MODELLING OF BIOENERGY FUTURES – THE CASE OF SWEDEN

MODELLING OF BIOENERGY

FUTURES – THE CASE OF SWEDEN

Martin Börjesson* & Erik O. Ahlgren

Chalmers

(*IVL)

1

Part 1

• Potential and supply of biomass

• Competition for biomass between sectors

• (Effects of sector-specific polcy measures

in the transport sector)

• ...

Methods/Tools

• Swedish Forest Inventory (SFI) & HUGIN

– calculation of potential outcomes of

stemwood, logging residues and stumps from

harvesting operations

• MARKAL

3

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 5 10 15 20 25

Co

st [

EUR

/MW

h]

Potential [TWh/year]

2030 2050

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 5 10 15 20 25

Co

st [

EU

R/M

Wh

]


2030 2050

4

Supply curve for forest residue tops and branches (top), and forest

residue stumps (bottom) for model year 2030 and 2050.

Part 2 - Background

• Bio combines: several bio-based products and/or

integration with district heating or industrial

systems

High energy efficiency, but implies also

increased complexitiy

• Combines often not well represented in national

energy system models

Questions

• Which bio combines show potential for cost

efficiency from an energy system point of view?

• Are different types of combines of importance for

the future bioenergy use?

Metod

• MARKAL_Sverige

• Improved model representation of bio energy

technologies, e.g.:

– Increased number of complex alternatives for transport

biofuels.

– Improved representation of the pulp and paper industry,

and of black liquor gasification.

– Gasification alternatives for transport biofuel production,

CHP, and electricity generation.

Alternatives for 2nd generation transport biofuel

production in the model

Table 1.

Costs and energy balances for second generation biofuel production technologies in model

Type of fuel

production

Type of

feedstock

Energy input and output relations Total

Eff.

Inv. cost O&M cost

Biomass

(In)

Electricity

(Net out)

Transport

fuel(s)

(Out)

Heat

(Out)

(MEUR/MW_in

)

(% of IC);

(EUR/MWh f)

MeOH (SA) Wood 1.0 -0.01 0.51 0.51 1.8 4.5; 1.5

MeOH (DH) Wood 1.0 -0.02 0.51 0.12 0.61 1.8 4.5; 1.5

MeOH (BLG) Black liquor 1.0 -0.07 0.56 0.27 0.77 1.3 4.5; 1.5

DME (SA) Wood 1.0 -0.04 0.59 0.57 1.7 4.5; 1.5

DME (DH) Wood 1.0 -0.05 0.59 0.11 0.67 1.7 4.5; 1.5

DME (BLG) Black liquor 1.0 -0.07 0.57 0.26 0.76 1.3 4.5; 1.5

FTD + FTP (SA) Wood 1.0 -0.01 0.33 + 0.12 0.44 2.2 4.5; 1.5

FTD + FTP (DH) Wood 1.0 -0.08 0.33 + 0.12 0.26 0.66 2.2 4.5; 1.5

FTD + FTP (BLG) Black liquor 1.0 -0.07 0.33+0.12 0.28 0.69 1.6 4.5; 1.5

SNG (SA) Wood 1.0 0.06 0.70 0.76 1.5 4.5; 1.5

SNG (DH) Wood 1.0 0.04 0.70 0.07 0.81 1.5 4.5; 1.5

EtOH (SA) Straw 1.0 0.06 0.47 0.56 1.2 4.5; 1.5

EtOH (SA) Wood 1.0 0.13 0.34 0.47 2.1 4.5; 1.5

EtOH (DH) Wood 1.0 0.12 0.34 0.40 0.85 2.1 4.5; 1.5

EtOH + Biogas

(SA)

Straw 1.0 0.06 0.47 + 0.03 0.56 1.2 4.5; 1.5

EtOH + Biogas

(DH)

Straw 1.0 0.07 0.30 + 0.11 0.22 0.71 1.2 4.5; 1.5

EtOH + Biogas

(DH)

