- Blog

Wegener Center for Climate and Global Change
University of Graz
Leechgasse 25, A-8010 Graz, Austria
Human Dimensions of Global Change Programme
Assessment of the Regional
Biomass Potential for the Region
East Styria
Final Report March 2010
Karl Steininger (Coordination)
Stefan Höltinger
Study on behalf of
Executive Summary
The region East Styria has started already many years ago to promote renewable
energy and thus now is one of Europe’s leading regions in the fields of biogas and
biomass. Policies to increase the share of bioenergy are very popular for different
reasons. First, climate change has to be tackled and biofuels represent a solution to
reduce greenhouse gases. Second, many countries consider their dependency on
fossil fuel imports as critical and thus focus on domestic biomass feedstock. Third,
industrialized countries whose agriculture is characterized by overproduction aim to
foster rural development and to revitalise their agricultural sector by defining new and
alternative demand for biomass.
However, since biomass has manifold possible uses and the global land area is
limited, competition for land among different uses arises. The best example is the
competition for land between biofuels, food and feed production. It already became a
striking problem when the expansion of bioethanol production in the USA contributed
– among other factors – to soaring food prices that made staple food unaffordable in
many low-income countries. Other uses of biomass, which could interfere with
expanding bioenergy, are the use of biomass as industrial feedstock and for the
purpose of biodiversity conservation.
Therefore, it is necessary to use existing biomass potentials as efficient as possible,
considering all steps, i.e. from cultivation, harvesting up to transportation and finally
the conversion into the desired energy service or product. The biorefinery concept is
based on this insight and should – in analogy to an oil refinery – convert biomass into
different energy services and products, as well as other (e.g. material) products. For
successfull implementation of new concepts, such as biorefineries, it is crucial to
include all stakeholders and to stimulate the cooperation along the whole value
chain.
As the integrated planning and coordination of the goals of different projects is the
future main challenge, the following measures are recommended:

decrease farmers dependency on fossil inputs by establishing new cropping
systems as mixed or double cropping and agroforestry systems

use synergies of existing bioenergy production systems for implementing new
concepts such as biorefineries, which provide a wide range of products

promote the utilization of wood in the construction sector and new innovative
wood products such as wood plastic composites
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
The Region East Styria ......................................................................................1
1.1.
Agriculture in East Styria .............................................................................. 2
1.2.
Forestry in East Styria .................................................................................. 3
1.3.
The Energy System of East Styria................................................................ 4
1.4.
Regional Projects to promote Renewable Energy ........................................ 5
1.5.
Renewable Energy Sources and Fields of Excellence ................................. 6
Biomass and Bioenergy.....................................................................................7
2.1.
Common Motives for promoting Bioenergy .................................................. 8
2.2.
Competing Biomass Uses in Agriculture and Forestry ................................. 9
2.3.
Current Role of Renewable Energy and Biomass in Austria ...................... 11
2.4.
Biomass Potentials in Austria ..................................................................... 12
2.5.
The Bioenergy Potential in East Styria ....................................................... 14
Sustainable Bioenergy Production Systems .................................................17
3.1.
Cropping Systems ...................................................................................... 17
3.2.
Energy Crops in Agriculture........................................................................ 19
3.3.
Biomass Conversion Pathways .................................................................. 21
The Biorefinery Concept..................................................................................22
4.1.
Definition and different Types of Biorefineries............................................ 23
4.2.
The Concept of the Green Biorefinery........................................................ 24
4.3.
The Chemical Conversion Process in the Green Biorefinery...................... 25
5.
Socioeconomic Impacts of Biomass Use.......................................................25
6.
Future Challenges and Recommended Course of Actions ..........................27
7.
References ........................................................................................................30
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
1
1. The Region East Styria
The NUTS 3 region East Styria is located
in the south eastern part of Austria. It is
divided into the five districts Feldbach,
Fürstenfeld, Hartberg, Radkersburg and
Weiz. East Styria has an area of 3,350
km² (20 % of Styria) and is inhabited by
268,000 residents (23 % of Styria). From
1991 to 2001 the population grew by 2 %
and stayed at a constant level since then.
The only district showing a deviating
development is Radkersburg with a
population decline of 2.9 % from 1991 to
2001 and a decline of 3.7 % from 2001 to
2009.
The regional GDP per capita is at 19,000 € significantly lower than the Austrian
average of 31,000 € (Beigl et al., 2009). Another characteristic is the traditionally high
rate of people employed in agriculture, forestry or fisheries (see figure 1). However, a
structural change took place in the last years. From 1995 to 2006, the share of
people working in this sector decreased from 31.1 % to 23 %. The unemployment
rate in the region is between 4.1 % in Weiz and 6.4 % in Radkersburg (Beigl et al.,
2009).
Employment in different economic sectors in 2006
East Styria
Styria
Austria
23%
27%
10%
7%
50%
26%
24%
Agriculture, forestry and fisheries
64%
70%
Industry
Trade and Services
Figure 1: Employment in the different economic sectors in 2006
(Source: Beigl et al., 2009)
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
2
The two key sectors for the biomass provision in the region are agriculture and
forestry. Figure 2 depicts the share of forest- and agricultural area in the five districts
of East Styria.
100%
80%
Other Areas
60%
Forest
40%
Agricultural Land
20%
W
ei
z
Ra
dk
er
sb
ur
g
Ha
rtb
er
g
Fü
rs
te
nf
el
d
Fe
ld
ba
ch
0%
Figure 2: Share of agricultural- and forest area in the districts of East Styria
(Source: Steininger et al. 2008)
1.1.
Agriculture in East Styria
Due to the fertile soils, agriculture plays an important role in East Styria. The total
agricultural land area is 153,000 hectares. Two thirds of the area is used for crop
production and one third is grassland. However the distribution varies a lot both
across and within the five districts (see figure 3). The major crop is maize, which is
cultivated on 47 % of the arable land. Other important crops are different types of
cereals (19 %) and oleiferous fruits (10 %) such as pumpkin and rapeseed. Energy
crops are cultivated on only 1.5 % of the agricultural land (2,110 ha) in East Styria.
The most widespread energy crop is again maize - accounting for around 80 % of the
whole energy crop production. This concentration on maize is very questionable from
an ecological point of view as maize monocultures endanger biodiversity, favour the
spread of pests and increase the risk of soil erosion.
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
3
30.000
area in hectares
25.000
20.000
Arable Land
15.000
Grassland
10.000
5.000
W
ei
z
Ra
dk
er
sb
ur
g
Ha
rtb
er
g
Fü
rs
te
nf
el
d
Fe
ld
ba
ch
0
Figure 3: Grassland and Arable Land in the districts of East Styria
(Source: Steininger et al. 2008)
Therefore, measures should be taken to promote the cultivation of other energy crops
like miscanthus, sorghum, sudan grass or short rotation coppice (SRC). So far these
crops are cultivated only on test fields. But the Styrian Chamber of Agriculture is
already taking efforts to boost the share of other energy crops, especially miscanthus
and short rotation coppice.
1.2.
Forestry in East Styria
Compared with other regions in Styria, the forest area in East Styria is quite low. In
total 151,010 ha are covered with forest. That is 43.5 % of the area, while the share
of forest in Styria is 61.1 %. (BFW, 2002)
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
4
60.000
area in hectares
50.000
40.000
Agricultural Land
Forest
30.000
20.000
10.000
W
ei
z
rg
bu
rg
R
ad
ke
rs
H
ar
tb
e
d
te
nf
el
Fü
rs
Fe
ld
ba
ch
0
Figure 4: Agricultural Land and Forest area in the districts
(Source: Steininger et al. 2008)
1.3.
of East Styria
The Energy System of East Styria
Steininger et al. (2008) carried out a comprehensive study about the energy system
in East Styria. The considered sectors are heating, electricity and mobility. The
heating demand depends on various factors such as the total living space, the share
of detached houses, the average age of buildings and the number of heating degreedays. The fact that the share of detached houses and older buildings is relatively high
in East Styria results in a yearly heating demand of 9.11 petajoule (PJ). An analysis
of energy carriers for heating shows that oil is still prevailing with 44 %. Firewood
satisfies at least 37 % of the heating demand - coal, gas, electricity, wood chips and
pellets provide the rest. The regional electricity demand was estimated by using the
electricity demand of an average Styrian household. This calculation shows a total
electricity demand of 1.59 PJ per year for the region East Styria. The mobility
demand for the region was estimated to be 4,000 passenger kilometres. The
motorised private transportation, which is responsible for most of the passenger
kilometres, results in an energy demand of 6.82 PJ. Altogether the sectors heat,
electricity and mobility result in an energy demand of 17.52 PJ for households.
