modelling of bioenergy futures – the case of sweden
TRANSCRIPT
MODELLING OF BIOENERGY
FUTURES – THE CASE OF SWEDEN
Martin Börjesson* & Erik O. Ahlgren
Chalmers
(*IVL)
1
Part 1
• Potential and supply of biomass
• Competition for biomass between sectors
• (Effects of sector-specific polcy measures
in the transport sector)
• ...
Methods/Tools
• Swedish Forest Inventory (SFI) & HUGIN
– calculation of potential outcomes of
stemwood, logging residues and stumps from
harvesting operations
• MARKAL
3
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 5 10 15 20 25
Co
st [
EUR
/MW
h]
Potential [TWh/year]
2030 2050
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 5 10 15 20 25
Co
st [
EU
R/M
Wh
]
Potential [TWh/year]
2030 2050
4
Supply curve for forest residue tops and branches (top), and forest
residue stumps (bottom) for model year 2030 and 2050.
Part 2 - Background
• Bio combines: several bio-based products and/or
integration with district heating or industrial
systems
High energy efficiency, but implies also
increased complexitiy
• Combines often not well represented in national
energy system models
Questions
• Which bio combines show potential for cost
efficiency from an energy system point of view?
• Are different types of combines of importance for
the future bioenergy use?
Metod
• MARKAL_Sverige
• Improved model representation of bio energy
technologies, e.g.:
– Increased number of complex alternatives for transport
biofuels.
– Improved representation of the pulp and paper industry,
and of black liquor gasification.
– Gasification alternatives for transport biofuel production,
CHP, and electricity generation.
Alternatives for 2nd generation transport biofuel
production in the model
Table 1.
Costs and energy balances for second generation biofuel production technologies in model
Type of fuel
production
Type of
feedstock
Energy input and output relations Total
Eff.
Inv. cost O&M cost
Biomass
(In)
Electricity
(Net out)
Transport
fuel(s)
(Out)
Heat
(Out)
(MEUR/MW_in
)
(% of IC);
(EUR/MWh f)
MeOH (SA) Wood 1.0 -0.01 0.51 0.51 1.8 4.5; 1.5
MeOH (DH) Wood 1.0 -0.02 0.51 0.12 0.61 1.8 4.5; 1.5
MeOH (BLG) Black liquor 1.0 -0.07 0.56 0.27 0.77 1.3 4.5; 1.5
DME (SA) Wood 1.0 -0.04 0.59 0.57 1.7 4.5; 1.5
DME (DH) Wood 1.0 -0.05 0.59 0.11 0.67 1.7 4.5; 1.5
DME (BLG) Black liquor 1.0 -0.07 0.57 0.26 0.76 1.3 4.5; 1.5
FTD + FTP (SA) Wood 1.0 -0.01 0.33 + 0.12 0.44 2.2 4.5; 1.5
FTD + FTP (DH) Wood 1.0 -0.08 0.33 + 0.12 0.26 0.66 2.2 4.5; 1.5
FTD + FTP (BLG) Black liquor 1.0 -0.07 0.33+0.12 0.28 0.69 1.6 4.5; 1.5
SNG (SA) Wood 1.0 0.06 0.70 0.76 1.5 4.5; 1.5
SNG (DH) Wood 1.0 0.04 0.70 0.07 0.81 1.5 4.5; 1.5
EtOH (SA) Straw 1.0 0.06 0.47 0.56 1.2 4.5; 1.5
EtOH (SA) Wood 1.0 0.13 0.34 0.47 2.1 4.5; 1.5
EtOH (DH) Wood 1.0 0.12 0.34 0.40 0.85 2.1 4.5; 1.5
EtOH + Biogas
(SA)
Straw 1.0 0.06 0.47 + 0.03 0.56 1.2 4.5; 1.5
EtOH + Biogas
(DH)
Straw 1.0 0.07 0.30 + 0.11 0.22 0.71 1.2 4.5; 1.5
EtOH + Biogas
(DH)
Straw 1.0 0.05 0.47 + 0.03 0.15 0.70 1.2 4.5; 1.5
EtOH + Biogas
(DH)
Wood 1.0 0.05 0.34 + 0.25 0.22 0.85 2.1 4.5; 1.5
SA: Stand alone; DH: heat integration district heating; BLG: black liquor gasification intergrated in P&P industry
Pulp and paper industry
• Chemical pulp
(pulp & paper industry sector divided into 6 parts)
DEMANDENERGY
BP TURBINE
ELECTRICITY (FROM GRID )
BL RECOVERY BOILER
DEMAND CHEMICALS
ELEC
TRIC
ITY
PR
OC
ESS
HEA
T (L
P/M
P)
RECOVERED CHEMICALS
PR
OC
ESS
HEA
T (
HP
)
BLACK LIQUOR
ELECTRICITY (TO GRID)
FUEL SUPPLY
TRANSPORT FUELTO MARKET
DEMANDPULPWOOD