Straw 1.0 0.05 0.47 + 0.03 0.15 0.70 1.2 4.5; 1.5

EtOH + Biogas

(DH)

Wood 1.0 0.05 0.34 + 0.25 0.22 0.85 2.1 4.5; 1.5

SA: Stand alone; DH: heat integration district heating; BLG: black liquor gasification intergrated in P&P industry

Pulp and paper industry

• Chemical pulp

(pulp & paper industry sector divided into 6 parts)

DEMANDENERGY

BP TURBINE

ELECTRICITY (FROM GRID )

BL RECOVERY BOILER

DEMAND CHEMICALS

ELEC

TRIC

ITY

PR

OC

ESS

HEA

T (L

P/M

P)

RECOVERED CHEMICALS

PR

OC

ESS

HEA

T (

HP

)

BLACK LIQUOR

ELECTRICITY (TO GRID)

FUEL SUPPLY

TRANSPORT FUELTO MARKET

DEMANDPULPWOOD

PULPWOOD

DME

FTL

METHANOL

HCO IND BOILER

LPG IND BOILER

OIL IND BOILER

BIO IND BOILER

ELETR IND BOILER

GAS IND BOILER

BL GASIFICATIONINT COMB CYCLE

BL GASIFICATIONTO DME

BL GASIFICATIONTO FTL

BL GASIFICATIONTO METHANOL

Modeled cases

• BAU: – CO2 +- 0 until 2050

– No advanced bio technologies available

• GC-scenarier – GC = Global Climate action, CO2 -80% until 2050

Available bio combines:

– GC_SA = only Stand Alone

– GC_DH= stand alone + bio combines with heat integration DH-sector

– GC_ALL= stand alone + heat integration + black liquor gasification in pulp & paper industry

CO2 limitation

Results

Bio energy use (exkl. MSW and peat) for BAU

0

40

80

120

160

200

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

[TW

h]

BAU

2nd Gen Biofuel Prod & District heat

2nd Gen Biofuel Prod - Stand Alone

1st Gen Biofuel Prod

Black liq. Gasification - 2nd Gen Biofuels & PH

Black liq P&P Recovery boiler (PH & BP)

Bio Industry - P&P (PH & BP)

Bio Industry - not P&P (PH & BP)

Bio CHP (DH)

Bio HOB (DH)

Bio use Building sector

Bio energy use (exkl. MSW and peat) for GC_SA

0

40

80

120

160

200

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

[TW

h]

GC_SA








Bio CHP (DH)

Bio HOB (DH)


Bio energy use (exkl. MSW and peat) for GC_DH

0

40

80

120

160

200

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

[TW

h]

GC_DH








Bio CHP (DH)

Bio HOB (DH)


Bio energy use (exkl. MSW and peat) for GC_ALL

0

40

80

120

160

200

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

[TW

h]

GC_ALL








Bio CHP (DH)

Bio HOB (DH)


Bio energy use (exkl. MSW and peat) at different

availability of bio combines

0

40

80

120

160

200

BA

U

GC

_SA

GC

_DH

GC

_ALL

BA

U

GC

_SA

GC

_DH

GC

_ALL

2010 . 2030 . 2050

[TW

h]








Bio CHP (DH)

Bio HOB (DH)


Price biomass

0

20

40

60

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

[EU

R/M

Wh

]

BAU

GC_SA

GC_DH

GC_ALL

Final energy use in the road transport sector

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

BA

U

GC

_SA

GC

_DH

GC

_ALL

BA

U

GC

_SA

GC

_DH

GC

_ALL

2010 . 2030 . 2050

[TW

h]

ELECTRICITY

METHANOL

FTL

BIODIESEL

ETHANOL

SNG

BIOGAS

NATURAL GAS

DIESEL

GASOLINE

Final energy use in the road transport sector

– GC_ALL

0

20

40

60

80

100

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

[TW

h]

GC_ALL

ELECTRICITY

METHANOL

FTL

BIODIESEL

ETHANOL

SNG

BIOGAS

NATURAL GAS

DIESEL

GASOLINE

Energy supply district heating

0

20

40

60

80

BA

U

GC

_SA

GC

_DH

GC

_ALL

BA

U

GC

_SA

GC

_DH

GC

_ALL

2010 . 2030 . 2050

[TW

h]

Solar (prod.)