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
5
The industry sector has an annual energy demand of 8.75 PJ, the service sector 2.44
PJ and agriculture and forestry 1.56 PJ. Thus, the total annual energy demand of the
region East Styria is 30.27 PJ. Figure 5 gives a detailed overview of the energy
demand in different sectors.
Energy Demand of different Sectors in East Styria (PJ)
Agriculture &
Forestry
1.56
Service Sector
2.44
Heating
9.11
Industry
8.75
Households
17.52
Mobility
6.82
Electricity
1.59
Figure 5: Energy Demand of different Sectors in East Styria in Petajoule (PJ)
(Source: Steininger et al. 2008)
1.4.
Regional Projects to promote Renewable Energy
Renewable energy is an important issue in regional development programs for many
years now. In 1999, the East Styrian Regional Development Program (D.E.O.) placed
an emphasis on renewable energy. The idea was to promote bio-, solar-, wind-, and
geothermal energy and to improve the cooperation between companies and other
institutions to increase the value added in the region. (EU-Regionalmanagement
Oststeiermark, 1999)
GO BEST stands for a common East Styrian economic- and development strategy
and serves as groundwork for subsidies for future projects. The main idea was to
connect local knowledge with expertise. In 2004, the project “Energy Region East
Styria” was initiated - aiming to let East Styria become a European model region for
renewable energy. The priority was to strengthen the existing capacities by
implementing new thematic lighthouse projects to assume a top position in Europe.
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
6
Projects that were realized within the project “Energy Region East Styria“ were
developed together with the stakeholders during the project GO BEST. Therefore, it
can be seen as the implementation process of the common goals and strategies.
Another goal was to create new employment in the region by promoting the sectors
biogas, biomass, vegetable oil and mobility, energy optimised construction and solar
heating and photovoltaic. (EU-Regionalmanagement Oststeiermark, 2009)
1.5.
Renewable Energy Sources and Fields of Excellence
Because of the regional topography, the share of hydro energy in East Styria is
comparatively low but the mix of the other renewable energy carriers well balanced.
To identify and promote the regional strength five fields of excellence were identified:
biogas, biomass, energy efficient construction, vegetable oil and solar heating and
photovoltaic (Energieregion Oststeiermark, 2009).
26 out of the 40 biogas plants in Styria are situated in East Styria – making East
Styria, especially the districts of Feldbach and Radkersburg, to have one of the
highest densities of biogas plants in Europe. The average electricity output of biogas
plants in Styria is 2 GWh per year (Reichhard, 2005). Applying this average for the
biogas plants in East Styria results in an annual electricity output of about 45 GWh
(0.162 PJ). This is equivalent to about 10 % of the annual electricity demand of all
East Styrian households. As the agricultural sector plays an important role in the
region, the main substrates are cow and pig manure, other agricultural residues and
maize silage.
Another important field is biomass, which is mainly used for heating - either in the
form of firewood, pellets or wood chips in private households or in mostly small scale
district heating plants. In 2005, 83 out of 204 Styrian district heating plants were
operated in East Styria.
Energy efficient construction is a measure to foster energy efficiency in the region.
The main goal is to increase the spread of buildings meeting passive house
standards. These require a yearly heating demand of less then 15 kW / m². The
advantage is an up to 90 % cost reduction for heating at only 5 % higher construction
costs. The target for 2010 is at least one passive house in each of the 192 East
Styrian communities.
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
7
In the mobility sector vegetable oil is promoted as alternative fuel. The objective is to
become more independent of fossil fuels and to strengthen the regional agriculture
by creating new markets. The intensified use of vegetable oil and the further
expansion of gas stations providing vegetable oil would also result in positive
employment effects.
Until 2005, more than 100,000 m² of solar heating panels and photovoltaic panels
with a peak capacity of 816 kW have been installed in East Styria. The rapid growth
of solar heating installations in Styria has been triggered already in the early 1980ies
by self-construction groups, which developed collector designs for home construction
and ran training seminars for building collectors (Boyle, 2004).
2. Biomass and Bioenergy
Biomass is a broad term as it stands for all kinds of living matter, including different
types of woody crops, energy crops and biogenous residues from households and
industry (Boyle, 2004). Other important terms are bioenergy and biofuels. Bioenergy
is the available final energy after converting the biomass and the term biofuel refers
to all fuels made out of biomass. Biofuels for transport are distinguished in first,
second, and sometimes even third generation biofuels. First generation biofuels
include vegetable oil, biodiesel and bioethanol. The second generation includes
synthetic biofuels (biomass-to-liquid and Fischer-Tropsch diesel), biogas and
biohydrogen (WBGU, 2009). Biofuels from algae are often referred to as third
generation biofuels. However, there are some technical problems to be solved and
they are still far from being economically feasible.
Traditionally firewood was the most important biofuel and still is in many countries. In
the last decades, the term “new biomass” emerged. It describes all kind of solid,
liquid or gaseous biofuels that are often produced on a large scale. These new
biofuels are not only used for heating, but also for electricity generation and as
transport fuel. One of the diverse advantages of bioenergy is that it can be stored
easily and thus can balance the power output fluctuations of solar- or wind energy
plants. Furthermore, biomass is an important carbon reservoir as plants remove CO2
from the atmosphere and store it. However, one has to keep in mind that biomass
has unique properties and is not substitutable in many areas, e.g. in food and fodder
production. Nevertheless, biomass is also an important resource for the
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
8
manufacturing-, paper- and chemical industry. For these reasons, biomass has to be
used efficiently and responsible. To give an example, the combustion of biomass for
the heating of buildings does not seem reasonable in the long terms – if one
considers; the same effect can be achieved by better insulation.
In the last years, policies to promote bioenergy gained momentum in many countries
and different measures are taken to increase the share of renewable energies. The
EU has agreed to the targets of 20% of renewable energy sources in gross inland
consumption and a share of 10 % of biofuels for the traffic sector by 2020 and the
USA aim to cover at least 20 % of their transport fuel demand in 2022 with biofuels
(WBGU, 2009). Policy measures to promote biofuels include mandatory blending
quotas, fixed feed-in tariffs for electricity, tax exemptions or relief and promotion of
research. The motives to pursue bioenergy promotion strategies are numerous.
2.1. Common Motives for promoting Bioenergy
One of the main arguments for promoting biofuels are geopolitical motives and
energy autonomy - based on the insight that the global fossil fuel reserves are
steadily diminishing and that it will not be possible in the future to satisfy the current
or an even raising global energy demand. A term often mentioned in this context is
peak oil. It describes the point when the global oil production has reached its
maximum and begins to decrease. From this time on oil will become more and more
expensive and other options become not only economically more feasible but also
necessary for substituting oil. Hallock et al. (2004) predicted peak oil between 2004
and 2037 depending on different rates of growth in oil demand. But they concede that
‘oil resources necessary for the decline point to occur in 2037 have not been
discovered yet’. Tsoskounoglou et al. (2008) expect peak oil within the next 15 years
by applying the Hubert’s curve. Using lower estimates for the global oil reserves, they
stress that peak oil maybe already happened. A general trend is the reduction of oil
exporting countries in the next decades. This means fewer countries controlling the
global oil reserves. This has led to growing concerns in the US and the EU to
become too dependent on a few countries that are controlling large amounts of the
global fossil fuel reserves. Therefore, plans to expand biofuels are supported to
reduce the dependence on imported oil and thus contribute to the national energy
security (WDR 2008).