PULPWOOD
DME
FTL
METHANOL
HCO IND BOILER
LPG IND BOILER
OIL IND BOILER
BIO IND BOILER
ELETR IND BOILER
GAS IND BOILER
BL GASIFICATIONINT COMB CYCLE
BL GASIFICATIONTO DME
BL GASIFICATIONTO FTL
BL GASIFICATIONTO METHANOL
Modeled cases
• BAU: – CO2 +- 0 until 2050
– No advanced bio technologies available
• GC-scenarier – GC = Global Climate action, CO2 -80% until 2050
Available bio combines:
– GC_SA = only Stand Alone
– GC_DH= stand alone + bio combines with heat integration DH-sector
– GC_ALL= stand alone + heat integration + black liquor gasification in pulp & paper industry
CO2 limitation
Results
Bio energy use (exkl. MSW and peat) for BAU
0
40
80
120
160
200
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
[TW
h]
BAU
2nd Gen Biofuel Prod & District heat
2nd Gen Biofuel Prod - Stand Alone
1st Gen Biofuel Prod
Black liq. Gasification - 2nd Gen Biofuels & PH
Black liq P&P Recovery boiler (PH & BP)
Bio Industry - P&P (PH & BP)
Bio Industry - not P&P (PH & BP)
Bio CHP (DH)
Bio HOB (DH)
Bio use Building sector
Bio energy use (exkl. MSW and peat) for GC_SA
0
40
80
120
160
200
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
[TW
h]
GC_SA
2nd Gen Biofuel Prod & District heat
2nd Gen Biofuel Prod - Stand Alone
1st Gen Biofuel Prod
Black liq. Gasification - 2nd Gen Biofuels & PH
Black liq P&P Recovery boiler (PH & BP)
Bio Industry - P&P (PH & BP)
Bio Industry - not P&P (PH & BP)
Bio CHP (DH)
Bio HOB (DH)
Bio use Building sector
Bio energy use (exkl. MSW and peat) for GC_DH
0
40
80
120
160
200
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
[TW
h]
GC_DH
2nd Gen Biofuel Prod & District heat
2nd Gen Biofuel Prod - Stand Alone
1st Gen Biofuel Prod
Black liq. Gasification - 2nd Gen Biofuels & PH
Black liq P&P Recovery boiler (PH & BP)
Bio Industry - P&P (PH & BP)
Bio Industry - not P&P (PH & BP)
Bio CHP (DH)
Bio HOB (DH)
Bio use Building sector
Bio energy use (exkl. MSW and peat) for GC_ALL
0
40
80
120
160
200
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
[TW
h]
GC_ALL
2nd Gen Biofuel Prod & District heat
2nd Gen Biofuel Prod - Stand Alone
1st Gen Biofuel Prod
Black liq. Gasification - 2nd Gen Biofuels & PH
Black liq P&P Recovery boiler (PH & BP)
Bio Industry - P&P (PH & BP)
Bio Industry - not P&P (PH & BP)
Bio CHP (DH)
Bio HOB (DH)
Bio use Building sector
Bio energy use (exkl. MSW and peat) at different
availability of bio combines
0
40
80
120
160
200
BA
U
GC
_SA
GC
_DH
GC
_ALL
BA
U
GC
_SA
GC
_DH
GC
_ALL
2010 . 2030 . 2050
[TW
h]
2nd Gen Biofuel Prod & District heat
2nd Gen Biofuel Prod - Stand Alone
1st Gen Biofuel Prod
Black liq. Gasification - 2nd Gen Biofuels & PH
Black liq P&P Recovery boiler (PH & BP)
Bio Industry - P&P (PH & BP)
Bio Industry - not P&P (PH & BP)
Bio CHP (DH)
Bio HOB (DH)
Bio use Building sector
Price biomass
0
20
40
60
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
[EU
R/M
Wh
]
BAU
GC_SA
GC_DH
GC_ALL
Final energy use in the road transport sector
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
BA
U
GC
_SA
GC
_DH
GC
_ALL
BA
U
GC
_SA
GC
_DH
GC
_ALL
2010 . 2030 . 2050
[TW
h]
ELECTRICITY
METHANOL
FTL
BIODIESEL
ETHANOL
SNG
BIOGAS
NATURAL GAS
DIESEL
GASOLINE
Final energy use in the road transport sector
– GC_ALL
0
20
40
60
80
100
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
[TW
h]
GC_ALL
ELECTRICITY
METHANOL
FTL
BIODIESEL
ETHANOL
SNG
BIOGAS
NATURAL GAS
DIESEL
GASOLINE
Energy supply district heating
0
20
40
60
80
BA
U
GC
_SA
GC
_DH
GC
_ALL
BA
U
GC
_SA
GC
_DH
GC
_ALL
2010 . 2030 . 2050
[TW
h]
Solar (prod.)
