III li'llll NO NORDISK BIOENERGIKONFERANSE. Mil. NEl-K'O--! MARKED, MILJØ OG TEKNIKK RADISSON SAS PLAZA HOTEL I OSLO OKTOBER II 1

Transkript

1 NEl-K'O--! 1 II 1 1 'ill Mill mil I I mil Mil il 11 in lil'illill NO III li'llll ii in 1 I1 III ii NORDISK BIOENERGIKONFERANSE MARKED, MILJØ OG TEKNIKK RADISSON SAS PLAZA HOTEL I OSLO OKTOBER 1997

2 DISCLAIMER Portions of this document may be illegible electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document.

3 BIOENERGI 97 Konferanse rapport NORDISK BIOENERGIKONFERANSE MARKED, MILJØ OG TEKNIKK RADISSON SAS PLAZA HOTEL I OSLO OKTOBER 1997

4 Innhold Åpning The market for bioenergy in Europe 7 Heinz Kopetz, president i European Biomass Association Det nordiske energimarkedet 17 Bioenergi - dagens bruk og fremtidig satsing i det nordiske energimarkedet 19 Erling Diesen, direktør i Norges vassdrags- og energivenk Naturgas konsekvenser for bioenergimarknaden i Norden 29 Roger Bergstrom, leder i Svenska Bhenergifirenmgen (SVEBIO) Nya miljoavgifter i Finland konsekvenser for bioenergimarknaden 39 Toge Fredriksson. Puuenergia.Trdenergi rf.wood Energy Association Fossile brensler, dagens bruk og fremtidig konkurranse med bioenergi 43 Peter Normark Sørensen, avdelingssjef Statoil als Stymedel for introduktion av bioenergi i Sverige 45 Tomas Kåberger, forsker, ChalmersTekniska Higskola Introduksjon av bioenergi i Norge 49 Svein Roar Brunborg, avdelingsdirektør, OJe- og energidepartementet Biomasseanvendelse i Danmark: Mål og virkemidler i «ENERGI 21» 53 Ole Odgaard, Energistyrelsen Bioenergy in the new fmnish energy strategy 65 Sirkka Vilkamojndustrial Counsellor, Head of Energy Efficiency and Technology Division Ministry oftrade and lndustry,energy Department Bioenergi og skogens rolle i COj-kretsløpet 71 Knut Dæhkn, f/lkesskogsjef i Oppland Biologisk afbalanceret anvendelse af skovene som energikilde 77 Niek Heding, forskningsleder, Forsknmgscenter for Skov og Landskap New technologies reducing emissions from combustion of biofuels 85 Heikki Oravainen.VTT Energia Askåterforing - en viktig faktor i skogsbranslets kretslopp 95 Anno Lundborg, miljø- og økotogiansvarligvattenfall UtvecklingAB

5 Parallelle avdelinger A og B A Produksjon og omsetning av biobrensel 101 Bioenergia Research Programme 103 Dan Asplund, Jyvaskylå Science Park Ltd. Rundbalningsteknik for produktion av tradbransle 121 Urban Larsson, daglig leder.traenergi Våst AB Morgendagens bioenergi pellets fra prototype til fullskala 123 Rune Brusletta, daglig leder, Cambi Bioenergi as, Cambi Pellets Import af biobraendsler, er det nødvendige > 125 Viktor Jensen, sekretariatsleder Danske Fjemvarmeværkers Forening Procurement and production of biofuels - a Finnish example of private entrepreneurship 131 SeppoTuomi,Work Efficiency Institute, Department of Forestry, Finland Nye forretningsideer, eksempler på strategier og organisationsmodeller for salg af bioenergi 141 Anders Evald, Videncenter for Halm- og Flisfyring, dk-teknik, Danmark Hydro Texaco - Norsk oljeselskap satser på bioenergi 143 Kjell Krogh, markedsdirektør, Hydro Texaco as Pellets - forådlad bioenergi på frammarsch 147 Jan-Erik Dahlstrom, daglig leder, Kils Energi AB B Omforming og utnyttelse av biobrensel Nye teknologier 153 Gasification-based energy production systems for different size classes - potential and state of R&D 155 Esa Kurkela.VTT Energiy, - Gasification and Gas Cleaning Group Nye forgasningsanlaeg til kraftvarme i Danmark 167 Søren Houmøller.Videncenter for Halm- og Flisfyring, dk-teknik Pyrolyseteknologi for produksjon av bio-karbon og energi i smelteverksindustrien 177 Lars Nygaard, Fesil ASA og Glenn Scott Christiansen, S. Syr Pedersen AS Våtskeformiga biodrivmedel 185 Rolf Berg, BEFRI Konsult Krafdvarme produksjon fra biobrentler 189 Power/heat production from biomass in Finland - two modern finnish examples 191 Martti Åijala Teknologisjef, IVO Technology Center Elproduksjon fra biobrensler i Sverige Henrik Lundberg, markedssjef.tps Termiska ProcesserAB Småskala kraft/varmeproduksjon basert på biomasse 195 Morten Fossum, forsker SINTEF Energi, avd. ForTermisk energi og vannkraft Kraftvarmeproduktion fra biobrændsel 205 Håkon Mosbech, Udviklingschef, ELKRAFT, Danmark left BLAS3K

