Strengthening the Link: Sustainable Biomass & Forest Certification

PEFC Stakeholder Dialogue

Vienna, Austria 14th November 2012

In Case of an Emergency...
Exit locations: Please note where the emergency exits are before theres an emergency
In case of evacuation: Gather outside the front entrance

William Street, PEFC Chairman Sarah Price, PEFC International

WELCOME REMARKS

Framing the Debate on Forests & Biomass:

Sustainability as a key requirement

Uwe R. Fritsche
Scientific Director, IINAS International Institute for Sustainability Analysis and Strategy

presented at the PEFC Conference Strengthening the Link: Sustainable Biomass & Forest Certification Vienna Nov. 14, 2012
research sponsored by

Consider all Biomass Flows

research sponsored by

Project Context
Sustainability criteria for RED-plus (IEE)

www.biomassfutures.eu
Sustainability criteria for non-food feedstocks (FP7)

www.crops2industry.eu
Global Assessments and Guidelines for Sustainable Liquid Biofuel Production in Developing Countries (FAO/UNEP/UNIDO) Joint Workshop series focusing on extending the RED to forest bioenergy www.iinas.org/Work/Projects/REDEX/redex.html

Indicators for Sustainable Bioenergy

Resource-Efficient Bioenergy in EU27 (EEA report forthcoming)
research sponsored by

Sustainable Forests
Discussed already quite long

1992 Rio Summit, then Montreal Process, founding of FSC and PEFC really started much earlier (1713 Carl von Carlowitz)

2000s: UN Forum on Forest, Collaborative Partnership on Forests Europe: MCPFE (more in 2013?)

but all voluntary, and not for bioenergy

research sponsored by

Sustainable Forest Bioenergy

Key Issues
resource efficiency: make the most from limited resource GHG emissions: > 60% reduction, but: consider carbon neutrality / C debt biodiversity: high-biodiverse areas and sustainable forest management water and soil quality impacts Employment, land tenure/livelihoods, rural income

Coherence for all forest products (bioenergy, biomaterials, fibre) needed

research sponsored by

A European Debate

research sponsored by

No go areas
Indicator Threshold

Highly biodiverse or HCVF (only for management) High risk of natural hazards, salvage logging Primary Forests

Compliance OK No

Ecosystems that should be protected High biodiverse forests: Forests and other wooded land that are species-rich or harbor rare, threatened or endangered ecosystems or species recognized by international agreements or included in national lists or lists drawn up by intergovernmental organizations or the IUCN

research sponsored by

Sustainable extraction rates, deadwood

Indicator Threshold

Stumps and roots left in forests. Only selected extraction allowed and complete stump removal is avoided.
Live cavity trees, den trees, other live decaying trees and snags left in the forest and protected Extraction restricted to soils without nutrient depletion risks. Protection or enhancement of SOC

Compliance, further threshold defined at national/local level

Compliance, further threshold defined at national/local level zoning(or 1/3 residues left) Mainten/enhance value

Map of soils risks (zoning): Considered in some countries (i.e.UK, some US States) Parameters: i.e. UK addresses ground damage, soil fertility and soil acidity Traffic light system with: green/yellow/red areas When map not available: 1/3 of residues should be left
research sponsored by

Key Criteria & Indicators

Resource efficiency: land (>100 GJ/ha), residues (> 60%) GHG: consider C debt (< 20 years payback) biodiversity: more than no go areas restrict forest residue extraction soil: maps of nutrient depletion risk (go) water: buffer zones, restrict chemicals social: land tenure and livelihoods

research sponsored by

Long-term: Cascading!
Biomass crops Material Use

Residues/wastes

Energy Use

research sponsored by

Way Ahead?

EC report on sustainability of solid bioenergy, possibly proposal on extension of RED (early 2013) GBEP Activity Group on solid bioenergy (decision Nov 16 in Rome?) Outcome of MCPFE (mid-2013) FSC, PEFC et al.: get ready!

research sponsored by

Project information & contact

Contact: uf@iinas.org
research sponsored by

15

Exploring Expectations & Requirements Renewable Energy & Sustainable Forests

Chair: Uwe Fritsche, IINAS

SESSION 1

Session 1: Exploring Expectations & Requirements Renewable Energy & Sustainable Forests

Dominique Reeb; United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Danielle de Nie; Natuur & Milieu Giulio Volpi; European Commission Caroline Season; Department of Energy & Climate Change, UK Government Heinz Kopetz; World Biomass Association

Strengthening the Link: Sustainable Biomass and Forest Certification

Status and Trends for

Wood Energy in the ECE region
14 November 2012 PEFC Vienna, Austria

Dominique Reeb, UNECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Outline

Current status: Joint Wood Energy Enquiry Trends: Pellets Markets Outlook: European Forest Sector Outlook

Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Joint Wood Energy Enquiry

Biennial questionnaire JWEE 2009 is the third of its kind (after 2005 and 2007) Aim: showing the real role of wood energy within the ECE region Promotes cross-sectoral communication and cooperation between the energy and forestry sector

Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

2009 Replies

Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Woody Biomass Sources

S1: Direct Logging residues, thinnings, clearings short rotation coppice, etc. S2: Indirect Residues, enhanced/ densified processed wood based fuels (pellets, charcoal, biofuels), etc. S3: Recovered Post consumer recovered wood products (often contaminated), construction demolition, waste, etc. S4: Unspecified Unspecified material where it is unclear what kind of material is used

Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Wood energy sources

Unspecified <1%

Recovered 3%

Direct 39%

Indirect 58%

Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Wood Energy Uses

U1: Power and Heat Transformation of woody biomass for commercial power and heat production - "Main activity producer" (IEA) U2: Industry internal use: Heat and energy generated for internal use by the forest based industries (sawmills, pulp, panel) for processing and drying U3: Residential Wood energy generated by private households

U4: Other Wood energy generated by public and private services; agriculture, forestry and fishery

Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Wood energy uses

Other 3% Residential 39% Power and Heat 20%

Industrial 38%
Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Role of wood energy in Total Primary Energy Supply

Share of woody biomass in TPES, 2009
JWEE Total
Sweden Finland Estonia Austria Serbia Lithuania Liechtenstein Czech Republic Slovenia France Italy Germany Switzerland Norway Slovak Republic Russian Federation United States Belgium Ireland Cyprus United Kingdom

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Role of wood energy among RES

Share of woody biomass in RES, 2009
JWEE Total Serbia Estonia Czech Republic Russian Federation Lithuania Finland Liechtenstein Sweden France Austria United States Slovenia Slovak Republic Germany Italy Belgium Ireland Switzerland United Kingdom Cyprus Norway

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Trends
Between 2005 and 2009 the amount of wood used for energy purposes grew annually by 2.7%.

Wood energy now accounts for 3% of the total primary energy supply (TPES) and 47% of the renewable energy supply (RES)
One of the biggest movers is the UK: share in TPES from 0.15% in 2005 to 0.52% in 2009; share in RES from 8.2% in 2005 to 16.3% in 2009. Role of wood in TPES supply grew, whereas it slightly declined among renewables. Other renewables at faster rates of increase. The structure of sources for wood energy has been relatively stable. A growing trend to use wood for power and heat combined with a slight decrease in the proportion of wood energy use in the residential sector. BUT Wood energy use by private households is often higher than anticipated as it may not be fully accounted for.

Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Pellet markets in Europe

Source: Sikkema et al., 2011

Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Pellets-Facts
Projection for future growth of European pellet markets
90 80 70

Poyry

RWE (Europe)

Million tons

60 50 40

Mitsubishi

AEBIOM
30 20 10 0

Rotterdam Port

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Enviva Expectation

Source: Sikkema et al., 2011

Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

European Forest Sector Outlook Study II EFSOS 2010-2030 Reference Scenario

What if we continue business as usual?

Maximizing Biomass Carbon

How much carbon could be stored?

Priority to Biodiversity
What if we focus on preserving and enhancing biodiversity?

Fostering innovation & competitiveness

What would a successful innovation strategy lead to?

Promoting Wood Energy

How to achieve the renewable energy targets?
Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Maximising Biomass Carbon Longer rotations and increased thinning share No reduction in supply Total increment increases by 14.6% Total growing stock volume is 7.8% higher (209.5 m3/ha) Average C sink is 0.67 tonnes C/ha/yr, +64% Somewhere after 2030, maximum sequestration capacity will be reached as increment decreases for older stands
Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Priority to Biodiversity

Dedicated management on 5% of current FAWS

Longer rotations on remaining 95%, no extraction of residues Wood supply decreases by 12% compared to reference scenario The growing stock shows considerably higher increase A shift from younger to older age-classes is projected Carbon stock shows a significantly positive trend Amount of downed deadwood will grow
Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Wood Energy Outlook Assumptions: Economic and population growth same as in Reference scenario. Meeting the EU 2020 renewable energy targets, and that trend continues to 2030. Other renewables grow faster, so that the share of wood in RES falls from current 50 to 40% by 2030. Not considered - the possible consequences of the Fukushima accident on energy policy, and oil price fluctuations.

Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Growing Share of Energy Use

Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Intensified Mobilisation

Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Carbon Stocks and Flows

Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Consequences
Higher price (+0.6% than ref) for wood and income for forest owners and wood sellers The strong increase in harvest residues and stump extraction (170 million m3 more than in reference scenario 2030) seems to pose an significant risk to the ecological balance of the forest.

Alternative strategies: Increased imports may be part of the solution, although competition sustainability must be evaluated. Short rotation coppice may also partly cover demand but at trade-off with other land uses. Depending on productivity, between 6 and 17 million ha of land would be necessary to supply 170 million m3. This is roughly equivalent to an area covering 3 to 9 % of utilized agricultural land of EU27. However, establishing SRC might imply trade-offs with other land uses and, depending on site selection, with landscape and biodiversity. We could therefore face significant environmental, financial and institutional costs. Another option would be that of actively managing protected forest areas. Managing 60% of protected forest areas at 60% harvest levels could yield up to 58 million m3 of stemwood from forests not designated for wood production.
Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Conclusion

Wood energy scenario: European forest sector in a radically new situation Emerging scarcity of wood Energy supply becomes the main objective Pressure on other wood supplies Heavy investments, more profitability, improved technology, changing power balance Need for open and comprehensive dialogue between stakeholders
Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

Contact us!
Dominique Reeb Deputy Chief email: dominique.reeb@unece.org tel: +41(0)22 917 14 39

UNECE/FAO Forestry & Timber Section Palais des Nations CH-1211 Genve www.unece.org/timber

Thank you for your attention!

Dominique Reeb, ECE/FAO Forestry and Timber Section

NGO perspective on woody biomass

Danielle de Nie Natuur en Milieu PEFC Stakeholder meeting 14 november 2012 Vienna

About Natuur & Milieu

Dutch NGO with European outreach (EEB, T&E)

Climate, energy, transport and food

Partners in developing sustainable solutions. constructive but reality-based.

Outline
1. 2. 3. 4. Parallels to the biofuel discussion - iLUC NGO perspective on woody biomass the concerns Carbon debt Relevance for forestry certification

Parallels in discussion biofuels and bio-energy.

2007: Biofuels could be part of a sustainable solution to climate change, by reducing emissions from road transport, especially when combined with more energy efficient transport. 2010:

Parallels in discussion biofuels and bio-energy.

1. Situation with no biofuel mandate
- Sustainability criteria exclude some areas

2. Displacement of land used to meet demands of food, feed or fibre

- Demand for other needs = equal or growing

3. Expansion of the agriculture over natural land

Figures: Ecofys

Parallels in discussion biofuels and bio-energy.

Lesson learned from biofuels:
-(Product) certification does not address all sustainability concerns
iLUC Substitution of wastes and residues (straw) Nutrient cycles Traceability

-These are complex mechanisms but complexity does not mean it can be ignored!

Parallels in discussion biofuels and bio-energy.

Why is this relevant for bio-energy:
-SRC (willow) and plantations have iLUC effects as well - iLUC discussion has moved interest to agricultural and forestry waste and residues - intensified use of additional forestry residues holds sustainability risks - intensified pre-harvest thinning and cleaning may have adverse effects

Parallels in discussion biofuels and bio-energy.

Issue recognition
(iLUC)

International (EU) response

(ilUC proposal)

Mitigation
ongoing

National response
(cap on food crops; subsidies; double counting)

Impact on industry
innovative solutions; change of business of usual

Parallels in discussion biofuels and bio-energy.

NGO perspective on woody biomass the concerns

ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
HOW will the increased demand for bio-energy be met?
industrial wood residues are drying up whole-tree harvesting and use of primary forests increased use of forests and forestry residues, stump extraction risks of overharvesting biodiversity impacts energy plantations (willow, Miscanthus) and iLUC soil carbon and nutrient depletion (ground) water impacts

NGO perspective on woody biomass the concerns

NGO perspective on woody biomass the concerns

NGO perspective on woody biomass the concerns

Carbon debt

NGO perspective on woody biomass the concerns

Forestry certification schemes should

Include full life cycle GHG accounting including iLUC
Address GHG accounting for above and belowground C stocks for whole-tree harvesting as well as for litter/residue harvesting AND USE APPROPIATE SCALE IN TIME AND SPACE.

Promote the protection of biodiversity and high conservation values (also for litter / residue harvesting!) Prevent the risk of nutrient depletion and erosion or rapid soil deterioration

Policy makers should

Promote the use of biomass in non-energy use first Repair the flaws in international GHG accounting and account for full life-cycle GHG emissions of bioenergy. Monitor the deployment of forest biomass use

Bio-energy producers should

Make use of existing forestry schemes to guarantee sustainable exploitation of forest biomass (including forestry residues!)
Develop bio-energy initiatives with other sectors to make optimal use of a scarce resource!

Key messages
1. There is an enormous drive to deploy bio-energy and equal big challenges to meet this demand sustainably. 2. There is scope for bioenergy but preferably only at the end-oflife of a forest based product. 3. Complexity of issues like iLUC and carbon debt does NOT mean that these sustainability issues shouldnt be addressed.

Thank you for yor attention!!! Questions??

D.deNie@natuurenmilieu.nl

Parallels in discussion biofuels and bio-energy.