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
9
Another motive is climate change mitigation. To avoid more severe climatic
impacts and the triggering of a series of positive feedback loops, which would lead to
a further rise of temperature, scientists agreed that the increase of temperature has
to be kept below 2°C (Metz et al., 2007). So far more than 100 countries have
accepted the necessity of this threshold. Meinshausen, et al. (2009) showed that the
probability of exceeding this 2°C limit is 32 % even if the Kyoto-gas emissions are
halved from 2000 to 2050. Therefore, drastic and immediate measures for cutting
down greenhouse gases are needed. This puts enormous pressure on governments
to act. Consequently, biofuels provide a welcome and apparently easy solution.
However, governments have started to rethink some of their biofuel policies since
concerns are growing about possible negative effects of biofuels such as competition
with food production, decreasing soil fertility and overestimation of greenhouse gas
savings. For example, the European Union made a step back from the declared goal
to boost the share of biofuels to 10 % of the total transport fuels by 2020. The former
directive was specified so that at least 40% of the goal must be met from ‘non-food
and feed-competing second-generation biofuels or from cars running on green
electricity and hydrogen’ (Euractiv, 2008).
A motive especially apparent in the US and the EU is rural development and the
revitalisation of the agrarian sector, which is currently highly dependent on
subsidies.
Bioenergy definitely offers huge potentials
for countries where
overproduction is an issue by creating new markets for agricultural and forest
products. The positive effects on the regional value added are described in detail in
chapter 5. However, possible consequences on world food markets and prices by
competing interests for agricultural land have to be considered to avoid conflicts. The
so-called second-generation biofuels are expected to solve this conflict by using
crops grown on marginal lands, which are not suitable for food production.
Nevertheless, it has to be considered that yields on more fertile lands will always be
higher, if the prices paid for energy are higher than those for food, energy crops will
inevitably always compete with food crops.
2.2. Competing Biomass Uses in Agriculture and Forestry
The agricultural markets are globally interlinked and the importance of bioenergy
trade is steadily increasing. Therefore, it is not possible to focus solely on regional
factors and exclude global developments for evaluating a regions bioenergy
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
10
potential. For example, agriculture in many industrialized countries is dependent on
fodder imports, e.g. soybeans. Also the EU and USA targets for biofuels in the
transport sector will be hard to meet using domestic feedstock only. Thus, a more
holistic view has to be applied when dealing with assessments in this sector.
The available land area and the yields of the cultivated energy crops determine the
future biomass potential. Since agricultural land is a limited resource, the land area
available for energy crops is dependent on the development of the land area
necessary for food and fodder production; as long as self-sufficiency is seen as
desirable target, the priority goes to food and fodder production. At least as long selfsufficiency is seen as desirable target and food and fodder production is given a
priority. One key driver for the food and fodder production is logically the population
number and the prevailing average diets. With higher meat consumption, the
demand for agricultural land is significantly rising – even if advances in plant breeding
can contribute to reduce the required land area.
Other factors that lead to more pressure on agricultural lands are soil sealing and
soil erosion. Soil sealing means the “loss of soil resources due to the covering of
land for housing, roads or other construction work” (IES, 2009). Soil erosion is a
common result of not site-specific crops and inadequate cultivation methods.
Another measure to increase the biomass potential in agriculture is the use of set
aside areas or marginal land areas. The obligatory set aside of 10 % per farm was
a measure of Europe’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to fight overproduction.
Due to the strong demand for bioenergy on international markets and the binding
renewable energy targets of the EU for 2020, there was no longer a reason to give
energy crops specific support. Therefore, the obligatory set aside and the energy
crop scheme were abolished at the end of 2009 (AMA, 2010).
The biomass potential of forestry is dependent on the future forest area and the
annual timber growth. Due to ecological reasons, not the total annual growth can
be used since forest residues often have important environmental functions. They are
a source of nutrients; regulate water flows and help to prevent soil erosion. However,
on eutrophicated sites biomass removal can also bring positive benefits by reducing
nutrient leakage (EEA, 2006).
As wood is also an important resource for saw timber production and the paper
industry, only a limited share of the annual growth can be used for energy provision.
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
11
This means that the future bioenergy potential is largely dependent on the
development of these industries and their demand for wood. The residues of sawand paper mills also offer an important resource for the bioenergy sector.
Consequently, an estimation of the future forest biomass potential is only possible by
including the whole timber industry (Haas & Kranzl, 2008).
2.3. Current Role of Renewable Energy and Biomass in Austria
The share of renewable energy is constantly high since 1990, with share exceeding
20% every year. In 2007, the total final energy consumption in Austria was 1082.6
petajoule (PJ), in which renewable energy sources contributed to around 305 PJ or
28% (Statistik Austria, 2009). This share of 28 % was achieved, by providing more
renewable energy than in the decades before and reducing the final energy
consumption at the same time. Regarding the EU target that by 2020 renewable
energy should account for 34 % of Austria’s final energy consumption, it will be a key
factor to keep the energy consumption low. Therefore, according to the preliminary
objectives of the national energy strategy the total final energy consumption should
be stabilized at the level of 2005 with 1,100 PJ per year (BMWFJ & BMLFUW, 2009).
The current (2007) contribution of the different renewable energy carriers is depicted
in figure 6.
Share of Renewable Energy Carriers on Final Renewable
Energy Consumption in 2007 (Total 305 PJ)
Heat Pumps, Solar
Heating and
Burnable Wastes Geothermal Energy
2%
3%
Biofuels for Heating
and Transport
22%
Firewood
22%
District Heating from
Bioenergy
5%
Electric Energy from
Hydropower
44%
Electric Energy from
Wind and Photovoltaik
2%
Figure 6: Share of different renewable energy carriers in final renewable energy
consumption in 2007 (Source: Statistik Austria, 2009)
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
12
As shown in figure 5, biomass plays an important role in the energy supply. The
categories firewood, biofuels for heating and transport and district heating from
bioenergy account for 47 % of the final renewable energy consumption.
2.4.
Biomass Potentials in Austria
The first step to quantify the biomass potential of the region is to estimate the forest
area and the annual timber growth, the area available for the cultivation of energy
crops and the amount of residues that can be utilized for energy production.
However, due to its multiple and sequential uses in different sectors, the actual
biomass potential is often hard to measure (Rosillo-Calle et al., 2007). Estimating the
bioenergy potential that results out of the available biomass is even more complex,
because the demand for several other biomass uses such as for food, fodder or as a
feedstock for industry has to be estimated. Moreover, the different efficiencies of the
numerous conversion routes have to be included.
In 2007, the agricultural area used for cultivating energy crops was estimated to
be 50,000 to 55,000 ha (Brainbows, 2007). Considering various driving factors,
several studies about the biomass potential in Austria expect the potential land area
for growing energy crops to rise significantly. Table 1 gives an overview about the
results of different studies about the biomass potential in Austria.
Table 1:
Potential arable land area for cultivating energy crops (1,000 ha)
Author
European Environment Agency
(EEA - 2006)
Brainbows and Agricultural
Chamber Lower Austria (2007)
Haas and Kranzl (2008)
Scenario
Reference Scenario
Environmental Scenario
Biomass Scenario
Basis
Low
High
2010
2020
204
266
125 - 195
83 - 137
203 - 276
149
148
149
283
175
406
246
215
278
The European Environment Agency (EEA, 2006) traced the question how much
bioenergy can be produced without harming the environment. As bioenergy
production often focuses on only a few crops and is related with further
intensification, the EEA has identified possible risks, such as the additional pressure
on water and soil resources or the loss of biodiversity. To reduce these risks the EEA
recommends considering the following environmental criteria:
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria




13
at least 30 % share of environmental friendly farming
3 % of the currently intensively cultivated land is reserved for set aside
extensively cultivated areas are maintained
bioenergy crops with low environmental pressure are used
Brainbows and the Agricultural Chamber of Lower Austria (2007) have developed
three scenarios to give a possible range of future developments under different
assumptions. The reference scenario shows the development under business as
usual conditions. The environmental scenario assumes a strong increase in organic
farming, whereas in the biomass scenario organic farming plays only an inferior role
and all biomass potentials are utilized. Haas and Kranzl (2008) choose a similar
approach. They developed three scenarios (basis, low and high) assuming different
developments for a Common Agricultural Policy, the number of cattle and pigs and
the selection of different crops for cultivation.