Waste heat biorefinery

Ind. waste heat

HP (prod.)

Electricity (boilers)

Peat

MSW

Bio

Coal

Natural gas

Oil

Electricity generation

0

40

80

120

160

200

BA

U

GC

_SA

GC

_DH

GC

_ALL

BA

U

GC

_SA

GC

_DH

GC

_ALL

2010 . 2030 . 2050

[TW

h]

Wind power

Cond fossil

CHP (DH), Bio, Waste, Peat

CHP (DH), Fossil

Ind BP bio

Ind BP fossil

Hydro

Nuclear

Percentage savings of CO2 reduction cost of the

system with integrated combines (GC_DH and

GC_ALL) in relation to ”stand-alone” (GC_SA)

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

GC_DH GC_ALL

[%]

CO2 marginal cost, EUR/ton_CO2

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

[EU

R/t

on

CO

2]

BAU

GC_SA

GC_SADH

GC_ALL

CO2 marginal cost, SEK/litre gasoline_eq

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

[SEK

/lit

er

be

nsi

n-e

q]

BAU

GC_SA

GC_SADH

GC_ALL

Conclusions

• Bio combines for production of 2nd gen transport biofuels

are of av considerable importance for the possibilities meet

ambitious climate targets at national scale

• Bio combines with integration with district heating or

industrial systems ...

– give a cost efficient energy system/lower cost of CO2 reduction

• in particular black liqour gasification

• but also heat integration

– but has little impact on total biomass for energy use

– has some impact on bioprice

– has large impact on how biomass is used

– has cross-sectoral effects

• Important to represent bio combines with several product

flows and system integration in energy system models

Thank you

27

Questions

• How does the cost-efficient supply of biomass

develop until 2050 under stringent climate targets?

• What is the share of available biomass cost-efficiently

used in the transport sector?

• Which biofuels are chosen?

• How does the attainment of an almost fossil-free road

transport sector (oil phase-out - OP) to 2030 affect the

biomass for energy markets (cost-efficient fuel and

technology choices and system costs)?

28

Excluding

• productive forest areas that are situated in areas of nature

protection, in wet areas and peat soils with low bearing capacity,

• in areas that are located 25 meters from a lake, sea, waterline or

any other ownership category than forest,

• in areas that have an uneven ground structure and/or a slope of

more than 19.60 according to the Swedish terrain classification

scheme.

• regeneration felling areas of a size of less than 1 ha as well as

hardwood stumps with attached root system.

29

PRIMARY ENERGY & MATERIALSUPPLY

HEAT & ELECTRICITY GENERATION

FUEL REFINEMENT

DISTRI-BUTION

COMMERCIAL

TRANSPORT

ENERGY SERVICE & MATERIAL DEMANDS

INDUSTRY

RESIDENTIAL

30

Aggregated overview of sectors, processes and energy and material

flows in MARKAL_Sweden.

Transport module

31

0

50

100

150

200

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

[%]

ROAD TRANSPORT OTHER TRANSPORT

INDUSTRY RESIDENTIAL

COMMERCIAL & SERVICE

32

Aggregated view of assumed reference energy service demand

developments expressed with demand levels of 2010 as base.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Cost

[EU

R/M

Wh]


Energy forest Ley/Grass Crops Cereal Crops Oilseed Crops

33

Supply curves for energy crops.

0

20

40

60

80

100

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

[TW

h]

[kto

n C

O2

]

Policy scenarios

34

CO2 emission and OP policy constraints.

Marks in 2010 indicate levels based on statistics.