6 Bioenergi 97 Nordisk Bioenergikonferanse Marked, miljø og teknikk Radisson SAS Plaza Hotel i Oslo oktober 1997 Forord Bioenergi 97 ble arrangert på Radisson SAS Plaza Hotel i Oslo oktober 1997 i samarbeid mellom Videncenter for Halm- og Flisfyring, FENBIO, SVEBIO og NoBio. NoBio var koordinator for konferansen. Bioenergi 97 er den 3. nordiske bioenergikonferansen i rekken. Den første nordiske bioenergikonferansen ble arrangert i Stockholm i 1990, etterfulgt av Bioenergi 93, som ble arrangert i Helsingfors Bioenergi 97 omhandler sentrale tema for bioenergiaktører i Norden, samtidig som konferansen også retter seg mot fagmiljøer over hele Europa. Økt politisk motstand mot bruk av ikke-fomybare fossile brensler og kjernekraft har ført til at fornybare energikilder får stadig større oppmerksomhet og betydning. Biomasse fra jord-/skogbruk og avfallssektoren representerer i denne sammenheng viktige fornybare energiressurser som myndighetene i de nordiske land ønsker å videreutvikle. Teknologiutviklingen og markedsøkningen de siste årene har resultert i biobrenselanlegg med bedre betjeningskomfort, økt tilgjengelighet og reduserte kostnader. Disse forholdene, kombinert med forventet prisøkning på elkraft og olje, vil gi økte markedsandeler for bioenergi i de nærmeste årene - ikke minst i de nordiske land. Dette er sentrale tema på Bioenergi 97 Denne rapporten inneholder de fleste innlegg presentert på Bioenergi 97. Jeg vil på vegne av arrangørene takke for bidrag fra Olje- og energidepartementet og Altener - EUs program for økt bruk av fornybare energikilder. Til slutt vil jeg benytte anledningen til å takke programkomiteens medlemmer for innsatsen og alle foredragsholdere for deres bidrag. Knut H. Birkeland Leder i programkomiteen Bioenergi 97 Bioenergi 97 Nordisk bioenergikonferanse Programkomiteen Knut H. Birkeland, NoBio (leder i komiteen) Lars Ravn-Jensen, Videncenter for Halm- og Flisfyring Arnold Kyrre Martinsen, NoBio Kent Nystrom, SVEBIO Raimo Sopo, FINBIO »»»«^ KEXT! f t BLANK

7 Dr. Heinz Kopetz, president I European Blomass Association The market for bioenergy in Europe I thank you very much for this invitation. It gives me the opportunity to present the ideas and proposals of AEBIOM concerning the future markets for bioenergy in Europe. Many ideas in the field of bioenergy were first developed in the Nordic countries. Many delegations of different European regions often came to you to learn from your experiences and results. We are grateful for your initiatives and hope you will also influence the future energy policy in Europe in favour of the renewable energy sources (RES). At present an intensive international discussion about the future community policies in different areas is going on in Europe: the reform of the common agricultural policy the preparation of a white book and an action plan for the deployment of RES the enlargement of the Union versus central Europe steps to mitigate the CO. emissions are on the agenda. There are many dependences and interrelationsships between these topics. Therefore it should be tried to develope an integrated approach to cope with the problems of COJ mitigation, indigenous energy supply and new outlets for the agricultural and forest production. The extension of the market for bioenergy could contribute substantially to solve the mentioned problems. The present situation The demand for energy in Europe amounts at present to about 16 PWh (1400 Mtoe). About 50% of the energy goes to the heat market, 27% to the transportation sector and 23% to other purposes (light, communication, power). Low temperature heat needs the biggest share of the total energy supply. Overhead 1: final energy in Europe The supply of energy is dominated by fossil fuels (81%), followed by nuclear power (13%) and finally by RES (6%). It is expected that the demand for energy will grow up to 17,4 PWh in the year 2010.

8 Overhead 2: Energieaufbringung Europa The green book for RES and the agenda 2000 At the end of the year 1996 the European Commission published a greenbook on RES. In this green book the commision proposes to double the share of renewables up to 12% in the year This corresponds to 2088 TWh (180 Mtoe). According to the greenbook the composition of the renewables in 1995 was as follows : Table 1 Renewables in the EU in 1995 Hydro Biomass Wind Solar Others Total TWh Mtoe % ,9 36, ,1 59,5 2 0,2 0,3 3 0,3 0,4 29 2,5 3, ,0 100,0 Overhead 3: Renewables in the EU 15 In 1995 hydropower and biomass comprised 95,6% of the total energy supply of all renewables. Referring to the study TERES II and calculations by AEBIOM the additional potential of all renewables until assuming favourable political frame conditions - appears to be the following: Table 2 Additional potential of'renewables until 2010 (ERU15) Hydro Biomass Wind Solar Others TWh Mtoe + 3,0 + 90,0 + 4,8 + 5,7 + 7,5 Sum ,0 Additional percentage compared to 1995-figures + 12% + 219% % % % (Source: TERES II, calculations by AEBIOM) Overhead 4: Additional potential of renewables until 2010 This table explains the probable future development of the different renewables. There are, for example, only a few more suitable sites for hydropower, because most of the economically feasible sites have already been exploited and in many countries the futher development is prevented by ecological restrictions. A doubling of the current 8

9 value is impossible, an additional 12% seems feasible. Contrary to that, the potential of biomass is presently not utilized to a great extent. An utilization of three times the present amount is considered being a possible option. Wind and active solar energy are relatively new energy-carriers for Europe. They are on the beginning of t heir market penetration and a 20fold extension is considered possible. Also for other renewables like geothermics, heat-pumps or tidal power stations an extension can be expected. Nevertheless, about 73% of the potential of the renewables for the next 14 years will have to come from biomass. Summing up the tables 1 and 2 explains in detail the meaning of a doubling of the share of renewables as it is proposed in the green book of the commission. Table 3 Target for the renewables in 2010 Hydro Biomass Wind Solar Others Sum TWh Mtoe 27,9 131,1 5,0 6,0 10,0 180,0 % 15% 73% 3% 3% 6% 100% Overhead 5: Target for RES in 2010 The result: Three fourths of the whole supply of renewables will have to be provided by biomass. These results lead to further questions: Are agriculture and forestry able to supply this amount of biomass? Where are the markets to sell this quantity of bioenergy? Biomass supply The actual supply basis of biomass consists of fire wood, wood residuals and by-products of the wood industry as well as energy crops such as about ha short rotation forests, mainly in the nordic countries, several ha set aside land to produce rape seed, cereals and sugar beats as raw material for the production of liquid biofuels. At present the liquid biofuel industry suffers a shortage of raw materials due to a reduction of the set aside programm and an increase of the prices for oil seeds on the world market. Obviously, the increase of the energetic use of biomass from 477 TWh to 1521 TWh needs a restructuring of the supply side. According to calculations of AEBIOM the supply of biomass could be organised als follows:

10 Table 4 possible supply ofbiomass TWh Mtoe continuation of the present contribution ,1 additional use of residuals, byproducts of agriculture and forestry, MWS ,0 solid biomass 1 ) from short rotation forests and other energy cultures energy cultures for 2) ethanol and oil sum Overhead 6: Possible supply ofbiomass ,5 10,5 131,1 The surface needed to produce 447 TWh (38,5 Mtoe) solid biomass corresponds to 7 Mio ha land. The underlying assumption being an annual yield of 121 dry matter per ha. To produce 11 Miot of liquid biofuels also 7 Mio ha land are required assuming an annual yield of 1,61 of fuel equivalent. Variations are possible depending upon the production mix between ethanol and oilseeds. According to these calculations about 14 Mioha land would be needed to secure the supply as compared to about ha set aside land at present used for this purpose. The latest agricultural market studies of the commission, published in May 1997, indicate an increasing overproduction of cereals in the next years. Without exports 15 Mio ha land would have to be fallowed to avoid growing stocks of cereals in the next years. Therefore, the capacity seems to be sufficient to comply with the goals of the greenbook. Yet, the political and economic framework is not in favour of the development of the bioenergy option. The agricultural chapter of the Agenda 2000, published in July 1997, does not analyse the energy option but puts all its emphasis on the export of commodities at world market prices. Therefore it is proposed to reduce the obligatory se aside rate to zero. This part of the agenda should be rewritten. The new ranking for the use of land ought to be food and feed energy and exports. A sufficient supply ofbiomass can only be guaranteed if a comprehensive energy crop programm will be started. This only will succeed if - the farmers will earn enough to cultivate energy crops, - the outlet for this production is organized 10