The forest biomass potential in Austria is dominated by two trends. Firstly the
growing annual wood harvest and secondly the decreasing wood imports (Zwettler,
2006). Another important parameter is the influence of property rights on the wood
harvest. The statistics about the annual wood harvest show that larger and betterorganised forest companies use a significantly higher share of the annual timber
growth. The “Austrian Federal Forests”, Austria’s largest forest managing company,
which owns 15 % of the woodland, uses about 81 % of the annual growth. Forest
companies owning more than 200 ha use even more, approximately 84 %. Contrarily
owners with less than 200 ha use only 46 %. (BFW, 2002)
Table 2:
Forest Biomass Potential (in 1,000 Solid m³ / year) without short rotation coppice
Author
BMLFUW 2009
Brainbows and Agricultural
Chamber Lower Austria (2007)
Haas and Kranzl (2008)
Scenario
2010
Reference Scenario
Environmental
Scenario
Biomass Scenario
Biomass Min
Biomass Max
390
2020
1,620 - 2,000
1,100
1,560
1,330
1,330
1,295
1,490
Table 2 shows the results of three studies dealing with the forest biomass potential in
Austria. The BMLFUW (2009) estimates the forest biomass potential to increase to
16.2 to 20 million solid cubic meters (scm) including 1.98 million scm from imports.
The estimations depend on different assumptions for the wood price and scenarios
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
14
for the utilization of wood. Haas and Kranzl (2008) used different scenarios for the
development of the timber industry. The “biomass max scenario” assumes a growing
importance of the sawing industry and a declining importance of the paper industry resulting in a higher share of by-products available for the bioenergy sector. This
scenario would be realistic under high wood and energy prices and high subsidies for
bioenergy. The “biomass min scenario” shows an opposite development but is seen
as very unlikely. The numbers of Brainbows and the Agricultural Chamber (2007)
vary a lot due to the different assumptions for bioenergy from by-products from wood
sawing and waste materials. Estimations were given only for 2010 since the
utilization of the annual timber growth, especially by small forest owners, cannot be
estimated.
2.5.
The Bioenergy Potential in East Styria
The scenarios and assumptions about the future biomass potential in Austria form a
basis for estimating the future biomass potential of East Styria. The statistics about
the agricultural land area in Styria reveal a steady decrease in the last decades. But
at the same time the area necessary for animal feed production is declining, due to
the lower number of cattle and pigs and the advances in plant breeding. According to
ARGES, the Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety, yields are increasing about
1 % for cereals and for maize about 1.5 % per year (Brainbows, 2007). Considering
the abolition of obligatory set aside, the Styrian Chamber of Agriculture expects 1,300
to 1,700 ha of the current 4,302 ha of set aside area to be used for production again.
The other areas are not expected to be used due to their low yields or difficult
cultivation, which does not allow an economic viable production.
The total agricultural biomass potential of East Styria was estimated by using
some of the assumptions of Haas and Kranzl (2008) for the development of the
agricultural land area and the area that will be available for cultivating energy crops
(see Table 3).
The main assumptions were:




continuing agricultural land area loss due to land sealing and soil erosion
fewer demand for arable land after further improvements in plant breeding
less set aside areas after abolishing obligatory set aside
decline in grassland as the number of cattle is expected to dwindle as well
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
Table 3:
15
Scenario for the Development of the agricultural land area
2006
2010
2020
2030
2040
Total agricultural land
153,0
150,2
145,7
141,3
137,1
Arable Land
86,6
85,0
83,3
81,6
80,0
Set Aside Area
4,6
4,5
4,1
3,7
3,3
Grassland
43,7
42,9
42,0
41,2
40,4
Extensive Grassland
Area available for non-food Crops
18,0
10
17,7
18,4
16,3
27,1
14,8
32,7
13,4
35,9
(Source: Own Calculation based on Haas and Kranzl, 2008)
However, it has to be stated that the conversion of grassland to arable land mostly
has negative effects on biodiversity and carbon storage in the soil (WBGU, 2009).
Therefore, finding alternative uses for grass e.g. as feedstock for green biorefineries
is a desirable target.
The importance of forestry in East Styria is lower than in most other parts of Styria.
The average annual wood harvest from 2005 to 2008 in East Styria was 957,000
solid cubic meters (scm) - 17.4 % of the total Styrian wood harvest. The most
important segment was sawtimber with 437,000 scm, followed by woodfuel with
421,000 scm, and pulpwood with 99,000 scm. The wood removals in the different
districts are depicted in figure 7.
Av e rage Annual Wood Harv e st 2005 - 2008
thousand cubic meters under bark
250
Woodfuel
Sawwood
Pulpwood
200
150
100
50
0
Feldbach
Fürstenfeld
Hartberg
Radkersburg
Figure 7: Average annual wood harvest 2005 – 2008
(Source: Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz, 2006)
Weiz
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
16
For the estimation of the forest biomass potential in East Styria, the forest area is
assumed to stay constant over the next decades even if the forest area was steadily
increasing over the last decades and this trend is assumed to continue. However,
most of the time the additional areas are situated in areas where the annual growth
cannot be used due to technical or economically reasons.
For estimating the biomass potential, the annual timber growth is more meaningful
than the forest area. According to the Austrian forest inventory, the annual growth in
East Styria is 1,767,000 solid cubic meters, but only 54 % of it is used. This is lower
than the Austrian average of 60 % (Land Steiermark, 2009 & Karl-FranzensUniversität Graz, 2006). Another factor that has to be considered for estimating the
annual wood supply is the influence of extreme whether events such as storms or
thousand solid m³ of standing wood
droughts or the occurrence of bark beetle plagues.
800
Used Annual Growth
Unused Annual Growth
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Feldbach
Fürstenfeld + Radkersburg
Hartberg
Weiz
Figure 8: Use of the annual timber growth in the East Styrian districts
(Source: Steininger et al. 2008)
Measures to activate these potentials are increased logging and forest thinning as
well the intensified use of forest residues, which are normally left in the forest.
Especially for the use of residues, ecological restrictions have to be considered since
removing residues causes a loss of nutrients from the ecosystem. Including all these
measures, the Styrian Chamber of Agriculture estimates the additional biomass from
forests to be around 135,000 solid cubic metres per year (Steininger et. al, 2008).
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
17
3. Sustainable Bioenergy Production Systems
Referring to the declining fossil fuel reserves, the role of agriculture for providing
bioenergy will become more and more important. Several programmes and incentive
schemes as the EU target for 20 % renewable energy in 2020 try to boost the share
of renewable energy. However, the agricultural land area is a limited resource and
the competition between food and energy production are likely to become more
severe. Therefore, the available areas have to be used as efficient as possible. This
means not only increasing the output per area, but also managing the soils to sustain
their fertility and guarantee high yields also in the future. Hence, energy crops should
have low requirements on the soils and high annual growth rates at low inputs of
fertilizers and pesticides. Energy crops, which require low inputs, also reduce the
farmer’s vulnerability to fluctuating oil prices since fertilizer prices are closely
interlinked with oil prices. The high oil prices in 2007 and 2008 resulted in
skyrocketing fertilizer prices and contributed to the soaring food prices (FAO, 2008).
Furthermore, lower fertilizer inputs help reducing greenhouse gas emissions - as at
the one hand fertilizer production is a very energy intensive process and at the other
hand also N2O soil emissions are rising with higher fertilizer inputs.
3.1.
Cropping Systems
In the last decades Monocultures became the most widespread cropping system in
industrialized countries, due to mechanization and modernisation in agriculture. The
functions of traditional cropping systems and crop rotations as nitrogen inputs by
legumes or suppressed insects, pests and weed, were replaced by increased use of
fertilizers and pesticides. These inputs also contribute to a big share of the biomass
production costs. Fertilizers and pesticides contribute to about 20 % of the production
costs of silage maize (Steininger et al., 2008). Under this consideration, alternative
cropping systems may be interesting not only ecologically but also from an
economical point of view.
In “Mixed Cropping Systems”, two or more crops are cultivated at the same time
on the same field. As a result, plants with different nutrient demands or root systems
can be combined in an optimal way as each crop has different attributes. Depending
on the desired “end-product” different combinations of cereals, legumes and oilseeds
can be used. This way fodder and energy can be produced at the same time.