(IFPRI 2011)

NGO perspective on woody biomass the concerns

Bio-energy is not carbon neutral Emissions in production, processing, transport. approx. 4.5% of energy delivered
(Pimentel and Pimentel; 2008)

Direct and indirect Land Use Change Temporal and spatial emissions due to forest harvesting and regrowth

Risks in disruption of C cycles

EU policy on bioenergy sustainability

Giulio Volpi Renewable Energy and CCS Policy DG Energy, European Commission

EU 2020 climate and energy targets

100%

-20%

-20%

+20% 20%
8,5%
GHG emissions -20%

Energy consumption -20%

Renewables share +20%

EU Renewable Energy Directive (28/2009)

20-20-20 targets
Binding renewables targets for 2020 Flexibility in technology mix Bioenergy dominant technology in all sectors Sustainability of biofuels/bioenergy

EU renewable energy outlook by 2020

ktoe kep

Technology Results from the National Renewable Energy Action Plans Bioenergy = over 10% of EU total final energy consumption

250000

200000 Heat pumps Biomass 150000

Biomass

Wind Tide, wave, ocean

100000

Solar

Wind
50000

Geothermal

Solar
Hydro

Hydro

0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Bioenergy use outlook by 2020

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2010 H&C 2020 2010 2020 2010 Total 2020 Non RES Other RES Biomass in transport Biomass in electricity Biomass in H&C

Electricity

Sustainability criteria for biofuels/bioliquids

1. GHG performance criteria: biofuels need to save at least 35% compared to fossil fuels, up to 50% in 2017 (and 60% for new installations/2018) (ILUC proposal: 60%) Need of a consistent methodology, with minimal administrative burden (e.g. use of default values 2. Biodiversity/land criteria: biofuel feedstock cannot come from land: High biodiversity (primary forest etc.) With high carbon stock (peatland etc.) 3. Cross-compliance criteria need to be met by agriculture raw material produced in the EU

Sustainability of solid biomass and biogas

Gradual approach: 2010 EU recommendation to MS to follow more or less the biofuels criteria.

.
.

. . . .

Land and biodiversity criteria do not apply to waste

GHG accounting to include end-use conversion, use of default values Small bioenergy installations (below 1 MW) to be exempted from compliance Biomass origin and quality in small-scale uses (e.g. (households) to be monitored by MS

Review of approach effectiveness by end of 2011, considering new market and policy developments

Growing energy use of forestry biomass

Significant domestic biomass mobilization

120000

Biomass from Waste

100000

Biomass from Agricultural and Fishery Biomass from Forestry

80000

60000

40000

20000

0 2006 2015 2020

Growing biomass imports

Primary energy from biomass for H&C and electricity (Mtoe)
160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 2010 2020 imports primary energy EU biomass supply primary energy

Wood pellets going global (2011, ktons)

Multiple national sustainability regulations

Risk of multiple national regulations on biomass sustainability, creating barriers to biomass trade, distorting the biomass market Growing number of industry-led sustainability schemes (Initiative Wood Pellet Buyers, Vattenfal-Berlin agreement, EN plus, etc) Voluntary sustainable forest management certification (PEFC, FSC etc) have an increasing role to play

Environmental sustainability issues

Inefficient biomass production/use practices (e.g. suboptimal GHG performance) Loss of areas with high biodiversity value due to biomass harvesting Release of significant carbon emissions due to undesirable land use change (e.g. deforestation) Loss of carbon stocks/biodiversity impacts due to unsustainable forest management practices

. . .

Guiding principles for policy action

Take stock of existing experience: build on ongoing experience with biofuels criteria, with necessary adaptations for woody biomass Do not reinvent the wheel: Build on and rely as appropriate on national and international forest management initiatives (including EU Timber Regulation) Risk-based and pragmatic approach: Focus on highest risks, exempt small scale operators, requirement need to be objective, specific and manageable.

Key elements of possible EU approach

o Simplified GHG accounting methodology (2010 report), with updated and expanded list of default values
o Minimum GHG saving performance compared to fossil fuels, based on LCA

o Minimum biodiversity and land use change criteria, excluding raw material production from areas with high biodiversity and high carbon stocks
o Building on national and voluntary certification initiatives, requirement for forest management plan for woodfuel production to minimize impacts on biodiversity and carbon stocks over the medium- long term

Management plan requirements

o Document or any equivalent evidence that describes:
o Forest resources to be managed (ownership status, presence of protected areas) o Medium and long-term management objectives, the rationale for the average rate of annual harvest and species selection, projected stock changes and increments; o Rare, threatened and endangered species and describes protection measures. o Drafted and updated on a regular basis and in accordance with scientific evidence, verified by the competent national authority or by a third party certifier.

Implementation of EU criteria
Through Member States certification schemes

Through voluntary certification schemes recognized by the European Commission

Objective is to build on existing experience of public/private forest management initiatives/ certification schemes Transition period of two years from approval of EU proposal, time for market to adapt

Thank you!
Email: giulio.volpi@ec.europa.eu
http://ec.europa.eu/energy/index_en.htm

Biomass & Sustainability the UK perspective

Caroline Season
Senior Policy Adviser, Biomass Sustainability Department of Energy & Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London SW1 email: caroline.season@decc.gsi.gov.uk ; telephone: +44 (20) 7979 7777

Agenda
Overview of the UK & EU climate and energy policy UK context EU Renewable Energy Directive (2009) Achieving the UKs 15% target Benefits from biomass Importance of sustainability Proposed sustainability criteria for the Renewables Obligation (RO) and Renewable Heat Incentive RHI: GHG Emissions Saving Target Land Criteria/ Sustainable Forest Management Timescales

The UK situation
60 million people and growing 244K sq km under size of France 245 people per sq km 76% of land farming & 12% forest cover
1990 UK energy market privatised Dash for gas decarbonises the UK electricity supply to 430 kg CO2/MWh >80% use gas from UK grid for heating UK achieves large carbon reductions with a highly centralised energy supply but low renewables (under 2% of energy) Declining North Sea output means oil/gas imports are increasing Coal power stations are due to close by 2015 so energy security issues

EU Renewable Energy Directive (2009)

UK lead scenario for 15%

Biomass benefits
Can be lower cost than other renewable power sources, built on existing infrastructure and protect existing jobs Hugely versatile - can provide base or peak load electricity; or controllable heat generation; or to make transport fuels Biomass power is dispatchable can be turned off & on, up & down, to match supply with demand; natural partner to wind and other variable sources Biomass feedstocks can be sourced from a diverse range materials (both domestic and imports), and used in a wide range of centralised and decentralised technologies Greater diversity means greater security, particular when using domestic feedstocks including wastes Generates business/job opportunities across supply-chain But there are risks to be managed, choices to be made

UK Bioenergy Strategy (2012)

Sets an agreed framework for Government to help deliver the benefits from bioenergy and minimising risks Four principles for bioenergy policymakers: Genuine GHG savings compared to fossil use Cost effective in context of overall energy goals Maximise benefits and minimise costs across economy Monitor key impacts such as food security, biodiversity Four priority pathways for the use of biomass including Uses of wastes for heat, electricity and CHP Use of biomass to replace existing coal power Use of biomass for heating buildings & industry Development of advanced biofuels for transport

Why is sustainability key?

