Skip to main content

Pointers for Bioenergy Policy in a Resource-Constrained World

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Perennial Biomass Crops for a Resource-Constrained World

Abstract

Bioenergy is the subject of a wide range of national and European policy measures. While some of these provide direct subsidies, more indirect market-based measures such as the mandating the use of bioenergy products are the major means of support. This paper examines the development of bioenergy policy in Germany, the United Kingdom and Ireland as examples of different approaches to harnessing the potential of bioenergy for public benefits. Of the three countries, Germany has led policy and technical developments. It has the largest area of agricultural land committed to bioenergy, as well as a very substantial forest resource that provides wood fuel. In contrast, support for bioenergy is new in Ireland. In the UK, market-based policy has stimulated biomass imports. Following an overview of the development of European Union policy, this paper provides an account of the public debate that has developed in Germany about the use of agricultural resources for energy. With nearly 1.9 million ha of arable land used for energy crops in 2014 (about 16 % of the total arable area), there has been a strong public reaction to the development of bioenergy from arable land. Developments in Germany have impacted on policy elsewhere and are therefore described here in detail. The comparison of the policy approaches in the three countries reveals the challenge of developing policy to support biomass crops to maximise public benefits while minimising the risks of unintended consequences. Against a background of direct intervention to promote specific bioenergy value chains, public policies in these countries are now converging with increasingly reliance on market-based approaches. While market-based policies can minimise adverse impacts on related markets, they need to be complemented by local measures to optimise land use for public benefits and stimulate the use of economically marginal land. Flexible policy instruments that are based on sound scientific evidence that is provided independent of political and commercial positions are needed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Biomass (2015) Abstracts of the Conference “Perennial biomass crops for a resource-constrained world”. www.biomass2015.eu./fileadmin/einrichtungen/biomass2015/Biomass2015_Abstracts.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • BMEL (2007) Wissenschaftlicher Beirat Agrarpolitik beim Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz Nutzung von Biomasse zur Energiegewinnung. Empfehlungen an die Politik

    Google Scholar 

  • BMEL (2011) Wissenschaftlicher Beirat Agrarpolitik beim Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz. Förderung der Biogaserzeugung durch das EEG. Stellungnahme zur geplanten Novellierung zur geplanten Novellierung des Ernuebare-Energien-Gesetze

    Google Scholar 

  • BMU (2009) Übersicht über die EEG-Vergütungsregelungen für 2009 gemäß Bundestagsbeschluss zum EEG Vergütung ct/kWh

    Google Scholar 

  • BMWE (2014) Die EEG-Reform Biomasse. www.biogaspartner.de/fileadmin/biogas/documents/Politik_und_Recht/eeg-2014-faktenblatt-biomasse.pdf

  • BMWE (2016) Informationsportal Erneuebare Energien. Das Erneurbare-Energie-Gesetz. www.erneuerbare-energien.de accessed on 23.6.2016.

  • CCC (2011) Bioenergy review. Committee on Climate Change. www.theccc.org.uk

  • Clancy M (2015) Renewable heat in Ireland to 2020. Achieving Ireland’s 2020 renewable heat target: Analysis of policy options

    Google Scholar 

  • Coombs J (1997) EU R&D programmes in the non-food area. Plant based specialty products and biopolymers. Nordic Council of Ministers

    Google Scholar 

  • DCENR (2015) Ireland’s transition to a low carbon energy future 2015-2030. Department for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources

    Google Scholar 

  • DECC (2012) UK Bioenergy Strategy. Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2012) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee of the Regions. Innovating for sustainable growth: a bioeconomy for Europe. COM 60

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2014) An ex-post evaluation of the rationale, implementation and impacts of EU Seventh Framework Programme (2007–2013), Cooperation Theme 2: Food, agriculture and fisheries, and biotechnology. Report to the European Commission

    Google Scholar 

  • FNR (2015) Entwicklung der Anbaufläche für nachwachsende Rohstoffe. Fachagentur Nachwachsende Rohstoffe e.V.

    Google Scholar 

  • Görmann H, Kreins P, Breuer T (2007) Germany—the European energy-corn-belt? Agrarwirtschaft 56:263–271

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauck J (2012) Speech of the Federal President at the opening of the Environment Week. Eröffnung der Woche der Umwelt 2012. www.bundespraesident.de

  • Isermeyer F, Zimmer Y (2006) Thesen zur Bioenergiepolitik in Deutschland: Agrarökonomen warnen vor negativen Folgen einer Fortführung der bisherigen Förderpolitik—Derzeit überhitzte Bioenergiekonjunktur birgt Gefahr von Fehlinvestitionen—Businessplan muss Grundlage für Neuausrichtung schaffen. Agra Europe (Bonn) 47(23):1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Isermeyer F, Bolte A, Dieter M, de Witte T, Zimmer Y (2012) Bewertung der Leopoldina-Studie 2012 zur Bioenergie. Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institute, Braunscweig, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaltschmitt M, Reinhardt GA, Stelzer T (1997) Life cycle analysis of biofuels under different environmental aspects. Biomass Energ 12(2):121–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Klawitter N (2012) Corn-mania: Biogas boom in Germany leads to modern-day land grab. Spiegel Online International. http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/biogas-subsidies-in-germany-lead-to-modern-day-land-grab-a-852575.html