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
18
Possible advantages are higher and more constant yields, better weed suppression
and better CO2 balance as more carbon can be captured in the soil. However
depending on the crop combination harvest may be more complicated and hence
more expensive.
Double cropping means the successive cultivation of two crops on the same field
within one year. Double or multiple cropping is common practice in regions with
milder climates, where crops can be cultivated the whole year. In regions with more
severe winters as in Europe, the vegetation period is too short for double cropping.
However, for biomass production double cropping offers important opportunities in
these regions. Since the crops high energy content is the interest (instead of the fruits
themselves), the crops can be harvested before the fruits are mature. A typical
double cropping system for biomass consists of one frost resistant winter crop such
as winter cereals, winter rapeseed or winter sugar beet, which is cultivated in autumn
and harvested in spring and a summer crop such as maize or sunflower, which is
cultivated in spring and harvested in autumn. (FNR, 2009)
In Agroforestry Systems agricultural crops and trees or bushes are cultivated on
the same area. These systems have been very common for many centuries as mixed
orchards or forest pasture systems. During the last decades, these systems mostly
disappeared due to the intensified mechanisation in agriculture. In the last years,
agroforestry became attractive again for producing biomass. On sites with low
average yields, the cultivation of poplars or widows can provide an economically
interesting option for farmers. Furthermore, the plantation of tree rows brings also
ecological advantages as erosion control and shadowing of the cultivated plants.
Ideally, agroforestry systems should provide the same or an even higher yield than
the trees and agricultural crops on separated sites.
An indicator to compare different cropping systems is the Land Equivalent Ratio
(LER). It compares the yields of growing two or more crops together with growing the
same crops separated on different sites. An LER greater than one indicates that the
agroforestry system requires less area than cultivating the crops in a monoculture.
This measure can also be used for the evaluation of mixed cropping systems.
(Kantor, 1999)
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
3.2.
19
Energy Crops in Agriculture
Energy crops can be divided into annual and perennial crops. Typical annual energy
crops are maize, cereals, rapeseed, sunflower, sugar beet and potatoes. For annual
energy crops, site adopted crop rotation systems are vital to sustain the soil fertility
and to avoid pests. Examples for perennial energy crops are miscanthus, switchgrass
and short rotation coppice as widow or poplar plantation. (FNR, 2009)
The statistics about the energy crop mix in East Styria (figure 9) reveal that maize
and rapeseed are the dominating energy crops in the region. So far in most regions
energy crops are dominating which were used already before for food and fodder
production, because their attributes as high yields and resistance against pests have
been optimized in breeding over the last decades. Another reason is that no new
machinery for cultivation and harvest is needed.
Energy Crop Mix in East Styria
Miscanthus
2%
Others
3%
Short Rotation
Forest
2%
Winter Rapeseed
15%
Corn Maize
19%
Maize Silage
59%
Figure 9: Energy Crop Mix in East Styria
(Source: Steininger et al. 2008)
Silage maize accounts for 59 % and grain maize for 19 % of the cultivated energy
crops in East Styria. Silage maize is mainly used as a co-substrate for the biogas
production - as it offers a high dry matter yield per hectare and a high share of carbon
hydrates with good attributes for fermentation (FNR, 2009). Maize requires a good
soil structure to guarantee the availability of sufficient water and nutrients for the plant
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
20
(Vetter, Heiermann & Toews, 2009). To achieve high yields considerable high inputs
of fertilizer and pesticides are necessary. Another problem is the risk of soil erosion
especially on hilly grounds.
Rapeseed is cultivated mainly for the production of vegetable oil or biodiesel, which
is produced through the process of transesterfication. The press cake can be used as
animal feed. As the self-compatibility of rapeseed is very low, rapeseed should
account for not more than 25 % of the crop rotation (FNR, 2009).
Beside these ‘traditional’ crops, there is a wide range of other crops, which are
suitable as energy crops. Examples are elephant grass (Miscanthus giganteus),
sorghum (Sorghum
Sudanese
and
Sorghum
bicolor),
Jerusalem
artichoke
(Helianthus tuberosus L.), Cup plant (Silphium perfoliatum) and also short rotation
coppice with poplar or willow.
Miscanthus already accounts for about 2 % of the total energy crop area in East
Styria. Miscanthus is a perennial grass showing high biomass yields with more than
15 tonnes per ha under good conditions. It favours similar conditions as maize
regarding soil, temperature and precipitation. Advantages of miscanthus are the low
fertilizer intensity and the high pest resistance and thus no pesticides are necessary
(FNR, 2009). The high requirements on soils are seen as possible disadvantage as it
may result in competitive situations with food production. Another problem is the
lower ash melt temperature of miscanthus, which leads to problems in standard wood
chip or pellet boilers (Stubenschrott, 2009).
In the past sorghum has been mainly used for food and fodder production; but due
to its high dry matter yields, it has become an interesting source for renewable
energy. So far, there are only few experiences with cultivating sorghum for energy
purposes. The average annual dry matter yields vary between 8 and 17 tonnes per
ha. In a biogas plant, ten tons of dry matter provide about 4,500 m3 gas with a
methane content of 53 %. Compared with maize, sorghum is more resistant against
dry conditions but achieves only low yields at low average temperatures. (FNR, 2009)
The Jerusalem Artichoke (topinambur) is an herbaceous perennial plant that can
grow up to 5m tall and has edible tubers similar to potatoes. The yields range from 4
to 13 tonnes of dry matter per ha for tubers; and 8 to 20 tonnes of dry matter per ha
for foliage. For the use in a biogas plant the foliage is harvested until September;
whereas for combustion harvest should be in December or January when the dry
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
21
matter content reaches 75 % or more. The tubers are harvested between October
and March and can be used for biogas or ethanol production. (FNR, 2009)
Although it offers various advantages the Cup Plant is cultivated only on some test
fields so far. The plant promises high dry matter yields with more than 20 tons, good
biogas yields comparable with those of maize, a good drought resistance and so far
no pests have been reported. But the plant has one big disadvantage: the planting
costs are extremely high as the seeds can not be sowed directly - as pre-grown
plants have to be used. As long as this problem is not solved no commercial use of
the cup plant is expected. (FNR, 2009)
Short rotation coppice (SRC) accounts for 2 % of the energy crop area in East
Styria. The two most widespread tree species are high yield varieties of poplar and
willow. They guarantee high annual dry matter yields of 5 to 10 tonnes per ha for
willow plantations and 10 to 15 tonnes per ha for poplar plantations (FNR, 2009). The
trees can be planted either on the whole area or in agroforestry systems. In the first
two years weed control is essential but the following years do not require any further
pesticide or fertilizer inputs. Normally SRC are grown on 2 to 4 year harvesting cycles
depending on the tree species. Cultivation tests in Bavaria have shown that all tested
former grass- and crop land areas were suitable for SRC. However, the cultivation on
marginal lands and in regions with an annual perception of less than 650 mm results
in significantly lower yields (ASP, 2008).
3.3.
Biomass Conversion Pathways
The variety of energy crops is enormous, but there is also a vast amount of
conversion routes to receive the demanded energy services (heat, electricity and
transport fuel). Depending on the process technology and products, the biomass
resources can be structured as shown in figure 10. Traditionally the combustion of
firewood was the most important biomass process. The use of biogas, the extraction
of vegetable oil and the production of ethanol via fermentation are relatively new.
Gasification and pyrolysis are not used on a commercial scale yet (Haas & Kranzl,
2008). Gasification allows the use of any cellulosic feedstock as wood, straw or other
residues. The raw gas can either be converted into electricity and heat or be used as
a transport fuel.
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
22
In the discussion whether to favour small-scale or large-scale plants different
arguments have to be considered. Referring to efficiency larger plants show a better
performance, which positively effects the energy provision costs (WBGU, 2009).
Small-scale facilities mostly create more employment and a higher regional value
added (Steininger et al., 2008). However, it is difficult to make a general statement,
as the effects vary for different feedstock.
