Reducing the use of nonrenewable biomass: an eligible CDM project category?
B. Schlamadinger and Ingmar Jürgens
Joanneum Research, Graz / Austria firstname.lastname@example.org
Land Use and Bioenergy in the Clean Development Mechanism Rome, 30 June 2005
Emission Protocol categories: IPCC Guidelines, Kyoto
Non-renewable bio-energy in the CDM
Solution 1: small scale projects
Solution 2: COP decisions, post 2012 Objectives of working meeting
Categories of national inventories (Annex A of the Kyoto Protocol)
Energy (CO2 from biomass not counted here) Waste Industrial Processes Agriculture (all EXCEPT carbon and liming, which are included in LUCF)
Land-use change and Forestry (LUCF), carbon in
croplands and grasslands
Bioenergy and land use in the CDM
Afforestation and reforestation: eligible
Biomass energy to replace fossil fuel: eligible Many developing countries do not have
Big opportunities for fossil-fuel reductions
Most have large share of biomass in primary energy
T otal B ioS hare energy energy of bioconsum p. countries energy Use of biomass fuels in 7 developing consum p. (1997) C ountry [P J] [P J] [% ]
P opu lation density 2 [cap/km ]
T otal energy per cap. [G J/cap]
A ustria G erm any Jap an P oland C o u n try S w eden USA A u stria B razil G e rm a n y C pan Jahina E gypt P o la n d India Sw eden USA M alaysia B ra zil T anzania C h in a Z aire
E g yp t In d ia M a la ysia T a n za n ia Z a ire
1,053 100 15,012 84 T o ta l B6 io 17,390 e n e rg y e n e rg y 3,595 40 co n su m p . co n su m p . 1,971 230 [P J] [P J] 84,321 3,482 1 ,0 5 3 100 1,604 15,155 5 ,0 1 2 84 36,632 9,287 1 7 ,3 9 0 6 1,502 380 3 ,5 9 5 40 16 ,554 8,543 1 ,9 7 1 230 81,488 4 ,3 2 1 36632 ,4 8 5 9545 ,1 5 19254 ,6 0 3 6 ,6 3 2 93627 ,2 8 435
1 ,5 0 2 1 6 ,5 5 4 1 ,4 8 8 954 435 380 8 ,5 4 3 663 925 362
9.5 0.6 S0.0 h a re o f b io 1.1 e n e rg y 11.7 [% ] 4.1 9 .5 31.1 0 .6 25.4 0 .0 25.3 1 .1 51.6 1 1 .7 4 .1 44.6 3 1 .1 97.0 2 5 .4 83.2
2 5 .3 5 1 .6 4 4 .6 9 7 .0 8 3 .2
94.3 230.8 Popu 331.9la tio n 126.5 d e n sity 21.1 2 [ca p /km ] 28.1 9 4 .3 18.5 2 3 0 .8 129.2 3 3 1 .9 56.3 1 2 6 .5 301.6 2 1 .1 2 8 .1 58.6 1 8 .5 32.5 1 2 9 .2 18.2
5 6 .3 3 0 1 .6 5 8 .6 3 2 .5 1 8 .2
137 189 T o ta l 141 e n e rg y 94 p e r ca p . [G230 p ] J/ca 337 137 35 189 32 141 29 94 20 230 337 83 35 37 32 12
29 20 83 37 12
Bioenergy in the CDM
From Marrakech Accords (FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add.2, p. 36, para. 44)
The baseline for a CDM project activity is the scenario that reasonably represents the anthropogenic emissions by sources of greenhouse gases that would occur in the absence of the proposed project activity. A baseline shall cover emissions from all gases, sectors and source categories listed in Annex A within the project boundary.
Renewable energy in the CDM that replace fossil fuels
Cumulative C Emissions
Baseline: emissions from fossil fuels (in Annex A)
Credit Zero emissions renewable technology
More efficient biomass energy
Cumulative C Emissions Baseline emissions from land use (not in Annex A)
Not eligible as credit Reduced emissions Time
Bioenergy projects that are eligible
Bioenergy displaces fossil fuel (most proposed CDM bioenergy projects)
Use of biomass residues (fuel switching, e.g. biomass residues) Replacing coal, oil, natural gas, kerosene etc.
Non-CO2 greenhouse gases are reduced
landfill gas recovery Methane recovery through enhanced animal waste management N2O and Methane avoidance in agriculture
Small scale replacement of NRB for thermal energy (but no definitions exist, no projects approved)
Bioenergy projects that are not eligible
All large projects to
replace NRB with renewable energy (> 15 MW) or reduce NRB by efficiency improvements (> 15 GWh/yr)
Small scale projects (< 15 GWh/yr):
Demand-side management to reduce NRB consumption improvement of the efficiency of production and conversion of NRB
Why is this important?
Excludes many countries from the CDM
The connection between land-use and bioenergy has been neglected.