Main analysis scenario GLOB_CA (GLOBal Climate Action)

• Reflects a situation in which Sweden and the rest of world pursue

ambitious climate targets.

• CO2 emissions of the modeled system, i.e. the entire Swedish

energy system (incl. transport), constrained to be reduced by 80% to

2050 (compared to the 1990 emission level).

• Linear reduction from model year 2015 to 2050 applied

• Emission cap, gradually decreasing

• Fossil fuel prices are based on the “450 scenario” of IEA´s World

Energy Outlook

35

Alternative scenarios

• “NAT_CA” (National climate action). Higher import fossil fuel prices

• “CO2_LR65” and “CO2_LR50” (Low reduction for CO2, -65% and -

50%)

• “2GEN_HC” (High cost for second generation biofuels)

• “EV_HC” (High costs for electric vehicles).

• “BIO_LS” (Low supply for biomass): no stumps

• “MET_NO” (No high blend methanol fuels)

• “TRAF_SG” (Slow traffic growth)

• “NUC_PO” (Nuclear phase-out until2030)

• “PULP_SD” (Mechanical pulp shut-down)

36

Results

37

-100

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2000 2030 2050 2000 2030 2050 2000 2030 2050

Total Energy Supply . Final Energy Use . Electricity Generation

[TW

h]

Oil / Oil products Natural gas Coal and coke

Electricity Nuclear power Hydro

Biomass, waste and peat Other renewables District Heat

Total energy supply, final energy use and electricity generation for

main analysis scenario GLOB_CA.

38

Nuclear power is for “total energy supply” represented in gross values (input energy), while for

“electricity generation” in net production (electricity output). For “total energy supply”, “electricity”

represents net import (negative values imply export).

INDUSTRIAL RESIDUES - LIQOURS

INDUSTRIAL RESIDUES - BARK, WOOD WASTE,

etc.

FIREWOOD RESIDENTIAL

FORESTRY RESIDUES -TOPS AND BRANCHES

FORESTRY RESIDUES -STUMPS

ENERGY CROPS/FOREST

ORGANIC WASTE (TO BIOGAS)

PULPWOOD

IMPORTSOTHER

Oil phase-out - TOTAL

0

40

80

120

160

200

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

[TW

h]

39

Cost-efficient biomass utilization (excluding peat and combustible

municipal waste) in scenario GLOB_CA.

Dotted line shows total biomass utilization with OP policy applied.

0

40

80

120

160

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

[TW

h]

2GEN_HC CO2_LR50 CO2_LR65 ELEC_HC BIO_LS TRAF_SG

NO_MET NUC_PO PULP_SD NAT_CA GLOB_CA

0

40

80

120

160

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

[TW

h]



40

Biomass use for heat and electricity production in different scenarios,

without OP policy (top) and with OP policy (bottom).

0

40

80

120

160

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050[T

Wh]



0

40

80

120

160

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

[TW

h]



41

Biomass use for transport biofuel production in different scenarios,

without OP policy (top) and with OP policy (bottom).

0

20

40

60

80

100

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

[EU

R/M

Wh]



0

20

40

60

80

100

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

[EU

R/M

Wh

]



42

Biomass marginal cost in different scenarios,

without OP policy (top) and with OP policy (bottom)

Findings - so far

• Total bioenergy utilization increases by 63% to 2050

(under system-wide CO2 reduction of 80%)

– including utilization of stumps and energy crops

• Biomass use in CHP peaks around 2030 in most

scenarios

• Transport sector accounts for 41% of total in 2050

– corresponding to 42 TWh transport biofuels

• Strong resource competition

– marginal biomass costs more than triples

– very large deployment of plug-in hybrid vehicles in transport

sector

43

Cont´d work

• Better representation of polygeneration options

• Improved representation of biowaste flows (possibly)

44

Tack!

45

MODELLING OF BIOENERGY FUTURES – THE CASE OF SWEDEN

Data & Analytics

Transcript of MODELLING OF BIOENERGY FUTURES – THE CASE OF SWEDEN