Assessing efficient biomass conversion pathways needs to include other renewable
energy carriers as well. Since biomass can be used very flexible, it should be used to
cover the energy demands, which cannot be satisfied by wind, solar, hydro or thermal
energy.
Biomass Resource
Cellulose richplants (wet)
(grass- and maize
silage, manure,
biowaste)
Process Technology
Product
Anaerobic
Digestion
Fermentation
Oil-rich plants
(rapeseed,
sunflower)
H
E
T
E
A
L
E
C
T
R
I
C
I
T
Y
R
A
N
S
P
O
R
T
Biogas
Sugar- and starch
rich plants
(cereals, sugar
beet, potatoes, etc)
Cellulose rich
plants (dry)
(straw, miscanthus,
short rotation
coppice)
Energy Service
Gasification
T
Ethanol
Methanol, DME
Combustion
F
Extraction
Vegetable Oil
Transesterfication
RME
U
E
L
Figure 10: Classification of Energy Crops according to their conversion pathways
(Source: Boyle, 2004; WBGU, 2009)
4. The Biorefinery Concept
The biorefinery concept is based on different considerations. The increased use of
biomass and the replacement of oil as the basis for numerous products and services,
could contribute to reduce CO2 emissions, to guarantee energy security and to
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
23
increase the value added in rural regions. Basically, a biorefinery should provide,
analogous to a petroleum refinery, a wide range of products and thus increase the
cost competitiveness of biomass products. This means that biomass is not only used
for the provision of energy, food and fodder but also for the production of high-value
chemicals and polymers that form the basis of a wide range of consumer products.
4.1.
Definition and different Types of Biorefineries
According to the great importance of sustainability along the whole production chain,
the members of the IEA Bioenergy Task 42 give the following definition: “Biorefinery
is the sustainable processing of biomass into a spectrum of marketable products
(food, feed, materials, chemicals) and energy (fuels, power, heat)” (de Jong,
Langeveld & van Ree, s.a.). Nevertheless, the biorefinery concept is not something
completely new; in fact many biorefineries use similar conversion processes as they
have been used already for many years in the sugar, starch and pulp and paper
industry. Thus, many biorefineries have their origins in these industries. They are the
result of optimized production processes aiming to make use of the largest possible
feedstock fraction. A criterion to distinguish between biorefineries and other facilities
which also use biomass as feedstock, e.g. biogas plants, is that “both multiple
energetic and non-energetic output need to be generated for a facility to be
considered as a biorefinery” (de Jong, Langeveld & van Ree, s.a.). Biorefineries can
be categorized after the four following features: feedstock, process, platform and
product. Table 4 gives an overview over the different features.
Table 4:
Features to categorise Biorefineries
Products
Energy
Materials
Feedstock
Process
Platform
Grasses
Chemical
Organic juice
Biomethane
Food
Starch-, sugar and
oil crops
Thermochemical
Biochemical
Biodiesel
Bioethanol
Lignocellulosic
crops and residues
Mechanical /
Physical
C6 & C5 sugars
Lignin
Oil
Biogas
Syngas
Animal feed
Fertilzer
Biomaterials
Chemicals
Polymers
Organic Residues
Pyrolytic liquid
(Source: de Jong, Langeveld & van Ree, s.a.)
Synthetic
biofuels
Bio-H2
Electricity
&Heat
Glycerin
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
24
Biorefineries can process various feedstock ranging from wood, agricultural crops,
forest residues, organic waste and aquatic biomass as algae and include many
potential transformation processes as thermo-chemical-, bio-chemical-, chemicaland mechanical processes. The number of different platforms combined in one
biorefinery is a good indicator for the complexity and also has an impact on the
number of possible products. To give an exact definition of a biorefinery, the IEA
Bioenergy Group recommends to quote all of the four main features, e.g.: C6 sugar
platform biorefinery for bioethanol and animal feed from starch crops (de Jong,
Langeveld & van Ree, s.a.).
4.2.
The Concept of the Green Biorefinery
The name green biorefinery originates from the feedstock, which is grass-, clover- or
lucerne silage. The idea for green biorefineries in Austria is based on two insights.
On the one hand the demand for green biomass as fodder for dairy- and beef cattle
is decreasing, but on the other hand grassland is regarded to be an important
element of Austria’s typical cultural landscape, which should be preserved. Thus,
biorefineries are seen as the perfect option to utilize this green biomass in an efficient
way and provide an economic basis for the farmers, which cultivate these grassland
areas. However, grass and other green biomass have also disadvantages: it is quite
expensive feedstock compared to other biomass resources; it is difficult to provide at
a constant quality; and it has only a low transport density – making larger plants that
require long transport routes inefficient (Naradoslawsky, 2003). An advantage is the
vast variety of substances, which enable the production of a wide range of products.
The main fractions, which are used, are fibres, proteins and sugars.
Within the project “factory of tomorrow”, a lot of research has been done to push
forward the realization of Austria’s first demonstration plant in Utzenaich in Upper
Austria, which started its operations in 2009. According to the IEA classification the
green Biorefinery in Utzenaich is described as “biogas and organic solution
biorefinery for organic acids, fertilizer, biomaterials, biomethane and electricity and
heat from grasses” (de Jong, Langeveld & van Ree, s.a.). The aim of the
demonstration plant is to show that the technology is ready for the implementation on
an industrial scale.
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
4.3.
25
The Chemical Conversion Process in the Green Biorefinery
As grass cannot be harvested the whole year, it has to be stored without losing the
essential fractions. Silaging has proven to be an optimal way to store the grass until it
can be processed in the green biorefinery. Basically, silaging is a commonly used
method in agriculture to conserve fodder; but it can be further optimized to gain
higher lactic acid yields if the grass silage is used as resource for biorefineries
(Novalin et al., 2005).
The first step is to mechanically separate grass silage into press juice and press
cake. The solid fraction can be used directly as animal feed or as substrate in a
biogas plant. For further processing to obtain other fibre products such as insulation
material, fibre boards or pulp and paper, the press cake has to be dried. However,
this quite energy intensive and costly process makes it difficult to compete with other
products based on wood or other fibres as flax or hemp (Mandl et al., 2006).
The second branch after the first mechanical separation is the press juice, which
contains various valuable fractions, e.g. different amino acids and lactic acid.
Different relatively new separation technologies as nanofiltration, electric dialysis and
chromatography are used to filter out the desired fractions. Products that meet
different quality standards are obtained by applying and combining the diverse
processes. These fractions form the basis for a wide range of products in food,
cosmetic and chemical industry.
5. Socioeconomic Impacts of Biomass Use
Biomass projects are generally said to have numerous positive economic effects for a
region. The basic idea is to minimise the monetary flow leaving the region for energy
imports in the form of fossil fuels by using regional bioenergy resources instead.
Hoffmann (2009) mentioned the following possible benefits: a lower dependency on
fluctuating fossil fuel prices, creation of new employment in the region, higher tax
income and a reduction of energy costs. Lower energy costs increase the purchasing
power of the consumers and thus result in a higher regional GDP as long as the
additional income is spent for consumer goods, produced in the region. The more
often the money is reinvested in the region by purchasing local goods and services,
the higher the positive GDP and employment effects.
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
26
The impact of a particular biomass project will depend on different regional factors
such as the level and nature of capital investment; the availability of local goods and
services; the time scale of both the construction and operation of the plant; and
policy-related factors like capital grants and subsidies (Krajnc & Domac, 2007).
In many countries, socio economic benefits have become the driving force to
increase the share of biomass. However, the cost competitiveness of bioenergy
depends on fossil fuel prices and the development of prices for biomass
technologies. As long as energy from biomass is more expensive than energy from
fossil fuels, policy measures are necessary to enable the positive socio economic
effects. One way is to make the fossil fuel based reference technologies more
expansive, i.e. by introducing a CO2-tax; or the other way is to boost biomass
technologies via investment subsidies or guaranteed feed-in tariffs.
Pichl et al. (1999) compared the positive employment effects, GDP changes and the
required subsidies of different biomass technologies. Single household or small
district heating systems based on forest biomass showed the best employment
effects and moderately positive or negative effects on the GDP. Electricity production
in large scale combined heat and power plants based on biomass showed even
negative effects, as high subsidies are necessary.