A source of biomass, such as a sustainably managed forest, can produce wood for construction, furniture and energy century after century after century To do this, the forest must regenerate naturally or by restocking growing new trees to replace those harvested This ensures both future supplies of biomass and allows for carbon to be sequestered in new growth We also need to ensure that real GHG savings are made; this means considering the lifecycle carbon emissions for bioenergy such as harvesting, pelleting and transport Imports have a role to play - as well as homegrown biomass - so to secure public support, we need a robust scheme in place to ensure sustainability wherever it was grown

B I O E N E R G Y

F O S S I L

Our sustainability approach

UK approach informed by the EU Renewable Energy Directive (RED) and the EU February 2010 report on the sustainability criteria for solid and gaseous biomass Three key elements GHG lifecycle assessment target to ensure genuine savings relative to fossil fuel use Land Criteria to protect land with high biodiversity and/or carbon sink value, ensuring good management practices General profiling data including biomass type, amount, format, country of origin, whether waste Annual sustainability reports to be provided to Ofgem

(i) GHG Emissions Target

Assessment methodology of the GHG emissions is as set out in the EU Renewable Energy Directive (RED) and the EU February 2010 report Includes emissions from cultivation, transport, processing and conversion efficiency at the plant Carbon calculator tool to help with assessment is available from the Ofgem website, can also use other equivalent tools Heat is to deliver a 60% saving (125kg CO2eq/MWhth)

Electricity is to be set on a trajectory starting at 60% saving for most biomass (285 kgCO2eq/MWh) new dedicated biomass starting at a 66% saving (240 kg)

Proposed trajectories
For New Dedicated Biomass Power inc. CHP (i.e. accredited after April 2013) propose 240 kg CO2eq/MWh (66% saving) from October 2013 to 2020, and 200 kg CO2eq/MWh (72% saving) from April 2020 to 2025 For Existing Dedicated Biomass inc. CHP propose to maintain at 285 kg CO2eq/MWh (60% saving) to 2020, and reduce to 200 kg CO2eq/MWh (72%) from April 2020-25 For all other Biomass Power including Full Conversions & Co-firing: propose to maintain at 285 kg CO2/MWh (60% saving) to 2020, and reduce to 240 kg CO2eq/MWh (66% saving) from April 2020-25

(ii) Land Criteria for Wood

For woodfuel we propose the land criteria will correspond to the UK public procurement policy for timber (covers central govt purchasing of wood products such as paper, furniture and wood-fuel) This approach requires documentary evidence that the wood is sourced from legal and sustainable sources Category A evidence FSC or PEFC (i.e. Draws on existing certification schemes for sustainability)

Category B evidence other acceptable evidence

See Govts centre of procurement expertise of timber http://www.cpet.org.uk/ for further information

Land Criteria for biomass other than wood

Other biomass would be required to meet the RED Land Criteria which consists of general restrictions on use of material from land with high biodiversity or high carbon stock value peatlands, wetlands, primary forests and protected areas Perennial energy crops planted to meet the Energy Crops Scheme for England (or equivalent) would be considered as meeting the land criteria

Wastes, animal manure and slurry, to be excluded from the scope of the Land Criteria and the GHG criteria

(iii) Profiling data

Proposed profiling information requirements: Biomass material e.g. wood Solid or gas;

Format e.g. pellet/chip

Mass/Volume; Country of origin and region

If Energy Crop, what the previous use of land was

If Virgin Wood, detail of quality and species If Waste, GHG and land criteria not required, but basic profiling info to be supplied.

Timescales
RHI Consultation for non-domestic heat installations Renewable Heat Incentive: providing certainty and improving performance closed 14th September Consultation on proposals to ensure sustainability and affordability for the use of biomass under the Renewables Obligation (RO) closes 30 November Renewable Heat Incentive: proposals for a domestic scheme consultation closes 7th December Intend to implement changes to the sustainability criteria for the RO and RHI for October 2013

Biomass & Sustainability the UK perspective

Caroline Season
Senior Policy Adviser, Biomass Sustainability Department of Energy & Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London SW1 email: caroline.season@decc.gsi.gov.uk ; telephone: +44 (20) 7979 7777

Renewable Energy@Sustainable forests

Dr. Heinz Kopetz Prsident des Weltbiomasseverbandes Wien, 14.November 2012 Tagung PEFC, Parkhotel Schnbrunn

Biomass and sustainability criteria

What lessons to learn from liquid biofuels?
biofuels from sugar, starch or vegetable oil are stopped! Advanced biofuels not available! fossil fuels will increase! The non sustainable systems are put forward!

Sustainable development

"Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the

present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

The central idea of this Brundtland Commission's definition of "sustainable development" is that of intergenerational equity.

Sustainability: old principle of European forestry This definition comprises well the definition of sustainability as used in the European forestry for centuries. It can be summarized briefly as following:
The annual wood harvest should be equal or smaller than the annual increment. Maintainance of the fertility of the soil and the ecosystem as a whole. What does this mean for the energy and climate policy?

Climate change: two cornerstones

Global warming: not more than 2 degree! Not more than 750 billion tons (Gt) C02 emissions between 2010 and 2050! This means an average of 19 Gt/year!

Official Sponsors:

Climate change: the situation

Actual emissions of C02:
Reduction starting 2020: then only Reduction starting 2035; then

31 Gt/a
14Gt/a 0 Gt/a

Main source of CO2 emissions -90%: combustion of fossil fuels! The later we start to reduce CO2-emissions the faster we have to do it or temperature will rise far above 2 degree !

Official Sponsors:

the transformation of the energy system until 2035

In compliance with the 2 target

600,0 500,0 other RES

Exajoule

400,0 300,0 200,0 100,0 0,0 2010 2035

biomass hydro nuclear fossil

The need for more biomass from forests The transformation of the energy system needs more biomass from forests What role for forests in the future climate and energy policy?

The sustainable managed forest Or the unmanaged forest as carbon storage

1 ha forest: three phases of development over time

(kumuliert grn, pro Zeiteinheit schwarz)

1 ha forest: increment over time

450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 1

Vorratsfestmeter

growth/dec growth cum

10

11

Jahrzehnte

The mature, unmanaged forest

Cannot help to build a sustainable energy system it does not produce biomass to replace fossil fuels! The transformation of managed forest to mature forests is unsustainable: - no absorption capacity for CO2 left for the next generation - fossil fuels instead are depleted - increase of CO2 in the atmosphere after reaching the mature phase - additional CO2 transfer from biomass to atmosphere if mature forests are transformed to productive forests. More mature forests: the unsustainableapproach! Postponing the problems to the next generation!

Beispiel 10ha Waldflche wird von Phase b in Phase c bergefhrt:

Bis zur Erreichung der Phase c nimmt Wald mehr C auf als l oder Gas emittieren!

The role of the sustainable managed forest

We need more sustainable managed forests! They have a clear function in efforts to achieve rapid reduction in the use of fossil fuels! National forest legislation and its implementation should warrant the sustainable forest management, at least in Europe

The need for a certification system

For big users of biomass from outside the EU certification systems are necessary to avoid the unsustainable use of forests in different parts of the world. This is no new discussion paper and pulp industry developed solutions PEFC is one of them. Why invent new systems if proven systems are available? Some question are open such as: plantation wood, wood from countries with deforestation or no certification so far. Therefore WBA started to develope a list of criteria and to test it.

To sum up
C. Systems should be simple and foster bioenergy and not hinder it First priority national legislation and its implementation Binding C. systems for the international supply should be simple, have the same criteria for CO2 reduction as for liquid fuels, no criteria on efficiency (also not existing for fossil fuels), no criteria on ILUC calculation ( a theory not well developed and reliable) and concentrating on the main criteria of sustainable forestry stabilzing or increasing the wood stock by sustainable forest management! Voluntary systems are important and can go further than legal systems! The PEFC method offers a valuable approach for this problem!

