The fuel produced by using the HEFA process is ASTM approved, which means it can be used in any aircraft under the same rules and regulations as conventional jet fuels. Although technology has been proven to work and airlines are willing to fly on SAF, there is currently limited activity in the production and use of SAF. The main reason for this limited activity is the price gap between fossil and sustainable aviation fuels. SAF is currently, and for the years to come, more expensive than fossil jet fuels. Also, the aviation industry is a very price sensitive industry. As a result, airlines are not able to pay more for their fuel, while keeping competitive. A mechanism to cover the price premium on the short term, should therefore be developed. SkyNRG has been set up in 2009 to make the market for SAF, and has developed several mechanisms to cover the price premium. One of those programs is the KLM corporate biofuel program where corporate customers of KLM pay a price premium to fly on sustainable fuels. Another opportunity to cover part of the price premium emerged within the European Union’s Renewable Energy Directive (RED). The voluntary inclusion of SAF in the RED obligation is a mechanism implemented into legislation in The Netherlands since 2013. From 2016 onwards it will be possible for other member states to facilitate this as well, due to a change in the RED and Fuel Quality Directive (FQD) under the recent ILUC amendment:
“In the case of suppliers of biofuels in aviation, Member States may permit such suppliers to choose to become contributors to the reduction obligation provided that those biofuels comply with the sustainability criteria” – Directive 2015/153 amending FQD (98/70/EC) and the RED (2009/28/EC). As all member states have implemented the RED differently, not all member states will have the same opportunities of implementing the voluntary aviation opt-in. Therefore, this report
SkyNRG 2016 (Document by: Oskar Meijerink) aims to give a structured insight in which EU member states can include the RED aviation optin.
First, the Dutch system is explained. Second, the 28 EU member states are categorized on their potential of implementing the voluntary aviation opt-in. This results in six high potential member states which are analysed in-depth. For these 6 member states an overview of the current system, the relevant stakeholders and a guideline on how the voluntary aviation optin could be implemented into the RED legislation. The final part concludes and reflect upon the RED aviation opt-in, this includes a brief discussion on the post 2020 legislation.

The interdisciplinary research project AviClim (Including Aviation in International Protocols for Climate Protection) has explored the feasibility for including aviation’s full climate impact, i.e., both long-lived CO2 and short-lived non-CO2 effects, in international protocols for climate protection and has investigated the economic impacts. Short-lived non-CO2 effects of aviation are NOx emissions, H2O emissions or contrail cirrus, for instance.

Four geopolitical scenarios have been designed which differ concerning the level of international support for climate protecting measures. These scenarios have been combined alternatively with an emissions trading scheme on CO2 and non-CO2 species, a climate tax and a NOx emission charge combined with CO2 trading and operational measures (such as lower flight altitudes). Modelling results indicate that a global emissions trading scheme for both CO2 and non-CO2 emissions would be the best solution from an economic and environmental point of view. Costs and impacts on competition could be kept at a relatively moderate level and effects on employment are moderate, too. At the same time, environmental benefits are noticeable.

This study discusses the technological, environmental and economic barriers for producing
methanol from carbon dioxide, as well as the possible uses of methanol in car transport in
Europe. Costs and benefits are evaluated from a life-cycle perspective in order to compare
different feedstocks for methanol production and to account for the potential benefits of CO2-
derived methanol in the transition to a more diversified fuel mix in the transport sector.
Benefits in terms of reduced dependence on conventional fossil fuels and lower risks to
security of supply can be envisioned in the medium and long term. It is nonetheless evident
that considerable and sustained research efforts are necessary to turn CO2 into an efficient
and competitive prime materials, which would be attractive not only for the transport sector,
but also other industries. Europe’s increasingly limited and expensive access to fossil fuels
makes it obligatory to consider policy options and smart strategies, combining market,
regulatory and planning instruments, to bring down the direct and indirect costs of
alternative fuels, so that transport services remain affordable for citizens and companies
during the transition to a less petroleum-dependent economy.