Steininger et al. (2008) evaluated the effects of different biomass technologies on the
regional value added in East Styria using a three region (East Styria, Styria, Rest of
the World) computable general equilibrium (CGE) model. This way also spill over
effects of biomass projects realized in East Styria to the other regions can be
illustrated. Furthermore, an expansion of 2,000 TJ, which corresponds to about 20 %
of the regional heat demand, for different heating technologies was assumed to
analyze their macroeconomic effects. Thereby, the following factors were identified to
influence the socioeconomic effects of biomass projects: substitution of fossil fuels,
cost differences, investments and land competition.
The substitution of fossil fuels is a common advantage of all biomass technologies
and results in positive regional GDP effects of all considered biomass technologies,
as less money is leaving the region for energy imports.
The cost difference between energy services provided by biomass technologies and
the reference fossil fuel technology is a key factor for the changes in the regional
GDP. If the biomass technology can offer the same energy service at lower prices,
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
27
the consumers’ expenditures decrease and thus they have more income available for
other goods and services. As long as regional products are purchased, the effects on
the regional GDP are positive.
Another factor is that investments in regional biomass projects also initiate a higher
demand for products and services of other sectors. The study has shown that the
construction-, metal- and engineering sector benefit most from these investments.
Investments in district heating systems have shown the highest employment effects,
as the construction of district heating grids very labour intensive.
The cultivation of agricultural bioenergy crops encourages the competition for
agricultural land. Agricultural land area is limited and even predicted to decline due
to land sealing and land erosion in the next decades. Thus, the additional utilization
of agricultural biomass resources results in higher land prices. The employment
effect of the increased agricultural biomass depends on the labour intensity of the
energy crop compared to reference crops. Monocultures, short rotation coppice and
perennial crops show the worst regional employment effects; while forest based
products as log wood, wood chips or pellets show consistently positive effects.
A comparison of 15 and 50 kWh heating systems has revealed two opposite effects.
On the one hand larger systems are more cost efficient, since consumers can spend
a higher share of their income for other goods; on the other hand smaller systems
show more positive effects on regional employment.
6. Future Challenges and Recommended Course of Actions
The main challenge for the future is to integrate and coordinate the goals of different
projects such as promoting the regional economy, ensuring adequate farmer
livelihoods, energy autarky and climate change mitigation and adaptation. To tap the
full innovative potential of the region, it is necessary to strengthen the cooperation of
different regional stakeholders. To assure the position of East Styria as a leading
region for renewable energy and energy efficiency, a wide range of measures can be
recommended. However, their implementation requires adjustment within the whole
region and with already existing initiatives within other projects such as the “Energy
Region East Styria”.
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria

28
In order to reduce the dependency on fossil fuels and increase the regions
energy autarky it is crucial to take measures for efficient biomass utilization.
This includes promoting the wider use of combined heat and power, and also
new concepts such as biorefineries, which can provide a wide range of
products. This approach has already been proposed by the project KOMEOS
(Krotscheck, 2008) as “multi-functional energy centres”. This could be
achieved by using synergies of different bioenergy production systems, such
as electricity generation and transport fuel production.

In addition, changes in agriculture are necessary to support regional energy
autarky. Today’s agricultural systems became too dependent on fossil fuel
inputs in the form of fertilizers, pesticides etc. Hence, farmers are vulnerable to
increasing fossil fuel prices. New cropping systems such as mixed cropping,
double cropping or agroforestry can contribute to reduce fossil inputs and soil
erosion. Moreover, appropriate site adopted cropping systems contribute to
the soil organic carbon build-up, thus ensure long-term soil fertility and show
better greenhouse gas balances. WBGU (2009) emphasized that perennial
crops such as miscanthus or switchgrass and short rotation forests show
better results according to these criteria than annual energy crops such as
maize, cereals or rapeseed.

Analysis of the biomass potentials in East Styria reveal a considerable forest
biomass potential for the future, given that only 54% of the annual timber
growth is currently utilized This means that additional resources are available
to satisfy growing demands. However, the main problem is the mobilisation of
small forest owners to use their forests. Forest associations, which assist
forest owners in managing their forests and in marketing, can contribute to
increase the annual wood harvest.

Oil and wood are the two most important energy carriers in the region for
heating - satisfying 44 % and 37 % of the heating demand respectively.
Therefore, replacing oil furnaces and better building insulation are important
steps to reduce the dependency of households on fossil fuels. Better building
insulation and changing old wood furnaces with currently low efficiencies are
crucial to reduce the energy demand for heating.
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria

29
In the long-term, the importance of wood for heating will decrease due to
better insulation standards of buildings. However, wood will play an important
role for achieving a low-carbon economy. Especially in the construction sector,
wood provides in many cases a perfect substitute for extremely energy (and
carbon) intensive products such as cement, steel, aluminium or plastic. In this
way, the CO2 captured in the wood can be stored for many decades.

Wood plastic composites are another example for innovative wood products,
which can create a higher value added for forestry. They are produced out of
wood and polymers and due to their unique features, more and more markets
develop for these products. So far, they are primarily used in the car and
furniture industry.

For the transport sector it will be necessary to develop completely new
concepts. A sustainable transport system cannot be reached by simply
replacing fossil fuels by biofuels. Electromobility represents a chance to
drastically increase the efficiency in the transport sector. This raises the
importance of renewable electricity. Furthermore, and especially to reach the
long-term objectives in greenhouse gas mitigation, changes in regional
planning are necessary to create residential structures, which help to reduce
the mobility demand and enable effective public transport systems.
Generally, measures should be preferred, which enable potentials in more than
just one sector – e.g. increasing the annual wood harvest and thus providing
potential resources for multiple uses. Furthermore, an approach including all
existing regional strength should be favoured, as focusing on only one pathway
poses the risk to lose strength in other sectors.
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
30
7. References
AMA - Agrar Markt Austria(2010): Energiepflanzen / Nachwachsende Rohstoffe von
stillgelegten Flächen.
http://www.ama.at/Portal.Node/ama/public?gentics.am=PCP&p.contentid=1000
7.21505
ASP – Bayrisches Amt für forstliche Saat- und Pflanzenzucht (2008): Merkblatt:
Energiewald
-
Anbau
schnellwachsender
Baumarten
im
Kurzumtrieb.
http://www.forst.bayern.de/asp/energiewald/28226/linkurl_2.pdf.
Beigl, B., Grabner-Trieb, R. & Gruber, K. (2009): Hauptergebnisse der Regionalen
Gesamtrechnungen 2006. Statistische Nachrichten 5/2009, Statistik Austria, p.
412.
BFW - Bundesforschungs- und Ausbildungszentrum für Wald, Naturgefahren und
Landschaft (2002): Ergebnisse der Österreichischen Waldinventur 2000 – 2002.
http://web.bfw.ac.at/i7/Oewi.oewi0002?geo=6&isopen=0&display_page=0
BMLFUW - Bundesministerium für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und
Wasserwirtschaft (2009): Erneuerbare Energie 2020 - Potenziale und
Verwendung in Österreich.
http://www.energiestrategie.at/images/stories/pdf/02_bmlfuw_09_erneuerbare20
20.pdf
BMWFJ – Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft, Familie und Jugend & BMLFUW Bundesministerium für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft
(2009):
Eckpunkte
für
eine
Energiestrategie
Österreich.
http://www.energiestrategie.at/images/stories/eckpunkte_energiestrategie.pdf
Boyle, G. (2004) Renewable Energy: Power for a Sustainable Future, 2nd Edition.
Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Brainbows (2007): Biomasse-Ressourcenpotenzial in Österreich – Studie im Auftrag
der RENERGIE Raiffeisen Managementgesellschaft für erneuerbare Energie
GmbH. Wien.
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
31
de Jong, E., Langeveld, H. & van Ree, R. (eds) (s.a.): IEA Bioenergy Task 42
Biorefinery.
http://www.biorefinery.nl/fileadmin/biorefinery/docs/Brochure_Totaal_definitief_H
R_opt.pdf
EEA – European Environment Agency (2006): How much bioenergy can Europe
produce without harming the environment? Report No 7/2006. Copenhagen.