Indoor air pollution Land degradation, soil erosion, biodiversity … Socio-economic issues
Fuel switching: rice husk instead firewood Fuel switching: rice husk instead firewood
1) Settled 1)Settled kiln kiln
• They are built with adobe or over burned bricks
• ITDG introduced an improved settled kiln, with a capacity to burn more than five thousands.
• The brick makers from La Huaca and Lambayeque reply the pilot kiln, with a little modifications with capacities of 4 and 8 thousands. • This type of kilns spends between 800 and 1000 kg. of rice husk for thousand of bricks.
Categorization of biomass fuels
No C stock effects/ residues Biomass from short turnover sources Agro-industrial residues such as bagasse or rice husk With C stock effects / direct harvesting from lands Annual energy crops (e.g., rapeseed)
Biomass from long turnover sources
Wood industry Harvest of forests and residues. Biomass not woodlands; dead main driving force for wood from forests and extraction woodlands
Based on Dutschke and Lambert, AR WG
Degradation Deforestation Devegetation
Based on Dutschke and Lambert, AR WG
What happened to date
Kyoto Protocol / Marrakech Accords Small-scale rules for CDM projects, Category 1C Submission by FAO and Joanneum Research to the CDM EB (March 2004)
Discussions in the AR WG and SSC WG
Response on submission (May 2005) First SSC project submitted (Bagapelli, Biogas) Decisions on NRB pending; leakage issue? No solution in sight yet for large-scale projects
A) Small Scale Projects
TYPE I - RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS, max output capacity <15 MW. 1. Electricity generation by the user 2. Mechanical energy for the user 3. Thermal energy for the user 4. Renewable electricity generation for a grid TYPE II - ENERGY EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, reduce energy consumption, < 15 GWh per year 1. Supply side energy efficiency improvements – transmission and distribution 2. Supply side energy efficiency improvements – generation 3. Demand-side energy efficiency programmes for specific technologies 4. Energy efficiency and fuel switching measures for industrial facilities 5. Energy efficiency and fuel switching measures for buildings TYPE III - OTHER PROJECT ACTIVITIES, cover other project activities, including methane capture and agriculture. Project emissions < 15 000 tCO2/yr.
Small scale category 1C: Thermal energy for the user
Renewable energy technologies that supply individual households or users with thermal energy that displaces fossil fuel or non-renewable sources of biomass. BUT: ONLY RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS.
In many cases biomass may remain non-renewable, although at lower level. “Upgrading of existing equipment not allowed” CDM Team: “improvements of efficiency of equipment such as stoves is a type II activity” Focus on technology / equipment fuel switch to renewable biomass not allowed
Minutes of SSC WG, May 05
TREATMENT OF BIOMASS (para 11)
The SSC WG noted that the AR WG and the Meth Panel shall, at their next meeting, prepare a joint recommendation to the Board on definitions of renewable and non renewable biomass (R/RNB). The SSC WG acknowledges that after definitions for R/NRB have been developed amendments to Appendix B to the simplified modalities and procedures for small-scale project activities would be needed to ensure consistency of reference to R/NRB across different project types.
Modifications – small scale
1. Extend definitions of baselines to include nonrenewable biomass in all relevant categories 2. Consistent differentiation between renewable and non-renewable biomass, in order to separate the respective baseline case from the project activity case. 3. The (explicit) inclusion of typical bioenergy technologies and appliances in the definition of the technologies and measures of the different relevant types of project activities.
Methodology to assess “NRB” and leakage
1. Define project boundary 2. Quantify (fuel) wood production in project area (including wood for charcoal) 3. Estimate available SUSTAINABLE (fuel) wood 4. Comparison shows whether non-renewable 5. Consistency check with deforestation, degradation and/or devegetation (including: is wood demand driving this?) 6. Emission factor between 0 and 100% of actual CO2 emissions, depending on 4. 7. Estimation / monitoring of leakage, rebound effects
Possible short-cuts for small scale projects
Country-level assessment of resource. Use of indicators as proxy for NRB assessment (e.g., decline of carbon stocks by more than 5% over last 10 years) Disregard leakage Conservative default leakage and rebound deductions (e.g., 50% and research to refine number), project developers can improve these if desired Direct link of wood use to certain tree species can limit the analysis Others?
B) Solutions via COPmop decision
Generally allowing the replacement of NRB
Post 2012: by admitting further land-use categories into the CDM
Reducing forest degradation
Allowing land-use credits, but tied to a minimum amount of useful energy per ton C credited Debundling of large projects into small-scale projects
Objectives of this working meeting
Present and discuss the issues identified Present examples Elaborate short-term solutions and methodologies (for CDM panels; small scale)
Definition and determination of “non-renewable biomass” Leakage
Long-term options (COP decisions; post 2012) Next steps
Press release Article in CDM Investment Newsletter Others