The demand for renewable energy has grown in the EU over recent years with policy support through the Renewable Energy Directive, Fuel Quality Directive, and Emissions Trading Scheme. While, at the time of writing, global cellulosic biofuel production is still low compared to other biofuels, there is significant potential for sustainable energy from cellulosic biomass in the future. This study aims to estimate the sustainable availability of certain cellulosic wastes and residues in the EU. We calculate the availability of the cellulosic fraction of waste, agricultural residues, and forestry residues, while considering current uses of these materials and the environmental impact of utilization. The total amount of paper, wood, food, and garden waste produced in the EU is considerable, in the order of 900 million tonnes per year. However, a large fraction of this is not truly “waste,” but low-value input materials from industrial processing and livestock care. A good example is sawdust, a “waste product” of milling wood that is then used to make products such as fiberboard. Agricultural residues, or the leaves and stalks of plants left over after harvesting, are “waste” from the consumer’s perspective but often have other agricultural uses, such as animal bedding. Some wastes and residues do not have industrial uses but still provide valuable environmental services, such as the twigs and leaves left over from logging, which house small wildlife and
return nutrients to the soil to support future forest growth. Diversion of these materials from their current uses would have potentially negative knock-on effects on industry and the environment. Accounting for various industrial uses and sustainability restrictions, about a quarter of the total production of these cellulosic materials is available for energy use, now and through 2030. The estimated sustainable availability in each category is shown in Table 1. The total available cellulosic biomass is found to be about 220 million tonnes per year, with the majority coming from crop residues The quantity of available cellulosic resource represents a sizable opportunity to produce sustainable, low-carbon-intensity energy on a large scale. If all the EU-based sustainably available cellulosic biomass was processed for transport fuel, and accounting for energy losses in conversion, these renewable feedstocks could supply a little under 1 million barrels of oil equivalent per day. This biofuel could potentially displace 13% of road fuel consumption in the EU in 2020, and 16% in 2030. At the same time, it is critical to understand that using any resource, even if it appears to be available in excess, can have complex downstream effects on markets, other uses, and the demand for other resources. Environmental impact stems from both the direct utilization of the wastes and residues analyzed here and also from the indirect effects
on other industries, and this impact is not fully assessed here. It should be recognized that there will be competition for feedstocks within the energy sector, so the above estimate should be understood as the upper bound on the available sustainable energy resource for transport fuels. In addition, there are many industrial challenges in achieving such a major new deployment of sustainable low carbon fuels. Among these challenges is the question of how to create the right policy and fiscal incentives to reduce investment risk for the advanced biofuel industry, thereby allowing for such a substantial scale-up. Even with robust and effective policy support, some fraction of this resource is likely to be impossible to economically mobilize—the stronger the support framework, the more could be achieved.

Many climate change mitigation strategies rely on strong projected growth in biomass energy, supported byliterature estimating high future bioenergy potential. However, expectations to 2050 are highly divergent. Exam-ining the most widely cited studies finds that some assumptions in these models are inconsistent with the bestavailable evidence. By identifying literature-supported, up-to-date assumptions for parameters including cropyields, land availability, and costs, we revise upper-end estimates of potential biomass availability from dedi-cated energy crops. Even allowing for the conversion of virtually all ‘unused’ grassland and savannah, we findthat the maximum plausible limit to sustainable energy crop production in 2050 would be 40–110 EJ yr 1. Com-bined with forestry, crop residues, and wastes, the maximum limit to long-term total biomass availability is60–120 EJ yr 1in primary energy. After accounting for current trends in bioenergy allocation and conversionlosses, we estimate maximum potentials of 10–20 EJ yr 1of biofuel, 20–40 EJ yr 1of electricity, and10–30 EJ yr 1of heating in 2050. These findings suggest that many technical projections and aspirational goalsfor future bioenergy use could be difficult or impossible to achieve sustainably.

10 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A 100% RENEWABLE ENERGY FUTURE
1. CLEAN ENERGY: Promote only the most efficient products. Develop existing and new renewable energy sources to provide
enough clean energy for all by 2050. 2. GRIDS: Share and exchange clean energy through grids and trade, making the best use of
sustainable energy resources in different areas. 3. ACCESS: End energy poverty: provide clean electricity and promote sustainable practices, such as
efficient cook stoves, to everyone in developing countries. 4. MONEY: Invest in renewable, clean energy and energy-efficient products and buildings. 5. FOOD: Stop food waste. Choose food that is sourced in an efficient and sustainable way to free up land for nature, sustainable forestry and biofuel production. Everyone has an equal right to healthy levels of protein in their diet – for this to happen, wealthier people need to eat less meat. 6. MATERIALS: Reduce, re-use, recycle – to minimize waste and save energy. Develop durable materials. And avoid things we don’t need. 7. TRANSPORT: Provide incentives to encourage greater use of public transport, and to reduce the distances people and goods travel. Promote electrification wherever possible, and support research into hydrogen and other alternative fuels for shipping and aviation. 8. TECHNOLOGY: Develop national, bilateral and multilateral action plans to promote research and development in energy efficiency and renewable energy. 9. SUSTAINABILITY: Develop and enforce strict sustainability criteria that ensure renewable energy is compatible with environmental and development goals. 10. AGREEMENTS: Support ambitious climate and energy agreements to provide global guidance and promote global cooperation on renewable energy and efficiency efforts.

In October 2012 the European Commission published a legislative proposal to amend the RED and FQD aimed at addressing indirect land use change (ILUC). One of the proposed measures is a further incentive for biofuels produced from wastes, residues and (ligno) cellulose material. The Commission proposes to count these biofuels two or four times towards national biofuel mandates. While biofuels produced from wastes and residues can be very sustainable and achieve high direct GHG savings compared to fossil fuels, they are not necessarily ILUC-free. If, for example, a quantity of straw was used for animal feed and is now being used for ethanol production, more animal feed production is needed to compensate the loss of animal feed. This study examines a number of waste and residue
material and assesses to what extent a ‘surplus’ of the materials exists which can be used to produce biofuels without causing ILUC; the rules laid down in the LIIB certification module are used for this purpose. The materials assessed in this study are cereal straw, woody residues, used cooking oil (UCO) and corn cobs.
In order to assess the low ILUC potential for each of the materials this study first identifies the available theoretical potential of each of the materials. This is the quantity of the material which is available and could in theory be harvested or collected. Subsequently the sustainable potential is estimated. This is the quantity which can be harvested or collected in a sustainable way, taking into account the need to protect, for example, soil quality. Finally the low indirect impact or low ILUC potential is estimated. This potential takes into account the current non-bioenergy uses of the material. Displacing these uses could lead to ILUC and therefore these existing uses are deducted from the sustainable potential. Because UCO is traded globally its potential was assessed also outside the EU while the other materials were analysed at EU and Member State level. This report shows that the assessed waste and residue materials assessed here all have considerable
theoretical potentials, smaller but still substantial sustainable potentials and varying low ILUC potentials. For corn cobs the low ILUC potential could not be established, while straw, woody residues and used cooking oil all have a substantial low ILUC potential. Results can differ significantly from Member State to Member State. Germany, France and some other Member State for example have a large surplus of straw available while the Netherlands and Poland currently have a straw deficit. Using straw to produce ethanol in the latter two Member State poses a serious risk of negative indirect impacts. UCO is widely used as a biofuel already and this study shows that on the one hand ample ILUC-free potential is available, whilst on the other hand that UCO collection can be a dodgy business in certain regions, which makes quality control challenging. The use of UCO as cooking oil or for human consumption in China, Indonesia and possibly Argentina and dumping of UCO in rivers in some regions poses particular problems for public health and the environment. Using UCO which would otherwise be dumped to produce biodiesel can be highly beneficial beyond it being low ILUC. From low ILUC EU woody residues, low ILUC EU cereal straw and globally available UCO a total quantity of 17Mtoe of low ILUC biofuels could be produced: 11.2Mtoe from woody residues, 3MTOE from cereal straw and 2.8Mtoe from UCO. This estimated total would equal almost 60% of the total forecasted quantity of biofuels in the EU in 2020 when single counted and around 120% with double
counting in place. The challenge is not the availability of ILUC-free feedstocks but in the willingness to invest in sufficient biofuel production plants which can reap this potential. This study shows that a substantial quantity of cereal straw and forestry residues could be harvested and used for biofuels, but that an even greater quantity cannot be harvested without risking serious negative sustainability impacts. The current proposed positive lists for multiple counting do not limit
the quantitative use of specific materials, in theory allowing both straw and ‘bark, branches, leaves, saw dust and cutter shavings’ (woody residues) to be completely harvested and used for biofuels. In order to reconcile the need for truly sustainable biofuels and the need to avoid negative sustainability
impacts it would be necessary to introduce a maximum removal rate for primary land-using agricultural and forestry wastes and residues before these materials are included in the positive lists. It would be good to specify the removal rates at Member State level and if feasible an even more detailed regional specification. More research is needed to determine appropriate maximum removal rates. When creating effective incentives for the use of wastes and residues as sustainable biofuel feedstocks it is advisable to take into account current uses of the feedstock. This study shows that this can require great efforts and results are often estimates, but in order to promote truly sustainable biofuels it is worth the effort.

Legal support of the bioenergy sector is crucial for a positive development and an expansion of the biogas sector. There are many examples in Europe, namely Austria, the Czech Republic, France, Germany and Italy being the most prominent examples. Biogas is practically an equimolar mixture of biomethane and carbon dioxide, with small traces of various other compounds such as H2, H2O, H2S, and NH3. Biomethane is physically and chemically practically identical with natural gas. This is why injection of biomethane into European gas grid is possible and can be used as energy carrier with only low energy losses and low costs. Injection of
biomethane into the gas grid is in practice since the 90’s and thus it represents a safe state-of-theart technology. The major advantage of this concept is in advanced utilization of the natural gas infrastructure, which dramatically reduce the costs of biomethane technology deployment. This unique feature is much highlighted, should biomethane be compared with other renewable fuels, which need a special dedicated infrastructure. There are several biomethane production technologies, which process raw biogas into biomethane. These technologies are all standard process technologies, commonly used in other chemical industry.
To derive total costs of biomethane production, as deepened in Chapter 2, several groups of operational cost are considered:
– Feedstock costs,
– Operational costs (OPEX) of biogas plant,
– Investment costs (CAPEX) of biogas plant,
– Operational costs (OPEX) of upgrading unit
– Investment costs (CAPEX) of biogas upgrading unit.
The market survey performed with several plant operators of the BIOSURF partner countries shows that running and investment costs are highly influenced by the plant scale and the upgrading capability where economy of scale arises. Bigger plant scale and higher upgrading capability may lead to lower running and investment costs per unit. Often unknown factors are the costs for feedstocks and the pipe laying which have to be calculated individually for each
biogas/biomethane project. The lowest feedstock costs were reported from France with 0.30 to 0.40 €cent kWhhu-1 thanks to the co-digestion of manure and organic waste. The average costs in Europe are around 3.53 €cent kWhhu-1. The OPEX of biogas upgrading and gas grid injection are also influenced by the plant size. A French plant with a capacity of 37 Nm³ CH4 will cost the operator 4.4 €cent kWhhu-1 but the OPEX are only 1.2 kWhhu-1 at a plant with the capacity of 136 Nm³ CH4. The prices of different upgrading techniques are comparable but the capacity is crucial again and can lead to a cost span of 8 €cent kWhhu-1 (i.e. 80 €cent m-3 biomethane) at a capacity of 500 m3 to 12 €cent kWhhu-1 (i.e. 120 €cent m-3 biomethane) for units with a capacity around 80 m3 biomethane per hour.