Energieregion Oststeiermark (2009): Stärkefelder der Energieregion Oststeiermark
http://www.energieregionoststeiermark.at/index.php?option=com_content&task=
section&id=6&Itemid=47
Euractiv (2008): Biofuel-makers denounce target downgrade. Available at:
http://www.euractiv.com/en/transport/biofuel-makers-denounce-targetdowngrade/article-175298
EU-Regionalmanagement
Oststeiermark
(2009):
Energieregion
Oststeiermark.
www.regionalmanagement.at
EU-Regionalmanagement Oststeiermark (1999): Zukunftsvertrag Oststeiermark.
http://www.ags7.at/dl/Zukunftsvertrag%20Oststeiermark.pdf
FAO – Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (2008): Current
world fertilizer trends and outlook to 2011/12.
ftp://ftp.fao.org/agl/agll/docs/cwfto11.pdf
FNR – Fachagentur
Nachwachsende Rohstoffe (2009):
Anbausysteme für
Energiepflanzen.
http://www.energiepflanzen.info/pflanzen/anbausysteme.html
Haas, R. & Kranzl, L. (2008): Strategien zur optimalen Erschließung der
Biomassepotenziale in Österreich bis zum Jahr 2050 mit dem Ziel einer
maximalen Reduktion an Treibhausgasemissionen: ein Projektbericht im
Rahmen
der
Programmlinie
„Energiesysteme
der
Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Innovation u. Technologie.
Zukunft.
Wien.
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
32
Hallock, J. L., Pradeep J. Tharakan, P.J., Charles A.S. Hall, C.A.S., Jefferson, M. &
Wua, W. (2004): Forecasting the limits to the availability and diversity of global
conventional oil supply. Energy. vol. 29 p. 1673–1696
Hoffmann, D. (2009): Creation of regional added value by regional bioenergy
resources. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 13, pp. 24192429.
IES – Institute for Environment and Sustainability - Land Management and Natural
Hazards Unit (2009): Soil Sealing.
http://eusoils.jrc.ec.europa.eu/library/themes/Sealing/
Kantor, S. (1999): Comparing Yields with Land Equivalent Ratio (LER) – Agricultural
and Natural Resource Fact Sheets #532.
http://king.wsu.edu/foodandfarms/documents/LER.pdf
Karl-Franzens-Universität
Graz
(2006):
Biomasse
Berichte
aus
den
Umweltsystemwissenschaften 2006/08.
http://www.uni-graz.at/usw1www_biomasse6_endbericht.pdf
Krajnc, N. & Domac, J. (2007): How to model different socio-economic and
environmental effects of biomass utilisation: Case study in selected regions in
Slovenia and Croatia. Energy Policy, vol. 35, pp. 6010-6020.
Krotscheck, C. (2008): Mehrstoffzentren – Folgerungen aus KOMEOS.
http://www.regionalmanagement.at/filebase/Energieregion%20Oststeiermark/ve
ranstaltungen/Komeos_Endpraesentation_29012008_Natan.pdf
Land Steiermark (2009): Holzeinschlagsmeldung.
http://www.agrar.steiermark.at/cms/beitrag/10432223/13081683/
Mandl, M., Graf, N., Thaller, A., Böchzelt, H., Schnitzer, H., Steinwender, M.,
Wachlhofer, R., Fink, R., Kromus, S., Ringhofer, J., Leitner, E., Zentek, J.,
Novalin, S., Mihalyi, B., Marini, I., Neureiter, M. & Narodoslawsky, M. (2006):
Grüne Bioraffinerie – Aufbereitung und Verwertung der Grasfaserfraktion Berichte aus Energie- und Umweltforschung. Bundesministerium für Verkehr,
Innovation und Technologie. Wien.
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
33
Meinshausen, M., Meinshausen, N., Hare, W., Raper, S. C. C., Frieler, K., Knutti, R.,
Frame, D. J. & Allen, M. R. (2009): Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting
global warming to 2° C. Nature, vol. 458, pp. 1158-1162.
Metz, B., Davidson, O. R., Bosch, P. R., Dave, R. & Meyer, L. A. (eds) (2007): IPCC
Climate Change 2007 – Mitigation. Cambridge University Press.
Naradowlawsky, M. (2003): Alternative Grünlandnutzung- Stoffliche Verwertung
grüner
Biomasse
in
der
„Grünen
Bioraffinerie“.
9.
Alpenländisches
Expertenforum, Bundesanstalt für alpenländische Landwirtschaft Gumpenstein.
Novalin, S., Lorenz, W., Kromus, S., Mandl, M. & Krotscheck, C. (2005): Grüne
Bioraffinerie - Entwicklung von Schlüssel-Trenntechnologien zur Gewinnung von
Milchsäure und anderen Wertsubstanzen aus Silagesäften Projektleiter.
Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Innovation und Technologie. Wien.
Pichl, C., Wilfried P., Obernberger, I. u.a. (1999), Erneuerbare Energieträger in
Österreichs Wirtschaft, Volkswirtschaftliche Evaluierung am Beispiel der
Biomasse. Studie des Österreichischen Instituts für Wirtschaftsforschung im
Auftrag der Wirtschaftskammer Österreich, WIFO, Wien.
Reichhard, T. (2005): Biogasanlagen in der Steiermark – eine Bestandsaufnahme
per Juli 2005. Amt der Steiermärkischen Landesregierung - FA19D Abfall- und
Stoffflusswirtschaft, Graz.
http://www.abfallwirtschaft.steiermark.at/cms/dokumente/10212870_4334719/a8
aebd7f/Gesamtwerk_Biogasanlage_in_der_Steiermark_Internetversion.pdf
Rosillo-Calle, F., de Groot, P., Hemstock, S.L. & Woods, J. (2007): The Biomass
Assessment Handbook - Bioenergy for a Sustainable Environment. Earthscan,
London.
Statistik Austria (2009): Gesamtenergiebilanz 1970 bis 2007 (Detailinformation).
http://www.statistik.at/web_de/static/gesamtenergiebilanz_1970_bis_2007_detai
linformation_029955.xls
Steininger, K., Kettner, C., Kufleitner, A., Loibnegger, T., Pack, A., Schleicher, S.
Töglhofer, C. & Trink, T. (2008): Volkswirtschaftliche Effekte einer erweiterten
Assessment of the Regional Biomass Potential for the Region East Styria
34
Biomasse-Energie-Nutzung in der Energieregion Oststeiermark.
http://www.uni-graz.at/igam7www_wcv-wissber-nr21-ksteiningeretal-jun2008.pdf
Stubenschrott, E. (2009): Regionale Wertschöpfung in der Oststeiermark durch
europäische Kleinfeuerung – Technologieführerschaft und Kurzumtrieb. 2nd
International Rubires Conference. 24.11.2009 – Miesenbach, Austria.
Tsoskounoglou, M., Ayerides, G. & Tritopoulou, E. (2008): The end of cheap oil:
Current status and prospects. Energy Policy. vol. 36 p. 3797– 3806
Vetter, A., Heiermann, M. & Toewe, T. (eds.) (2009): Anbausysteme für
Energiepflanzen – optimierte Fruchtfolgen + effiziente Lösungen. DLG-VerlagsGmbH, Frankfurt am Main.
WBGU
–
Wissenschaftlicher
Beirat
der
Bundesregierung
Globale
Umweltveränderungen. (2009): Welt im Wandel – Zukunftsfähige Bioenergie
und nachhaltige Landnutzung. WBGU, Berlin.
WDR - World Development Report 2008: Agriculture for Development.
http://econ.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/EXTRESEARCH/EXT
WDRS/EXTWDR2008/0,,contentMDK:21410054~menuPK:3149676~pagePK:6
4167689~piPK:64167673~theSitePK:2795143,00.html
Zwettler, S. (2006): Konzepte zur Mobilisierung des Rohstoffpotenzials der
Forstwirtschaft.
http://www.biomasseverband.at/static/mediendatenbank/root01/3.%20Veranstalt
ungen/3.2%20Tagung/Biomassetag%202006/Vortraege/06%20Zwettler.pdf

Download Report