Waste heat biorefinery
Ind. waste heat
HP (prod.)
Electricity (boilers)
Peat
MSW
Bio
Coal
Natural gas
Oil
Electricity generation
0
40
80
120
160
200
BA
U
GC
_SA
GC
_DH
GC
_ALL
BA
U
GC
_SA
GC
_DH
GC
_ALL
2010 . 2030 . 2050
[TW
h]
Wind power
Cond fossil
CHP (DH), Bio, Waste, Peat
CHP (DH), Fossil
Ind BP bio
Ind BP fossil
Hydro
Nuclear
Percentage savings of CO2 reduction cost of the
system with integrated combines (GC_DH and
GC_ALL) in relation to ”stand-alone” (GC_SA)
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
GC_DH GC_ALL
[%]
CO2 marginal cost, EUR/ton_CO2
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
[EU
R/t
on
CO
2]
BAU
GC_SA
GC_SADH
GC_ALL
CO2 marginal cost, SEK/litre gasoline_eq
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
[SEK
/lit
er
be
nsi
n-e
q]
BAU
GC_SA
GC_SADH
GC_ALL
Conclusions
• Bio combines for production of 2nd gen transport biofuels
are of av considerable importance for the possibilities meet
ambitious climate targets at national scale
• Bio combines with integration with district heating or
industrial systems ...
– give a cost efficient energy system/lower cost of CO2 reduction
• in particular black liqour gasification
• but also heat integration
– but has little impact on total biomass for energy use
– has some impact on bioprice
– has large impact on how biomass is used
– has cross-sectoral effects
• Important to represent bio combines with several product
flows and system integration in energy system models
Thank you
27
Questions
• How does the cost-efficient supply of biomass
develop until 2050 under stringent climate targets?
• What is the share of available biomass cost-efficiently
used in the transport sector?
• Which biofuels are chosen?
• How does the attainment of an almost fossil-free road
transport sector (oil phase-out - OP) to 2030 affect the
biomass for energy markets (cost-efficient fuel and
technology choices and system costs)?
28
Excluding
• productive forest areas that are situated in areas of nature
protection, in wet areas and peat soils with low bearing capacity,
• in areas that are located 25 meters from a lake, sea, waterline or
any other ownership category than forest,
• in areas that have an uneven ground structure and/or a slope of
more than 19.60 according to the Swedish terrain classification
scheme.
• regeneration felling areas of a size of less than 1 ha as well as
hardwood stumps with attached root system.
29
PRIMARY ENERGY & MATERIALSUPPLY
HEAT & ELECTRICITY GENERATION
FUEL REFINEMENT
DISTRI-BUTION
COMMERCIAL
TRANSPORT
ENERGY SERVICE & MATERIAL DEMANDS
INDUSTRY
RESIDENTIAL
30
Aggregated overview of sectors, processes and energy and material
flows in MARKAL_Sweden.
Transport module
31
0
50
100
150
200
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
[%]
ROAD TRANSPORT OTHER TRANSPORT
INDUSTRY RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL & SERVICE
32
Aggregated view of assumed reference energy service demand
developments expressed with demand levels of 2010 as base.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Cost
[EU
R/M
Wh]
Potential [TWh/year]
Energy forest Ley/Grass Crops Cereal Crops Oilseed Crops
33
Supply curves for energy crops.
0
20
40
60
80
100
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
[TW
h]
[kto
n C
O2
]
Policy scenarios
34
CO2 emission and OP policy constraints.
Marks in 2010 indicate levels based on statistics.
Main analysis scenario GLOB_CA (GLOBal Climate Action)
• Reflects a situation in which Sweden and the rest of world pursue
ambitious climate targets.