The amount of biomethane plants has been slowly but steadily increasing between 2011 and 2014 with over 350 upgrading plants in Europe today. Considering this rather small amount of plants there has already been great development. But so far these are single developed plants. To bring further development and technology jumps to the biogas technique, more installations accompanied with scientific programmes and targets on installations/share of natural gas
equivalent for 2020, 2025 and 2030 are needed. This would also bring cost reduction. Within the BIOSURF project, the work on feasibility of biomethane production and trade will be continued. The finding in this Report will be extended to include further factors influencing the income of the biomethane producers and improving the economics of the operations. Among such factors, the following ones will be given additional attention:
 possibilities for generating revenue from the sale of GHG emission reduction certificates (also named CO2 certificates) either within the ETS system or other markets,
 appreciation of the renewable and sustainable feature of biomethane by consumers (in addition to the revenue from the sale of biomethane certificates),
 tax benefits provided by national governments in comparison with fossil comparators,
 investment subsidies provided to biomethane projects fulfilling organic waste handling functions on the regional and local levels,
 other incentives granted to biomethane producers or consumers which increase the market value of the product.
In view of the above possibilities, the numbers indicated as threshold values for tradeable biomethane certificates should be interpreted as the highest required amounts (which will be decreased in the practice through the impact of the above listed and other factors).

In most IEA member countries, natural gas (NG) plays an import and particular increasing role in energy provision to meet the demand for heat, electricity and transport fuels. Hence, natural gas is an important all-round energy carrier with an already well-developed infrastructure in some countries such as gas grids, filling stations, road transport via heavy duty vehicles or marine transport via tanker in the form of compressed natural gas or liquefied natural gas. Nevertheless natural gas is a fossil based fuel and various countries have initiated the stepwise transition from a fossil resource base towards renewables due to concerns regarding greenhouse gas emissions, energy security and conservation of finite resources. Biomethane, defined as methane produced from biomass with properties close to natural gas, is an interesting fuel to support the transition from fossil fuels to renewables and to achieve the greenhouse gas emission reduction targets in different ways. In principal, biomethane can be used for exactly the same applications as natural gas, if the final composition is in line with the different natural gas qualities on the market. Therefore, it can be used as a substitute for transport fuels, to produce combined heat and power (CHP), heat alone or serve as feedstock for the chemical sector. It can be transported and stored in the facilities and infrastructure available for natural gas. Biomethane can be produced by upgrading biogas or as so called bio-SNG from thermo-chemical conversion of lignocellulosic biomass or other forms of biomass. The aim of this study is to provide an up-to-date overview of the status of biomethane (which includes upgraded biogas and bio-SNG in this report) production, grid injection and use in different countries, and to illustrate the options and needs for the development of larger biomethane supply strategies. The focus is on technical, economic and managementrelated hurdles to inject biomethane into the natural gas grid and to trade it transnationally. The study provides insights into the current status of technologies, technical requirements and sustainability indicators as well as cost of biomethane production and use in general and especially in selected countries. The study also assesses implementation strategies, market situations and market expectations in selected countries. Based on the findings in this report, proposals are given for actions to be taken to reduce barriers and to develop the market step by step. The technical feasibility to produce biomethane from biogas on a large scale has been
demonstrated over the last decade. Table 4-1 gives an overview of the biomethane production in selected IEA member countries. At the time of writing this report about 280 biogas upgrading plants were running in several countries with an overall production capacity of some 100.000 Nm³/h. To inject biogas in the natural gas grid or to use it as a vehicle fuel, the raw biogas has to be upgraded and pressurised. Biogas upgrading includes increasing the energy density by separating carbon dioxide from methane. Furthermore, water, hydrogen sulphide and other contaminants are removed, sometimes before the upgrading process to avoid corrosion or other problems in downstream applications. Today, a range of technologies for CO2-separation are on the market. It is difficult to specify the exact characteristics for an upgrading technology, since the design and operating conditions vary between the different manufacturers, sizes and applications. The key quality criteria for the upgrading technologies are the energy demand and the methane loss during upgrading. The production of biomethane via thermo-chemical conversion is still in the pilot and demonstration stage, with no commercial market penetration so far. The small-scale production of biomethane at many different locations is a new phenomenon, and requires additional efforts to adapt the regional infrastructure and to find adopted transport modes outside the natural gas grid. Biomethane may also play a significant role in future power-to-gas concepts by combination of renewable methane from excess energy, e.g. by providing the renewable carbon source (separated CO2), so that hydrogen produced from excess electricity and the renewable carbon source can be converted to methane, thus
the overall methane output can be increased. Even if the technical and logistical requirements for biomethane production are in principle available today and in some areas already implemented on a local level, clear criteria for the biomethane quality (transnational) to be fed- into the gas grid and the end use application
are necessary. Compared to conventional fuels, the level of standardization is sparse for gaseous fuels. The international ISO (International Organisation for Standardization) has issued a natural gas standard, ISO 13686:1998 “Natural gas – Quality designation” and a standard for compressed natural gas, ”ISO 15403 Natural gas – Natural gas for use as a compressed fuel for vehicles”. The normative part of both standards contains no levels or limits, but have informal parts included with information for suggested values for gas composition, i.e. from national standards or guidelines from France, Germany, the UK and the U.S. The
absence of quantitative limits reflects the prevalent view of the gas industry that no precise gas quality can be specified, given the wide range of compositions of the raw gas obtained from underground. Up to recent years, the natural gas vehicle business has adjusted to this, international and national standardization focussing more on safety issues regarding vehicle cylinders, other gas-related components and refuelling stations. Regarding biomethane, there is a range of national standards in Europe for the injection of upgraded and purified biogas to the natural gas grid. Work on the international standardization of biomethane has