  • Lindegaard K (2013) Why we need an energy crops scheme. Position Paper. Crops for energy. http://www.crops4energy.co.uk

  • Lovett A, Sünnenberg G, Dockerty T (2014) The availability of land for perennial energy crops in Great Britain. GCB Bioenergy 6:99–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mildon R (1986) Surpluses and the common agricultural policy. In: Raymond WF, Larvor R (eds) Alternative uses for agricultural surpluses. Elsevier Applied Sciences, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Monbiot G (2014) How a false solution to climate change is damaging the natural world. Biomass and Bioenergy. George Monbiot’s blog. www.theguardian.com

  • Moran D, Barnes A, McVittie A (2007) The rationale for Defra investment in R&D underpinning the genetic improvement of crops and animals. Defra report for project IF0101. SAC Commercial Ltd, Scotland, United Kingdom

    Google Scholar 

  • NLWKN (2010) Grundwasser Band 10. Niedersächsischer Landesbetrieb fürWasserwirtschaft, Küsten- und Naturschutz

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce D (2015) DRAX, UK—up in flames. How biomass burning wrecks Europe’s forests. Case study report. Fern

    Google Scholar 

  • Rauch A, Thöne M (2012) Biofuels—at what cost? International Institute for Sustainable Development

    Google Scholar 

  • Rexen F (1997) Information on Nordic and EU R&D programmes in the non-food area. Plant based specialty products and biopolymers. Nordic Council of Ministers

    Google Scholar 

  • Rexen F, Munck L (1984) Cereal crops for industrial use in Europe. European Commission

    Google Scholar 

  • Renewable Fuels Agency (2008) The Gallagher Review of the indirect effects of biofuels production

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose D (2014) The bonfire of insanity http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2581887/The-bonfire-insanity-Woodland-shipped-3-800-miles-burned-Drax-power-station-It-belches-CO2-coal-huge-cost-YOU-pay-cleaner-greener-Britain.html#ixzz41DIwM8n6

  • Soldatos P (2015) Economic aspects of growing perennial grasses for fibre and bioenergy in South Europe. Abstracts from the International Conference on ‘Perennial biomass crops for a resource-constrained world’ 7–9 September 2015. Hohenheim, Germany. www.biomass2015.eu

  • Stechmesser G (n.d.) Initiativen mit Weitblick. www.initiativen-mit-weitblick.de

  • Stern N (2006) The economics of climate change (the stern review). HM Treasury, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Theuvsen L, Plumeyer C-H, Emmann C (2011) Einfluss der Biogasproduktion auf den Landpachtmarkt in Niedersachsen. Niedersächsisches Ministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft, Verbraucherschutz und Landesentwicklung

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren CR, Burton R, Buchanan O, Birnie RV (2016) Limited adoption of short rotation coppice: the role of farmers’ socio-cultural identity. J Rural Stud 45:175–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westhoek H, Lesschen J, Rood T, Wagner S, De Marco A, Murphy-Bokern D, Leip A, van Grinsven H, Sutton M, Oenema O (2014) Food choices, health and environment: effects of cutting Europe’s meat and dairy intake. Glob Environ Chang 26:196–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wintzer D, Fürniss B, Klein-Vielhauer S, Leible L, Nieke E, Rösch C, Tangen H (1993) Technikfolgenabschätzung zum Thema Nachwachsende Rohstoffe. Reihe A: Angewandte Wissenschaften, Sonderheft, Schriftenreihe des BML, Landwirtschaftsverlag, Münster-Hiltrup

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmer Y, Berenz S, Döhler H, Isermeyer F, Leible L, Schmitz N, Schweinle J, Toews T, Tuch U, Vetter A, Witte T de (2008) Klima- und energiepolitische Analyse ausgewählter Bioenergie-Linien. Braunschweig: vTI, V, 120 p, Landbauforsch SH 318

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

Donal Murphy-Bokern works on the WATBIO project (Development of improved perennial non-food biomass and bioproduct crops for water-stressed environments) which is a collaborative research project funded from the European Union’s Seventh Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement No 311929.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. Murphy-Bokern .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Murphy-Bokern, D. (2016). Pointers for Bioenergy Policy in a Resource-Constrained World. In: Barth, S., Murphy-Bokern, D., Kalinina, O., Taylor, G., Jones, M. (eds) Perennial Biomass Crops for a Resource-Constrained World. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44530-4_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics