JULKAISU8/2009

TUTKAS Tutkijoiden ja kansanedustajien seura

BIOENERGIA JA BIOETIIKKA

The bioethics of bioenergy

Toimittanut Ulrica Gabrielsson

The bioethics of bioenergy November 17, 2009 The seminar is organized by the Nordic Committee on Bioethics (www.ncbio.org) and the Association of Parliament Members and Scientists (TUTKAS). During recent years the interest in developing alternative sources for renewable energy has increased dramatically. The up-coming climate conference to be held this fall in Copenhagen will focus on international restrictions on green house gas emissions. Different sources of bioenergy have been suggested and renewable energy is now being promoted as an alternative to fossil fuels. The large-scale production and consumption of bioenergy raises, however, a host of ethical issues. This one day seminar will present different dimensions related to the production and use of different types of bio-energy, the impact they may have on the environment and consumer choices, as well as the direction and possibili-ties that ongoing research is offering to development. In this seminar will include a number of international experts who will present on topics ranging from the latest technologies available for the production of bioenergy to ethical aspects. With the seminar we hope to provide a meeting place for experts, citizens and political representatives to discuss these issues in a constructive environment.

Contents On the Way to Copenhagen - Expectations of the Environment Committee of the Finnish Parliament Susanna Huovinen, Environmental Committee of the Finnish Parliament Biofuel Production and Industry Kristina Maria Holm, Statoil New Types of Bioenergy - Algae in Energy Production Kristian Spilling, Finnish Environment Institute Biofuels: Prospects, Risks and Opportunities for Market and Food Security Keith Wiebe, FAO Sustainability and Ethical Aspects of Bioenergy Henrik Wentzel, University of Southern Denmark Ethical Concerns of Bioenergy Use Mickey Gjerris, Copenhagen University Bioenergy - a Problem or a Solution? Maija Suomela, Greenpeace Bioenergy and Development Policies - Small-scale Bioenergy Initiatives Steven Hunt, Practical Action Consulting Bioenergy and Air Pollution: Health Effects Raimo Salonen, National Institute for Health and Welfare

BIOETHICS OF BIOENERGY 17 November 2009 Chair Susanna Huovinen Eduskunta Environment Committee Dear audience, It is my pleasure to bring the greetings of the Eduskunta Environment Committee to this seminar, which is focusing on an important and topical subject. The Environment Committee views bioenergy as one of the central means with which to curb climate change, but we also recognise the need to improve awareness of the diverse impacts energy use has. The Committee has considered these matters in many of its submissions. Our submission regarding the national climate strategy, for example, dealt with several aspects of this subject. First and foremost I must, in relation to bioenergy as in the case of all other energy forms as well stress the great importance of the Copenhagen Climate Conference. Climate change is a global threat that calls for a global solution, and the role of bioenergy as a substitute to fossil fuels must be examined as a part of this. Research in climate science is progressing so rapidly that it has proven very challenging to secure the most recent knowledge to serve as a foundation for political decision making. Since climate change poses such a great challenge to humankind, we need to develop our ability to compile scientific research findings into a form, which facilitates decision making, much faster than at present. The challenge for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is substantial, as it has to combine the findings of researchers from countries all over the world. Decembers meeting in Copenhagen needs to achieve a comprehensive and sufficiently ambitious agreement on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. An opening speech I heard at a recent event made me sit up and think. The speaker said that he was sick and tired of hearing talk about saving the planet because he reckoned that the planet would save itself just as it had always done up to now. His view was rather that humanity should take action to save itself. The treaty that will hopefully emerge from the Copenhagen conference should therefore secure the commitment of all countries and present its objectives in a sufficiently clear form. If we fail to achieve this primary objective, details on, for example, carbon sinks will not, in my view, play as significant a role as they would if a comprehensive treaty were in force. Ladies and Gentlemen, The effort to replace fossil fuels that is being led by industrialised countries must not be allowed to speed up the destruction of tropical forests. As we know, many of the indirect effects associated with land-use issues are already very difficult from the point of view of deforestation. A fifth of all greenhouse gas emissions on the global level is caused by tropical forest destruction. This is why forest-related questions must be incorporated into the global treaty. Forests and issues related to forest carbon sinks are essential for Finland. It is a good idea to emphasise the crucial significance of scientific knowledge in responding to the challenge of climate change. Appropriate decisions cannot be made without a scientific understanding of, for example, how carbon sinks function. I would like to also point out that the challenge of global consideration does not apply to forests alone. We have to find a way to reduce our own emissions in a way that does not lead to increased emissions or hamper sustainable development elsewhere in the world.

So lets hope that a global treaty is achieved my personal view is that the EUs common reduction target could be as high as 30%. We know, however, that this all just a prelude: emissions need to be reduced by as much as 80% by 2050. It would be best if we began adjusting to the new situation at once. This applies also to the climate funding that developing countries are calling for. To win the support of developing nations for a comprehensive treaty, the EU needs to commit to a sufficiently large amount of climate funding. We inhabitants of the prosperous northern hemisphere cannot expect the developing countries to do their share without our support. Active engagement with this common undertaking would be in our own best interests as well. We can still prevent climate change from breaking away from the two-degree target if we work together. Dear audience, The Environment Committee has emphasised that, for Finland, the strategic objective should be set at halting and reversing growth in energy consumption. In addition to this, we need to substantially improve our energy-efficiency as well as adopt a vision of an emission-free energy economy. It would also be good if we considered how Finns could take advantage of the ongoing energy transition. The search for emission-cutting solutions is now on all over the world, and it is imperative that we do not fall by the wayside of this trend. A competitive advantage on the international markets cannot be established without bold and concrete national objectives that produce demand within the domestic market and thus create a reference for the broader markets. Any increase to renewable energy utilisation has to take into consideration the principles of sustainable development. We must select the environmentally, socially and economically most sustainable energy forms and know everything about the impact they have on the environment over their full lifecycle. We must not forget to evaluate their regional, social and health effects either. The effects of bioenergy utilisation on biodiversity should also be examined. Forest utilisation, for example, can, up to point, be made more effective. Models, which can identify and limit the harmful environmental impacts of forest energy use, need to be developed. We need scientific knowledge and evaluations as well as wide-ranging socio-political debate to support political decision making. I believe that knowledge, which will enable us to realise our common great challenge to climate change also on the practical level, is being shared and disseminated at this seminar, too. I hope that your meeting is fruitful and I thank you for your attention.

Statoil and biofuelsSeminar: The bioethics of bioenergy

Nordic Committee on Bioethics and the Association of Parliament Members and Scientists

The Finnish Parliament, Helsinki

Kristina Maria Holm

17.11.2009

Energy company present in 40 countries with 30,000 employees

Producing 1.95 million barrel of oil equivalent (boe) pr day

About 22 billion boe in proven resources (5.6 billion as booked reserves)

One of the worlds largest net sellers of crude oil

The world's largest operator in waters deeper than 100 metres

World leader in carbon capture and storage

The second largest exporter of gas to Europe

Biggest retailer of oil products in Scandinavia

Who we are

Our business areas

Exploration & production Norway

International exploration & production

Natural gas Technology & new energy

Projects & procurement

Manufacturing & marketing

Maximisethe NCS values

Deliver international growth

Build new energy

Harsh environments

Deep water

Heavy oil

Gas value chains

Building growth from a firm strategy

Statoil and biofuel production

DRIVERS

Growing market - financial op