been on-going since 2006. The specific challenge is to define standards which are attractive for the different potential end-user (gas grid owner, automotive industry, etc.) to enter the new market. Intensive discussions primarily concern sulphur and silicon content. Currently, two different standards for grid injection and automotive specification are under development at European level and might be passed by the end of 2015. One key driver for the application of biomethane is the reduction of greenhouse gas emission (GHG) due to the substitution of fossil fuels. The emission reduction potentials depend on both plant design and operation, as well as the GHG accounting methodology. By following best practices, it is possible to achieve GHG savings of over 80% when compared to
the fossil fuel alternative. Key parts in the production of biomethane that contribute to these GHG emissions include biomass feedstock cultivation (e.g. energy crops like maize) and different biogas upgrading technologies. Sustainability standards for biomass have been discussed and developed in different contexts during the last years. The most important approaches are the indicators from the Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) and the demands from the European Directives on Renewable Energy and Fuel Quality. The EU sustainable criteria are only obligatory for biomethane when it is used as fuel for transport. It is so far not obligatory for biomethane if it is used in other fields, such as for CHP. Outside the EU (e.g. USA (U.S. Congress 2005)) biofuel sustainability criteria are established for liquid
biofuels but do not refer to biomethane. Compared to natural gas, the biomethane provision is linked to higher costs, at least on the short- and middle-term. To ensure a sustainable feedstock as well as a proper and transparent mass balance for the biomethane which is transported and traded via the natural gas grid, uniform and cross-border standards for biomethane composition and quality are necessary. Today, the biomethane market is still at the very beginning. Different strategies, investment programmes, support schemes and utilisation concepts have been adopted in different countries and there are different stakeholder expectations. Due to the complex supply chain, see Figure E-1, there are different environmental, economic and administrative hurdles for the market introduction of biomethane. On the other hand, a survey of market expectations in five selected focus countries of IEA Tasks 37 and 40 showed that many stakeholders have
quite strong expectations for market growth. Even if the response to the survey per country is not sufficient for a statistically sound analysis, it gave an insight in the trends and perceptions in the countries (Austria, Belgium, Germany, The Netherlands and Sweden). Regarding the policy for biomethane, it can be concluded that a good framework is necessary to push biomethane development forward. Because of the challenging conditions of the post-economic crisis of 2008, biomethane needs political support and as a result of that financial support. This conclusion is the same for all the countries surveyed. Even in countries like Germany and Sweden that have strongly promoted biomethane, financial support is still an important factor. When asked if international trade should be developing, experts from Belgium, Germany and Sweden answered positively. Respondents from the Netherlands and Austria were more sceptical whether international trade could or should be established in the future. The main reason for doubt is that demand for biomethane in these countries is higher than the production, so there will be nothing left for export. The Swedish respondents reported that they hope to import biomethane to satisfy the increasing demand. Market introduction strategies have to consider the complex provision chain (Figure E-1), which has to include the very different stakeholders. Promising markets are seen in those countries with dedicated biomethane strategies, targets and support schemes. Today there is a wide range of approaches, instruments and certificates established which can differ in technical demands on grid injection and end use, sustainability demands, support schemes and monitoring of the biomethane flows. Given the political strategies and the presence of an extensive natural gas grid, a number of EU countries are becoming more active in the development of a biomethane market. There are on-going actions in the field of technical standardisation and sustainability certification, including mass balancing and tracing. Both are complex issues, but should provide instruments in the next one or two years to improve the situation with biomethane application and cross border trade. Several European countries have established national biomethane registers, which provide information on the amount and origin of the available biomethane qualities to support the market implementation. Furthermore, there is already a planned close cooperation between the national biomethane registers for better trade between six countries with the option of including more countries, see chapter 3.3.3. Relevant next steps for those registers are the development of a common terminology,
tracing system and the definition of interfaces between the country specific quality demands while also enabling accounting and monitoring of the market. Additional problems for transnational trade arise from the different support schemes developed in the different countries. Two aspects are relevant here:
(i) The part of the supply chain to which the financial policy support is applied: Currently in the different countries different products are supported (biomethane
feed into the grid, electricity provided from biogas, biomethane provided at filling stations, etc.). From a national perspective this is reasonable due to different targets and strategies for biomethane, but for international cooperation there is the risk of confusion. For international trade a very clear tracking of flows is necessary in order to avoid double support or marketing (e.g. at the injection point in one country and at the delivery point in another country).
(ii) Level of support: Today the specific level of support differs over a wide range (e.g. the feed-in-tariff for biomethane injected into the grid). If framework conditions for international trade are implemented it will be very easy to transport the biomethane via the gas grid to those countries giving the higher support or otherwise very favourable framework conditions, which may on the one hand accelerate market development, but on the other hand may also cause some national support systems to collapse. This has led to the conclusion that a more coherent EU-wide support structure between countries could make market development easier and reduce the complexity of the registry systems. To ensure a successful regulated and sustainable market, stable framework conditions are needed. Therefore, the following recommendations can be given for such a future biomethane market:
• Technical standards regarding for biomethane injection to the natural gas grid, which aims for standardised biomethane quality (in a defined range) regarding e.g.
calorific value and purity. Sustainability standards for all biomethane applications, but also with the possibility to trade sustainable biomethane between the countries.