A few words on the World Bioenergy Association

WBA World Bioenergy Association

Together with our members
we work for an increased use of biomass in the global energy system in the markets for heat, electricity and biofuels We follow the principles of sustainable, efficient and economic biomass development We influence and inform the public opinion in favor of sustainable biomass solutions worldwide and in particular countries
Official Sponsors:

WBA: How we work?

Office in Stockholm, Sweden Our board: 22 members from 5 continents (Africa 4, Americas 6 , Asia 6, Australia 1, Europe 5) Our members: companies, associations, indiviudals from all over the world Main issues: biomass potential, sustainability of biomass, small scale heat with biomass, combined heat and power, future of biofuels, carbon neutrality of biomass, bioenergy statistics Main activities: fact sheets, projects, position papers, presentations in conferences and workshops, supporting biomass trade with the platform: bioenergy connect (BC)

Official Sponsors:

WBA member fees

Form of membership characteristics
Full members Associated members individuals Biomass associations

Fee in Euro
300 5000 1) 1)

Companies, agencies, 300 -5000 research institutions Interested persons 50

1) Depending on size, additional rules for sponsors!

We invite you: join WBA! for more: www.worlebioenergy.org

ANDRITZ
The Official supporter of World Bioenergy Association

Official Sponsors:

Biomass stored solar energy The energy fo the future!

Thank you for your attention!

Heinz Kopetz World Bioenergy Association www.worldbioenergy.org We invite you to join WBA!

Session 1: Exploring Expectations & Requirements Renewable Energy & Sustainable Forests

DISCUSSION

LUNCH
12:00 13:20

Delivering Sustainable Forest Biomass in the Market

Chair: Kees Boon, PEFC Netherlands

SESSION 2

Session 2: Panel Discussion Delivering Sustainable Forest Biomass in the Market

Yves Ryckmans; Laborelec

Peter-Paul Schouwenberg; Essent

Matti Ylanne; UPM Elizabeth Woodworth; Enviva Gordon Murray; Wood Pellet Association of Canada

Meeting Expectations & Safeguarding Forests

Chair: Tat Smith, University of Toronto

SESSION 3

Session 3: Meeting Expectations & Safeguarding Forests

Tat Smith, University of Toronto Ben Gunneberg, PEFC International Kathy Abusow, Sustainable Forestry Initiative Moritz Nill, Systain Consulting GmbH

HOW CERTIFICATION CAN HELP MEET SOCIETYS SUSTAINABILITY GOALS

Tat Smith, University of Toronto Inge Stupak, University of Copenhagen IEA Bioenergy Task 43 Biomass feedstocks for energy markets

122 122

Our responsibility & challenge:

Design low-impact systems
Identify risks to soils, water, biodiversity, GHG balances Identify practices to mitigate risks

Develop standards and C&I for SFM

Environmental incl. LCA Economic Social

Commit to certification of whole value chain

Graphics source:

Courtesy Tapio Ranta, VTT Processes 2002

123

OVERVIEW
Global trade of wood pellets Developments in sustainable bioenergy governance IEA Bioenergy study on improving the effectiveness of governance and certification systems to benefit sustainable bioenergy deployment Some things to consider

124

Wood pellet trade streams, 2010

Fig. 10. World wood pellet trade streams above 10 ktonnes in 2010 based on [28,38,42,44,47,48]. Source: Lamers et al. 2012

Multiple sustainability hurdles for USA exports to EU markets

Local BMPs Voluntary certification EU standards

Forestland in southeastern USA

FSC 1% ATFS SFI 6% 10%

Path 1 Path 2
Uncertified but verified to comply with BMPs where they exist

Certified SFM

Certified fibre sourcing EU markets

Non-certified 83%

Path 3

Path 4

Unverified compliance with BMPs where they exist No local BMPs or other

Path 5 ?

Adapted from: Kittler et al. 2012

126 126

Multiple sustainability claims & levels of governance for Canadian exports to EU markets
Managed Crown forestland in Canada
Non-certified forest: 31% of managed forest Provincial policies and guidelines Voluntary certification: CSA, FSC, SFI EU standards

Path 1 Path 2 2 Path

Certified forest: 69% of managed forest

Uncertified, but verified to comply with BMPs Certified SFM; fibre sourcing

EU markets

Graphics credit: Jessica Murray, University of Toronto. Adapted from: Kittler et al. 2012

127

POINTS FROM GLOBAL ANALYSIS OF CERTIFICATION SYSTEMS

Rapid global proliferation of certification systems Diverse approaches to standards Diverse approaches to assessments (audits and reporting) Potential for consumer confusion Potential impacts on trade Potential failure to achieve sustainability goals Need for harmonization

Source: van Dam et al. 2010

128

IEA BIOENERGY SURVEY

Survey to evaluate options for improving the effectiveness of governance and certification systems for sustainable bioenergy deployment. Determine the operational experiences of people involved with all aspects of bioenergy production systems, including:
biomass feedstock production, conversion to primary and secondary biofuel and bioenergy products, markets and trade, as well as certifying organizations.

Evaluate how these sectors are affected by governance mechanisms, including:

binding and voluntary standards, legislation, regulations and certification schemes.
http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/936779/IEA-certification http://www.bioenergytrade.org/ongoing-work/monitoring-sust-certification-of-bioenergy.html
129

CAPACITIES OF THE RESPONDENTS

Expert NGO Professional organization Bioenergy Association Regulator Administrator Standardization Auditor Certification body Certification scheme Financing Energy producer Trader / distributor Biomass processor / liquids Biomass processor/ solids Sub-contractor Forestry Agriculture 0 10 20 30

194 respondents in many (and multiple) capacities

40

50

60

70

80

90

100
130

Capacity counts

Q8

IMPORTANT INITIATIVES?
Legislation 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Montreal MCPFE ITTO ATO African Dry Zone Dry Forest Asia Tarapoto Near East Lepaterique
131

Standards

International conventions

International SFM processes

Number of respondents

EU RED RFS2 EU CAP LCFS BAEZ EU TR EU Natura 2000

very important

important

Note the importance of: EU RED, RFS2, ISO TC 248, UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol

UNFCCC Kyoto Protocol CBD ILO Ramsar CITES CCD ELC Cartagena

ISO TC248 CEN TC383 GBEP NTA8080

moderate

not important

THE ROLE OF CERTIFICATION?

Are the above initiatives (together) adequate?

Q9 Q12 Q15

I don't know

yes Voluntary initiatives or regulatory requirements? I don't know Voluntary initiatives Strict regulations

no

Is voluntary certification essential? I don't know A mix of both

no yes
132

Q18

IS NON-CERTIFIED LAND A PROBLEM?

80 Number of respondents 70

60
50 40

30
20 10 0 Yes Forestry No Agriculture I don't know

This question addresses the other 90% issue

ie. only approx. 10% of global forests are certified
133

Q19

EFFECTIVENESS OF ALTERNATIVES TO CERTIFCATION?

Other Non-certification systems Multilateral initiatives such as the GBEP Bilateral or multilateral agreements Stepwise certification Biomass sourcing programmes International criteria in national legislation Certification of entrepreneurs National verification Group certification

0 high moderate

20 low

40

60

80

100

120

Number of respondents

I don't know

Note that several approaches are considered effective

134

Q20 Q21

HARMONIZATION AND INTEGRATION?

12% Problem with redundancy? 81%

7%
Yes, there is an overlap/redundancy

No, they all have added value

I don't know

If yes, which problems.? Other Discrimination in raw material use Lack of transparency Trade barriers Lack of consistency Confusion abt sustainability definitions

0
I don't know

20

40 60 80 Number of respondents
Yes

100
135

No

Q22

HARMONIZATION AND INTEGRATION Solutions to redundancy?

Other International criteria in national legislation Use future ISO or CEN standards Reduce the number of schemes Introduce meta-standards Mutual recognition 0 High Medium 20 40 60 80 100 Number of respondents Minor
136

120

Q59

NEED TO DEVELOP ADDITIONAL TOOLS AND GUIDELINES FOR VERIFICAITON OF CRITERIA?

other Internal management systems Supply chain control systems Air quality Traceability Social aspects Competition for raw material Soil and water Energy balance Biodiversity GHG emission reductions Ecosystem carbon stocks 0 5 I don't know 10 15 20 Number of respondents No Yes 25 30

New tools for estimating GHG emissions & ecosystem carbon stocks are suggested 137

Increasing demand for Life Cycle Assessment of bioenergy systems Should this standard be added to forest certification schemes?

Bird et al. -- IEA Bioenergy:ExCo:2011:03

138

Response to Q9

WHAT IS LACKING?
Example comments from respondents (1)
National legislation & monitoring and political commitment versus Governments should not be involved
Criteria - more focus on food security, iLUC, landscape level, social aspects, trade-off between energy demand and environmental values versus, GHG consensus versus Stick to simple criteria -- we have enough in Europe and Northern America; focus on deforestation
139

Response to Q9

WHAT IS LACKING?
Example comments from respondents (2) Integration and harmonization
Adaptation of existing initiatives to bioenergy Local adaptation of international criteria Coordination between assessments (local, national, international levels) Fewer schemes

140

SOME THINGS TO CONSIDER

Forest management should be sustainable regardless of biomass end use Differing points of view along supply chain
Should forest landowners be held accountable for how their biomass is used? Consider also biomass processors, energy producers, consumers

Additional standards may be needed

Ecosystem carbon stocks, GHG balances Consider efficiencies of default values for specific systems

Mix of voluntary and mandatory schemes is suggested Consider harmonization

http://www.bioenergytrade.org/ongoing-work/monitoring-sust-certification-of-bioenergy.html
141

Thanks!

Questions?
tat.smith@utoronto.ca ism@life.ku.dk

142

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
IEA Bioenergy project colleagues
Task 43 Biomass feedstocks members:
Gran Berndes and Oskar Englund, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden Jamie Joudrey, University of Toronto

Task 40 Sustainable bioenergy markets & trade members:

Luc Pelkmans and Liesbet Goovaerts, VITO, Belgium Martin Junginger and Chun Sheng Goh, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands Lena Dahlman, Swedish Bioenergy Association, Stockholm Lukas Kranzl, Technical University of Vienna, Austria

Task 38 Climate change impacts members:

Neil Bird, Joanneum Research, Austria Annette Cowie, University of New England, Australia Alison Goss Eng, Department of Energy, USA Helena Chum, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, USA

IEA Bioenergy's vision is to achieve a substantial bioenergy contribution to future global energy demands by accelerating the production and use of environmentally sound, socially accepted and costcompetitive bioenergy on a sustainable basis, thus providing increased security of supply whilst reducing greenhouse gas emissions from energy use.

http://www.ieabioenergy.com/
144

Task 43 will address issues critical to mobilizing sustainable bioenergy supply chains, including biomass markets and the social, economic and environmental consequences of feedstock production and supply. The objective is to promote sound bioenergy development that is driven by well-informed decisions in business, governments and elsewhere.
http://www.ieabioenergytask43.org/
145

Field Trip Quebec

Science-policy interface on issues of the environmental sustainability of forest bioenergy : workshop and field visit
Research Station Fort Montmorency - Universit Laval
Quebec, Canada 3-5 October 2012.
146

Field Trip Quebec

Message to take home: a better understanding of how science can inform policy-making and support development of governance mechanisms knowledge of how levels of governance from the local to the global level can interact to ensure both sustainability of forest management and the vitality of domestic and international biomass markets.
Source: Art Wellinger, IEA Bioenergy Technical Coordinator
147

Field Trip Quebec

General understanding that: 1. the format was successful in addressing science, policy, ENGOs and industry with an open dialogue among participants 2. there is a need to address GHG emissions in terms of carbon balance over time from ecosystems and combustion 3. the framework of SFM should include bioenergy with the addition of GHG accounting within certification systems 4. certification might be a valuable tool for client acceptance 5. overall governance and certification will be broadly implemented only if there is a sound business case
Source: Art Wellinger, IEA Bioenergy Technical Coordinator
148

Field Trip Quebec

General understanding that: 6. increased bioenergy use will not have an impact on primary forests in Canada 7. the impact of SFM on biodiversity should be understood in the context of natural disturbances (e.g. fire, insect epidemic) 8. although all discussions focused on the boreal forest, it was agreed that the results were applicable to all forest types with some differentiation 9. there was recognition that there will be other international processes addressing forests, but there is a need for convergence among these processes 10. the future role of bioenergy must be placed in the context of the overall bio-economy.
Source: Art Wellinger, IEA Bioenergy Technical Coordinator
149

PEFCs Approach to Sustainability & Linkages to Biomass Requirements

PEFC Stakeholder Dialogue Vienna, Austria (14th November 2012)

Ben Gunneberg Secretary General, PEFC International

What is Forest Certification?

Elements of Certification Certification Delivers
Sustainable wood raw material is:

legal: the wood is harvested following local legislation and international agreements and the forest owner has been compensated accordingly from well managed forests: forestry operations have been conducted maintaining forests ecological, social and economic values traceable: the raw material supply chain is controlled and verified from the harvesting site up until finished products

Forest Management Certification

Chain of Custody Certification

Why PEFC?

Global, not-for-profit, non-governmental organisation based in Geneva, Switzerland

Voluntary mechanism promoting sustainable forest management providing independent, third party certification of good practices Alliance of national forest certification systems with global representation and an international chain of custody World's largest forest certification system and provider of two thirds of the worlds certified sustainably managed wood Certification system of choice for small family forest-owners

Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification

PEFCs Bottom-Up Approach

Developed by local stakeholder Aligned with national law and regulations Adresses local conditions (biodiversity, culture) Subject to national public consultation

International Compliance
Verification of compliance with international requirements Assessment by 3rd party consultant Global public consultation Panel of Expert

Provides mutual recognition, access to global markets Board recommendation Approval by all members Subject to revisions every five years

National Standards

Endorsement by PEFC

Delivering Sustainability Since 1999

Established in 1999 by 11 national organizations Recognition of 5 EU-based national forest certification system in 2000 First non-EU systems (Australia, Chile) endorsed in 2004 Worlds largest system with more than 100 million hectares in 2005 Reaching 200 million hectares in 2007 First African, Asian systems endorsed in 2009
PEFC is the forest certification system in terms of number of number of national forest certification systems (31) More than a dozen countries are known to be working towards a PEFC compliant system

PEFC Sustainable Forest Management Requirements

Requires compliance with all fundamental ILO conventions Tailored to specific needs ranging from company to family and community owned forestry Sets highest standards for forest certification aligned with the majority of worlds governments, including