• CO2 emissions of the modeled system, i.e. the entire Swedish
energy system (incl. transport), constrained to be reduced by 80% to
2050 (compared to the 1990 emission level).
• Linear reduction from model year 2015 to 2050 applied
• Emission cap, gradually decreasing
• Fossil fuel prices are based on the “450 scenario” of IEA´s World
Energy Outlook
35
Alternative scenarios
• “NAT_CA” (National climate action). Higher import fossil fuel prices
• “CO2_LR65” and “CO2_LR50” (Low reduction for CO2, -65% and -
50%)
• “2GEN_HC” (High cost for second generation biofuels)
• “EV_HC” (High costs for electric vehicles).
• “BIO_LS” (Low supply for biomass): no stumps
• “MET_NO” (No high blend methanol fuels)
• “TRAF_SG” (Slow traffic growth)
• “NUC_PO” (Nuclear phase-out until2030)
• “PULP_SD” (Mechanical pulp shut-down)
36
Results
37
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
2000 2030 2050 2000 2030 2050 2000 2030 2050
Total Energy Supply . Final Energy Use . Electricity Generation
[TW
h]
Oil / Oil products Natural gas Coal and coke
Electricity Nuclear power Hydro
Biomass, waste and peat Other renewables District Heat
Total energy supply, final energy use and electricity generation for
main analysis scenario GLOB_CA.
38
Nuclear power is for “total energy supply” represented in gross values (input energy), while for
“electricity generation” in net production (electricity output). For “total energy supply”, “electricity”
represents net import (negative values imply export).
INDUSTRIAL RESIDUES - LIQOURS
INDUSTRIAL RESIDUES - BARK, WOOD WASTE,
etc.
FIREWOOD RESIDENTIAL
FORESTRY RESIDUES -TOPS AND BRANCHES
FORESTRY RESIDUES -STUMPS
ENERGY CROPS/FOREST
ORGANIC WASTE (TO BIOGAS)
PULPWOOD
IMPORTSOTHER
Oil phase-out - TOTAL
0
40
80
120
160
200
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
[TW
h]
39
Cost-efficient biomass utilization (excluding peat and combustible
municipal waste) in scenario GLOB_CA.
Dotted line shows total biomass utilization with OP policy applied.
0
40
80
120
160
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
[TW
h]
2GEN_HC CO2_LR50 CO2_LR65 ELEC_HC BIO_LS TRAF_SG
NO_MET NUC_PO PULP_SD NAT_CA GLOB_CA
0
40
80
120
160
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
[TW
h]
2GEN_HC CO2_LR50 CO2_LR65 ELEC_HC BIO_LS TRAF_SG
NO_MET NUC_PO PULP_SD NAT_CA GLOB_CA
40
Biomass use for heat and electricity production in different scenarios,
without OP policy (top) and with OP policy (bottom).
0
40
80
120
160
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050[T
Wh]
2GEN_HC CO2_LR50 CO2_LR65 ELEC_HC BIO_LS TRAF_SG
NO_MET NUC_PO PULP_SD NAT_CA GLOB_CA
0
40
80
120
160
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
[TW
h]
2GEN_HC CO2_LR50 CO2_LR65 ELEC_HC BIO_LS TRAF_SG
NO_MET NUC_PO PULP_SD NAT_CA GLOB_CA
41
Biomass use for transport biofuel production in different scenarios,
without OP policy (top) and with OP policy (bottom).
0
20
40
60
80
100
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
[EU
R/M
Wh]
2GEN_HC CO2_LR50 CO2_LR65 ELEC_HC BIO_LS TRAF_SG
NO_MET NUC_PO PULP_SD NAT_CA GLOB_CA
0
20
40
60
80
100
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
[EU
R/M
Wh
]
2GEN_HC CO2_LR50 CO2_LR65 ELEC_HC BIO_LS TRAF_SG
NO_MET NUC_PO PULP_SD NAT_CA GLOB_CA
42
Biomass marginal cost in different scenarios,
without OP policy (top) and with OP policy (bottom)
Findings - so far
• Total bioenergy utilization increases by 63% to 2050
(under system-wide CO2 reduction of 80%)
– including utilization of stumps and energy crops
• Biomass use in CHP peaks around 2030 in most
scenarios
• Transport sector accounts for 41% of total in 2050
– corresponding to 42 TWh transport biofuels
• Strong resource competition
– marginal biomass costs more than triples
– very large deployment of plug-in hybrid vehicles in transport
sector
43
Cont´d work
• Better representation of polygeneration options
• Improved representation of biowaste flows (possibly)
44
Tack!
45