• Certification and registries for a transparent national and international market of biomethane (e.g. no double support).
• Equal treatment of domestic and imported biomethane (certification, support/incentive, etc.).
• Support schemes need to be stable over the long term. From today’s perspective, uniform regulation for regions connected by a single natural gas grid (e.g. Europe) seems to be an important pre-requisite for the development of international markets; this study did not investigate in detail what such an instrument could contain (e.g. a uniform biomethane grid injection tariff, a quote, etc.).
• Roadmaps for middle and long term biomethane targets in order to provide a guide for incentives and support schemes. With regard to the complex provision chain of biomethane, different stakeholders in the field and the transnational natural gas grid (especially in Europe) it is easy to understand that framework conditions are difficult to achieve. Implementing the above recommendations should provide a good base for building a sustainable, fair, futureorientated
and stable biomethane market. An overarching international framework of sustainability information (e.g. feedstock, origin, GHG emission from production and
transport, etc.) for fossil and renewable energy carrier could also support the biomethane market, but goes beyond the scope of this study. Outside the EU, only minor activities were observed, such as in the USA and South Korea, with less restriction than in the EU.

The volume of UCO-derived biodiesel supplied on the UK market has increased markedly since the
introduction of the RTFO, peaking during Year 4 of the RTFO when the duty differential was available
only for UCO-derived biofuel. Increasing biofuel production from waste materials is a positive
development, however the DfT wishes to monitor key aspects of the UCO market to ensure
unintended consequences of the support for UCO biodiesel are avoided. This report aims to identify
and understand key trends in the UCO market and identify key areas of concern. The report will
additionally be used as an input to the 2013 RTFO Post-implementation review.
Key questions addressed include:
 Where is UCO used for biofuel in the UK coming from? (Chapter 2)
 What is the available potential for UCO? Is there a volume of UCO above which DfT should be
concerned about unintended consequences? (Chapter 3)
 Has the RTFO incentivised additional recovery of UCO, especially in the UK? (Chapter 3)
 Are there alternative uses for UCO? (Chapter 4)

The volume of UCO-derived biodiesel supplied on the UK market has increased markedly since the
introduction of the RTFO, peaking during Year 4 of the RTFO when the duty differential was available
only for UCO-derived biofuel. Increasing biofuel production from waste materials is a positive
development, however the DfT wishes to monitor key aspects of the UCO market to ensure
unintended consequences of the support for UCO biodiesel are avoided. This report aims to identify
and understand key trends in the UCO market and identify key areas of concern. The report will
additionally be used as an input to the 2013 RTFO Post-implementation review.
Key questions addressed include:
 Where is UCO used for biofuel in the UK coming from? (Chapter 2)
 What is the available potential for UCO? Is there a volume of UCO above which DfT should be
concerned about unintended consequences? (Chapter 3)
 Has the RTFO incentivised additional recovery of UCO, especially in the UK? (Chapter 3)
 Are there alternative uses for UCO? (Chapter 4)

Expansion in the use of biofuels driven by the European Union’s Renewable Energy Directive (RED) has led to concerns that this may be contributing to deforestation and land use change, where land is brought into cultivation to grow food crops to compensate for lost production linked to biofuel feedstock production (the so called “indirect land use change” or ILUC impact). This has led to increased interest in the use of non-food feedstocks for biofuel production such as crop and forest residues and other waste streams. Faced with uncertainties around the scale of any ILUC impacts associated with EU biofuels policy, the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers are currently locked in a debate on the level of biofuel production that should be supported. There are proposals to cap production of biofuels derived from food crops and to introduce a specific ‘carve out’ of the current RED target for transport that would be allocated to biofuels derived from non-food feedstocks. There is currently uncertainty over the level of biofuel production that could be supported by use of non-food feedstocks, whether such biofuel production is economically feasible and the economic and job benefits that could arise through supporting the development of the associated nascent technologies. This study analyses the potential economic viability of using crop, forest and waste residues (Refuse Derived Fuel or RDF) as feedstocks for biofuel production using a range of conversion technologies and examines the economic benefits and job creation opportunities that could arise from exploiting these resources within the EU. This analysis draws on parallel work to assess the amount of sustainably harvestable crop and forest residues and residual waste arisings in the EU that could be accessed for biofuel production without affecting other traditional markets. NNFCC used a discounted cash-flow model to examine three advanced biofuel production pathways to determine whether it was economically feasible to use waste and residue feedstocks for biofuel production. The biofuel production pathways considered included cellulosic ethanol (biochemical fermentation) and gasification followed by either fermentation of the resulting syngas to ethanol or catalytic conversion of syngas to Fischer Tropsch diesel. These represent technologies that are currently at pilot scale development in the EU or globally. Typical delivered cereal straw price ranges from 60-80 €/t for northern Europe, and 30-40 €/t for southern and eastern European examples. Typical costs for delivery of forest harvest residues ranged from 40-65 €/t across the EU. Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) gate fees1 are currently around 20€ to 40€/t in Europe. The economic analysis indicates that at current typical feedstock costs in the most likely areas of production, advanced biofuels produced from agricultural and forest harvest residue feedstocks are likely to be more expensive to produce than current commercial biofuels. However these resources could be mobilised for use in advanced biofuel production if the appropriate incentives are made available. The incentives required in most cases are not in excess of those that have been offered as duty reductions to incentivise biofuel industry start-up in the past and currently on offer by some EU Member s States. In some cases high feedstock cost, particularly where this is in excess of €70-€ 80/tonne, may be a barrier to development. As an alternative to production support, mandating the use of such fuels would also drive their development, encouraging the most economically competitive technology solutions. At current gate fees (ca. €20-46/tonne) it is estimated that RDF-derived biofuels can be produced at a price competitive with current biofuels. This is predicated on the assumption that receipt of RDF materials will continue to attract gate fees, even down to acceptance at zero cost by the biofuel processor, but this cannot be guaranteed as competition for such material increases. However, the feedstock is only partially renewable. Materials of biological origin can account for between 50 and 85% of the carbon content in RDF fuels. Therefore any biofuel derived from residual waste is only partially renewable and incentives are likely to be required to compensate for the anticipated lower value of the fossil-derived fuel component co-produced with the bio-derived fraction (which would have no value beyond its
intrinsic fuel energy value). Again the incentives required are anticipated to be relatively small, but any incentive required to promote uptake of RDF-derived
biofuels would need to be at least doubled per litre of eligible biofuel, to account for the fact that only around 50% of the output is likely to be eligible for support as a low carbon renewable fuel. It is not possible to indicate where in the EU feedstock resources might be most effectively mobilised to rationalise how much of the available biomass resources could actually be mobilised and utilised. However, if all of the resource was used then:
 between 56 and 133 thousand additional permanent jobs would be created in the agricultural and forestry sectors; when also considering the impact of
refuse derived biofuels between 4 and13 thousand additional permanent would jobs be created in the operation of the biofuel plants and a further 87to 162 thousand temporary jobs would be created during the biofuel plant construction phase.
 a net value of between €0.2 and 5.2 billion would flow into the EU’s rural agricultural economy and between €0.7 and 2.3 billion to the EU’s rural forest
economy.

Liquid, gaseous or solid biofuels hold great promise to deliver an increasing share of the energy required to power a new global green economy. Many in
government and the energy industry believe this modern bioenergy can play a significant role in reducing pollution and greenhouse gases, and promoting development through new business opportunities and jobs. Modern bioenergy can be a mechanism for economic development enabling local communities to secure the energy they need, with farmers earning additional income and achieving greater price stability for their production. But it is not that simple. Biofuels remain a complex and often contentious issue. Over the past few years the risks of competition with food production and potential negative impacts on the atmosphere, biodiversity, soil and water have been highlighted. The way biofuels are made and used is critical: they may either help mitigate or contribute to
climate change, reduce or exacerbate impacts on ecosystems and resources. Issues related to biofuels are complex and interconnected: they require solid planning and balancing of objectives and trade-offs. Safeguards are needed and special emphasis should be given to options that help mitigate risks and create positive
effects and co-benefits. Biofuels Vital Graphics is designed to visualise the opportunities, the need for safeguards, and the options that help ensure sustainability of biofuels to make them a cornerstone for a Green Economy. It is meant as a communications tool, rather than providing new analysis. It builds on a 2009 report
by the International Panel for Sustainable Resource Management of the United Nations Environment Programme, Towards Sustainable Production and
Use of Resources: Assessing Biofuels, and refers to research produced since.

This reports updates the initial study carried out by UNCTAD on the state of the biofuels markets, which was first published in 2006. In doing so, this 2013 update attempts to cover the main developments since 2006 in the biofuels sector, examining issues of production in key countries and regions, international trade, consumption trends, as well as evolving regulatory and political debates on this important theme. During the 2000s there was an unprecedented increase in public and private interest for liquid biofuels, driven by a number of factors. Those included uncertainties about the price of petroleum products, the finite nature of fossil fuels, and ever growing environmental concerns, especially related to greenhouse gas emissions. It included also interest in novel ways to promote development and growth which could deliver -carbon intensive sectors of the economy. Biofuels were discussed at one of the potential tools to allow a level of decoupling between development and environmental degradation. While in 2006 the biofuel market was only starting to become truly international, by 2013 bioethanol and
biodiesel have already become established commodities traded daily in all continents. Their market increased based primarily on demand from the transport sector, especially road vehicles, which use biofuels either in pure form or as blend into conventional fossil fuels (e.g. diesel or gasoline). Another important development, which occurred since 2006, was the emergence of alternative markets for liquid biofuels, beyond their core usage in road transport. Biofuels started being used in larger scale for aviation, electricity generation, cooking energy and even maritime transport. Policy focus of many countries also migrated from a limited scope of liquid biofuels towards broader notions of bioenergy (solid, liquid and gaseous energy products). In addition, concepts such as bioeconomy now embody a systemic view, in which systems must consider the usage of biomass not only for energy, but for food, feed and fiber as additional outputs. Since 2006 several developed and developing countries have established (and continue to pursue) regulatory setups for biofuels, including blending targets, sustainability norms, as well as research and deployment strategies for advanced biofuel technologies which hold great promise of reducing social and environmental risks associated to their production and usage. While subsidies and incentives continue to be provided, biofuel industry as a whole seems to be more self-reliant in 2013 than it was in 2006. This is perhaps one of the factors behind a relative stabilization in demand for biofuels (and overall rate of growth in the industry) after 2010.
The emergence of better science around the issue of land use change associated to production and usage of biofuels brought doubts on the strength of 1st generation biofuels as a tool to mitigate greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions. Yet, the merits of biofuels have somehow shifted towards arguments about green jobs,
energy security, and overall improvement of agricultural returns, which are in dire need in many developing and least developed countries. The large increases in production, use, and international trade of biofuels which were seen after 2006 have contributed to mature the industry, giving it a professional standing in line with other major tradable commodities. Still, the basket of producing countries has not changed substantially since our first assessment was published in 2006. While in the policy front quick progress has been carried out by many countries, investments maintained the trend towards traditional producing areas that offer more predictable business landscapes for entrepreneurs. A large potential remains to be exploited in the sustainable production of 1st generation biofuels in
developing countries. Efficiency considerations continue to indicate that feedstock and biofuel production can be done most favorably in developing countries, where the climate to grow them and low-cost farm labor continue to exist. Energy security considerations, however, have prompted less-efficient countries to
engage in biofuel production irrespective of economic and environmental considerations. Bioethanol and biodiesel continue to be the primary forces behind international biofuel markets. Developing and developed countries, particularly the United States (US), Brazil, the European Union (EU), China, Argentina and Malaysia have benefited from that dynamism by distinguishing themselves in the sector. In addition to biofuel trade flows between the EU, US and Brazil, South-South trade and transfer of technology are also taking place, especially as capacity flows albeit at a slow pace towards new production frontiers such as in many African countries. At the same time, there has been little international trade in bioethanol feedstocks, partially due to the non-tradable and perishable characteristics of some feedstocks (e.g. sugarcane), and to the dual role that some countries have as both producers of feedstock and consumers of biofuels (e.g. cereals-ethanol, sunflower-biodiesel in the US and in the EU). Biodiesel production outside of the EU has grown since 2006, but most imports in the region still take form of vegetable oil, from countries like Malaysia, Indonesia and Argentina. The 2nd generation of biofuels, which has started to be marketed at commercial levels in 2013, could change this panorama by allowing larger trade of feedstocks such as cellulosic and waste material, in line with practices adopted in the pellets and
pulp & paper industries. International trade in biofuels remains important to provide win-win opportunities to all countries, as several countries need the trade route as a way to guarantee the attainment of self-imposed blending targets. It has been noticed over the years that the successful cases of biofuel strategy implementation involved first the creation of domestic markets, with regional and international trade emerging from it. Export-oriented production models have not been the main trend adopted by the industry, as it became clear that reliance on fast-changing foreign regulations made risky the adoption of business models heavily reliant on exports. Instead of viewing export markets as primers for biofuel industries in developing countries, those have now the possibility to look for other sectors beyond transport such as cooking energy, electricity generation, and niche fuels such as aviation biodiesel as ways to start small, but in more
solid ground. While the market has grown more liberalized since 2006, biofuels still face tariffs and non-tariff measures. Brazil and the US both struck down their respective bioethanol import tariffs, primarily due to a mutual dependency to cover short-term demand needs from each other. The EU, on the other hand, aintained its applicable tariffs for bioethanol unchanged since 2006, but offered some waivers in the case of E85 (85 percent bioethanol blend with gasoline) imports by Sweden. While tariffs were somehow reduced, domestic subsidies continued to exist, and in some cases were strengthened such as in Brazil during
2012-13 as the country launched a plan to revitalize its bioethanol industry. With a considerable increase in biofuels trade since 2006, sustainability certification became a new norm in the industry, as well as a prerequisite for market access. After intense debate on the formulation of sustainability regulations, certification, and labeling of biofuels and feedstocks, the sustainability criteria for biofuels has evolved mainly via voluntary schemes which adhere to legislation adopted in major markets (e.g. US and EU). With the eyes towards the future, some specific challenges for developing countries include: (i) striking regulatory setups for bioenergy tailored to each country, which do not antagonize food and energy supply, but instead enhance agricultural productivity, rural income and worker’s skills; (ii) design strategies to avoid the emergence of a technological gap between 1st generation (land-intensive) and 2nd generation (capital-intensive) biofuels; (iii) find ways to ensure that the cost of sustainability certification is spread along supply chains in a way that protects small farmers from undue cost burdens; (iv) promote a continuous inflow of private investment and production and process technologies to developing countries, especially through predictable business environments; (v) prioritize research and deployment of advanced technologies that can convert non-edible biomass into bioenergy products, doing so in cooperation with other countries to reduce costs; and (v) facilitate trade by engaging in consultations and adoption of sustainability practices which are compatible with major sustainability schemes adopted in the US, Brazil and the EU.Conscious decisions, sharing of information and data collection, organizational strategies, government
support services, technical and financial assistance will continue to be needed to guide developing countries towards the right decisions in this highly dynamic market. UNCTAD, through its work on biofuels and renewable energy, is providing developing countries with access to economic and trade policy analysis, capacity-building activities, and consensus-building tools to help them address those and other challenges.