Maintaining & enhancing biodiversity Prohibition of forest conversions Prohibition of most hazardous chemicals, GMOs Protecting workers rights & welfare Encouraging local employment Recognizes principles of FPIC (free, prior, informed consent), UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, ILO 169

Provisions for consultation with local people and stakeholders Exclusion of certification of plantations established by conversions

WWF FCAG Assessment

Criterion 2: economic, ecological, equity dimensions of forest management Compliance with laws Respect for tenure and use rights Respect for indigenious peoples rights PEFC 2010 fullfilled fullfilled fullfilled

Respect for community relations

Respect for workers rights Delivery of multiple benefits from forests Assessment and mitigation of environmental impacts Maintenance of 1) critical forest areas & 2) related natural critical habitats Specific provisions for plantations

fullfilled
fullfilled fullfilled fullfilled fullfilled fullfilled

Implementation of management plan

Effective monitoring and assessment
Source: PEFC:

fullfilled
fullfilled

WWF FCAG assessment of PEFC, 2010

Certification Globally
9% 26% 66%

Only 9% of the worlds forests are certified Only 26% of the worlds industrial roundwood supply is certified 66% of the total area certified is to PEFC

What Have We Learned?

System integrity is fundamental Adapt to changing requirements Engage new stakeholders Dont overlook role of scheme administration Utilise existing norms, procedures, definitions External evaluations are constant Outreach important throughout value chain Combine resources mutual recognition

Linkages between PEFC & Biomass Requirements I

Full contribution of forests to the green economy is only possible if forests are under sustainable management

Linkages between PEFC & Biomass Requirements II

Forest certification prevalent in the main woody biomass supply regions (of today)
*Collaboration required to advance uptake*

Linkages between PEFC & Biomass Requirements III

PEFC incorporates regular revision into its standards at all levels.

New requirements or terminology can be addressed

Linkages between PEFC & Biomass Requirements IV

Harmonization and mutual recognition is possibleand valuable!

In Summary, PEFC:

Welcomes the increasing demand and utilization of forest products for a broad range of applications. Offers the experience of more than twelve years in defining and delivering sustainable forest management and has a proven track record in meeting international requirements and stakeholder expectations alike. Acknowledges the opportunities and challenges bio-energy sector presents Interested to engage and collaborate with the bio-energy sector to explore the potential for meeting market and regulatory demands for sustainability.

In Summary, PEFC is:

Revising its chain of custody to cover due diligence requirements for legality and developing a voluntary module for greenhouse gas emissions.
Committed to collaboration at all levels, and believes that engagement and cooperation in building strong legitimate certification systems is essential for advancing sustainable management of the worlds forest.

Further information about PEFC: www.pefc.org

THANK YOU!

Why SFI Fibre Sourcing is Important to the Bioenergy Sector: The North American Context

Kathy Abusow
President and CEO SFI Inc.

Outline
Global Context SFI Fibre Sourcing How and Why SFI Engagement on Bioenergy SFI Pilot Project with The Nature Conservancy

Global Context

We Can See the World Like This

Or this.

What are you doing about the other 90%?

Global Context
Global Certified Area by Certification Standard
412 million hectares/ 1,018 million acres (estimated 39 million ha/ 96 million acres dual certified)

PEFC N.A. portion of PEFC total: 59% 146 million ha/ 360 million acres
October 31, 2012

Or this.

What are you doing about the other 90%?

What Happens on the Other 90% Globally?

Chain of Custody is basically an accounting system audit doesnt matter if its PEFC, FSC, or SFI All Chain of Custody approaches have three ways to follow the fibre:
Physical Separation Average Percentage Method Volume Credit Method

All Chain of Custody approaches also address the noncertified forest content in the product:
PEFC no controversial sources (risk assessment) FSC controlled wood (risk assessment) SFI no controversial sources (risk assessment) AND certified sourcing (audited procurement system)

SFI Fibre Sourcing

Addressing the Other 90%: How and Why

Addressing the Other 90%

SFI requires all SFI program participants both those who own or manage forest lands and those who buy the raw materials they need to demonstrate that the raw material in their supply chain comes from legal and responsible sources, whether the forests are certified or not. Requirements for North America and offshore.

SFI 2010-2014 Standard: Forest Land Management Objectives 1. Forest Management Planning

2. Forest Productivity 3. Protection and Maintenance of Water Resources 4. Conservation of Biological Diversity including Forests with Exceptional Conservation Value 5. Maintenance of Visual Quality and Recreational Benefits 6. Protection of Special Sites 7. Efficient Use of Forest Resources

SFI 2010-2014 Standard: Fibre Sourcing Objectives

8. 9.

Landowner Outreach Use of Harvesting and Logging Professionals

10. Adherence to Best Management Practices 11. Conservation of Biological Diversity 12. Avoidance of Controversial Sources, Including Illegal Logging 13. Avoidance of Controversial Sources, Including Fiber Sourced from Areas Without Effective Social Laws

Offshore

SFI 2010-2014 Standard: Forest Land Management and Fibre Sourcing Objectives

14. Legal and Regulatory Compliance 15. Forestry, Research, Science and Technology 16. Training and Education

17. Community Involvement in the Practice of Sustainable Forestry

18. Public Land Management Responsibilities 19. Communications and Public Reporting

20. Management Review and Continual Improvement

SFI is the only forest certification program in North America that requires participants to provide in-kind support or funding for forest research. SFI Participants have invested a total of $1.3 billion since 1995.

Logger Training
6,497 resource and logging professionals have been trained in responsible forestry through the SFI program or its recognition of other programs in 2011. The total amount trained since 1995: 135,835.

What Does This Mean on the Ground? Proactive.

When buying fibre from sources in North America that are not from a certified forest, SFI program participants must:
Supply regionally appropriate information or services so forest landowners can identify and protect or create habitat for wildlife; reforest harvested lands, either naturally and through replanting; and protect riparian zones and water quality. Provide implementation guidance for responsible forestry, addressing topics such as biodiversity, utilization, afforestation, invasive exotic plants and animals, and special sites. Promote the use of loggers and resource professionals trained in sustainable forestry practices and, where possible, support logger certification programs. Clearly define fibre sourcing policies in writing and make them available to suppliers contracts for the purchase of raw material must include requirements for the use of best management practices.

Implement a verifiable monitoring system.

Encourage landowners to participate in forest management certification programs.

SFI Engagement on Bioenergy

Buyers who choose SFI- products, whether paper, pellets, solid wood or packaging products send a strong signal to the thousands of people in the SFI community that their work is respected and valued.

Bioenergy: Opportunity and Challenge

Healthy forests require healthy markets and bioenergy markets can be a part of healthy forests and sustainability BUT
Value is diminished if the feedstock is not from a legal and sustainable source -- that challenge is central to SFIs efforts in the bioenergy arena

183

Bioenergy Companies Certifying to the SFI Standard

Nine companies that produce wood pellets or wood chips

Bayou Wood Pellets Eden Pellets Green Circle Bioenergy

Biomass Energy Enviva LP Appling County Pellets

Cogent Fibre Georgia Biomass

184

SFI Outreach

SFI fact sheet on bioenergy Engagement on government policy, including in EU

185

SFI Pilot Project with The Nature Conservancy

SFI-TNC Pilot Project

Demonstrate the applicability of SFI Fibre Sourcing requirements to bioenergy feedstock procurement Engage bioenergy companies in fibre procurement and assist them in establishing a responsible procurement system

Use the outcomes of the project to interface with policymakers to demonstrate that voluntary certification of bioenergy facilities is an effective mechanism to assure sustainable production

SFI-TNC Pilot Project

The Nature Conservancy is interested in this project with SFI to explore how the SFI Standards unique fibre sourcing requirements can be used in conjunction with other measures to address the need of procurement of woody biomass for bioenergy facilities while managing for important forest values.
Glenn Prickett, Chief External Affairs Officer The Nature Conservancy

SFI Board of Directors

ENVIRONMENTAL SECTOR Larry Selzer President and CEO The Conservation Fund Roger Sedjo, PhD Senior Fellow Resources for the Future SOCIAL SECTOR Steven W. Koehn. Director/State Forester Maryland Forest Service Charles Tatersall Smith, PhD. Professor Faculty of Forestry, University of Toronto Richard W. (Dick) Brinker, PhD. Dean Emeritus School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University William V. (Bill) Street Jr. Director Woodworkers Department, Intl. Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers George Finney, PhD. President Bird Studies Canada Tom Franklin Senior Director of Science and Policy Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership

John M. Hagen III, PhD. President Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences

Dr. Skeet (A.G.) Burris Representing Family Forest Owners

Stewart Hardacre. CEO Habitat for Humanity Canada

ECONOMIC SECTOR Henry H. (Hank) Ketcham Chairman, President and CEO West Fraser Timber Co. John B. Crowe Chairman and CEO Buckeye Technologies Inc. Craig Blair President and CEO Resource Management Service David Walkem Chief of the Cooks Ferry Indian Band, and President Stuwix Resources Joint Venture Bob Luoto Representing independent professional loggers & the American Loggers Council Daniel Christensen CEO Hancock Natural Resources Group

Kathy Abusow
Kathy.abusow@sfiprogram.org

Integration of Carbon Emission Criteria into PEFCs Standards and Procedures

PEFC Stakeholder Dialogue Vienna, Nov 14th 2012

Energy from wood is not necessarily sustainable, as for example production and processing have serious impacts on the GHG balance
Wood briquettes or pellets made from...
50-60% required GHG* savings (2017/18) 35% required GHG* savings (today)

GHG* emissions after processing (gCO2eq/MJ el) at 25% net efficiency

Source: Own calculation on basis from EU Communication COM(2010)11. *GHG = green house gases ** needed for drying of briquettes and pellets

systain consulting

14.11.12

192

To counter potential sustainability failures, sustainability criteria are being set up by official and voluntary bodies
1. Expected sustainability criteria for solid biomass* Expected entry into force EU-level mid 2014, member state implementation mid 2016 GHG savings must at least cover 35% (50%-60% from 2017/18), to be calculated with a life cycle approach No conversion of land with high carbon stock

2.

No raw material from land with high biodiversity value

Certified wood necessary for heat output higher than 1 MW Further standards and guidelines that include product-related sustainability criteria

GHG** Protocol: Product Lifecycle Accounting and Reporting Standard

ISO 14067: International Standard on Product Carbon Footprinting Initiative by Walmart/Sustainability Consortium
*on basis of EU directives for liquid biofuels (2009/28/EC:RED) and EU COM(2010)11 **GHG = green house gases

systain consulting

14.11.12

193

With incorporating sustainability criteria into the chain of custody PEFC is tapping a growth market
Market potential for the PEFC:
Wood Consumption in the EU by consumption types Material use Energy use

having already 131 Mm3 to be subject by the RED immediately tapping a market worth of 3 bn * of wood for EU consumption whereas the material market is saturated, high growth is expected in energy wood markets facing an extra 71 Mm3 by 2020, totalling a market of 5 bn * certified wood

4.5% growth

30% subject to RED**

[Mm3 RWE***]

Source: UNECE The European Forest Sector Outlook Study II *with coal price equivalent at 25,5/m3 RWE (National Energy Statistics) **assumptions on basis of UNECE, AEBIOM 2011, EU Wood 2010, etc. *** RWE = round wood equivalent

systain consulting

14.11.12

194

Demand for certified energy wood induces demand for pellets especially in Northern America and Russia
Share of pellet import into EU 2010 .

EU energy wood resources 2010

[Mtoe]

2010 net EU imports pellets

Sources: UNECE, AEBIOM Annual Statistical Report 2011.

2020 Scenario 1 (7%)

14.11.12

2020 Scenario 2 (12%)

195

systain consulting

The mass balance system in PEFCs chain of custody needs to be extended to gather data for the GHG calculation
Chain of Custody (simplified example)
Cultivation or extraction of raw materials

Transport

Processing (e.g. sawmill)

Transport

Processing (e.g. pelletisation)

Storage

Electricity / Heat generation

dat a

dat a

dat a

dat a

Certification requirements: Certification system, Certifier qualification, Accreditation, Certificate management

Emissions from: Land use Carbon captured storage Machinery Used input materials Land managed

Emissions from:
Transport Processing Electricty consumption Fuel use ...
systain consulting 14.11.12

Balance: Comparison to conventional fossil power/ heat generation

196

The mass balance system requires different sets of values

a) Calculate the GHG-emissions of every step in the chain of custody
Electricity consumption of ? [kWh] x EFel

Natural gas consumption of ? [MJ]

EFgas

Transport distance with lorry ? [tkm] ...

EFtrans

[ ] [ ] [ ]
kg CO2e kWh kg CO2e MJ kg CO2e tkm kg CO2e t kg CO2e

Open issues: Which granularity of carbon emission calculation? When to use standard values or calculate in detail?

b) Add GHG-emissions of upstream products (wood)

Wood consignment ? [t]1 x EF1

Wood consignment ? [t]2 ...

EF2

[ ] [ ]
t
EF CO2e tkm MJ kWh

measured standard value Input by partner in CoC

c) Allocate to different outputs sold to subsequent step in CoC

produced electricity produced heat different consignments

[ ]

kg CO2e per consignment t type

systain consulting

= GHG emission factor = CO2 equivalent = tonne kilometres = mega joule = kilowatt hours

14.11.12

197

Thank you very much!

Dr. Moritz Nill
Director Berlin Office Mail: moritz.nill@systain.com Tel.: +49 40 609 46 18 51

systain consulting

14.11.12

198

Session 3: Meeting Expectations & Safeguarding Forests

DISCUSSION

Topic

1.

GHG Balance Calculation tool a. Where is the necessary data for mass balance system? Cascading Principle a. Theory or Practice? b. How to ensure wise utilization Certified material availability // Resources supply issues a. What are the solutions for addressing bottlenecks ; supply of tomorrow? The role of forest management certification Meeting sustainable biomass requirements? Whats possible to address within scope of Forest certification?

2.

3.

4.

5.

Addressing broader environmental concerns where is the role and limitations for forest certification
Are the regulators getting it right? What to influence, how to influence?

6.

COFFEE BREAK

Conclusions, Collaboration and the Way Forward

SESSION 4

Session 4: Conclusions, Collaboration and the Way Forward

Reports from Thematic Groups Discussion Closing Remarks from Invited Speakers

Cocktail Reception

MEET IN KAISERLOUNGE AT 18:00