11 - sufficient supply for the European food and feed market is secured. This goal could be attained if the energy crop program is organised within the frame work of a voluntary set aside program, with the same primes as for other crops, and a contract system to secure the sales. Markets for biomass: heat, electricity, transportation fuel In 1995 the contribution of biomass to the energy market was 477TWh (41,1 Mtoe). 90% of the biomass was used to produce heat, about 9% to produce electricity and 1% to produce transportation fuels. Table 5 shows how biomass is used at present and how biomass could extend its importance until Table 5 Energetic use of biomass in the EU Heat single houses District heat, process heat Electricity Liquid biofuels Sum TWh 301,8 116, , Mtoe 26,0 10,0 4,6 0,5 41,1 possible TWh 707,8 464,0 221,6 127, , Mtoe ,0 19,1 11,0 131,1 (Source: annex to Green Paper, calculations by AEBIOM) Overhead 7: Use ofbioenergy in the EU (1995) The growth of the share of biomass from 477 to TWh demands fundamental restructuring in parts of the European energy economy. Biomass will have to penetrate all markets where this is possible. Heat market According to calculations of AEBIOM it is expected that TWh - 77 % - of the bioenergy supply will be used to deliver heat. There are different ways how biomass is being introduced into the heat market: - heating installations (boilers) for private households and small firms - district heating performances - industrial users of (process-) heat Small heating installations The space heating market currently and will be in the future the most important sector for the demand of biomass (more than half of European houses are being heated by 11

12 single systems). Two options exist concerning space heating: - single house heating - district heating Concerning the systems for single houses, one can differentiate between - logwood based heating systems, - woodchip systems and - pellets systems. Experiences of recent years show that especially automatic pellets systems face high acceptance on the market. There are excellent prospects for further development of pellets systems and their penetration of the heat market. Actually, investment costs for small biomass boilers are two- to three times as high as for gas- or oil fired systems. Even if the running costs for the fuel - depending on the taxation - are close to each other for different systems, the high investment costs often are a barrier that can not be overcome without financial support. Investment costs for single house systems are in the range between and ECU. Good experiences in market penetration have been made where subsidy of 30 to 40% of the investment costs were payed. To introduce biomass into the heat market, such financial support will be necessary and is recommended. It should, for example, be implemented for five years and afterwards be evaluated. About 10 to 15 million flats will have to be additionally supplied by biomass within the coming 12 years, if the goal of introducing 406 TWh biomass additionally in the heat market should be attained. District heating District heating systems are a precondition for thermodynamically efficient biomass based electricity production, on the other side they are very capital intensive. Normally, the costs for the grids and the combustion systems amount to by and large the same. Establishement of the grids can be consideres being investments in the infrastructure. Practical experience has shown, that subsidies of 50% of investment costs have led to a rapid increase in the number of district heating grids. It is recommended that biomass based district heating grids should be subsidized by a joint program of the Commission and the national governments. Programs by the European banks could be helpful, because the whole amount of investment is extraordinarily high. When, for example, 232 TWh were introduced into the domestic sector and 116 TWh into the process heat sector, more than 8 million flats would have to be connected to district heating grids supplied by biomass. This number could be reached by switching already existing grids to supply by biomass or by the installation of new plants. 12

13 Industrial users of (process-) heat For implementation of biomass in industrial enterprises, normally no or at least little subsidies are required. Speaking for the whole heat market generally, to penetrate the market only investment costs should be subsidized and not the running operation. One way to better penetrate the heat market could be the elaboration of regional heat programs. Regional action plan for heat: The member state should be invited to submit to the commission regional heat concepts,,heat from biomass". The content of these concepts: - a description of the region including information about the number of people living in the area, the number of flats, buildings, heating systems, public buildings - proposals for investment aids for stoves, chip and pellet burners, in single houses, district heating installations - the percentage of public investment aid, which should range between 25 and 55 % - discription of the regional biomass supply (wood, wood residuals, short rotation forests, straw etc.) and the tons of oil to be sustituted - time schedule for the private investment The necessary investment should be financed by private investors and public money coming from the member states and the European Union. Expected total cost within the Union: 22 Mio houses, subsidy per house ecu ecu coming from the union, the rest from member states. This would require 28,6 billions Ecu from the Union within 12 years, almost 2,4 billions/year The financing of this investment should become an important new task for the structural fonds of the union. 13

14 The market for electricity Green electricity is a way to promote renewable energy resources. The extension of electricity production based on renewables is different from one country to the other. Partly, the technologies to be implemented are quite new and not yet commercially available (like gasification and pyrolysis, for example). Often the discussion is focused on photovoltaics and wind energy and the - partly tried and tested - technologies to produce electricity by biomass are ignored. These technologies are electricity by biogas cofiring of biomass in coal fired power stations steam engines and steam turbines gasification of biomass, utilization in gasengines and -turbines engines fuelled with vegetable oils production of pyrolysis oil and electricity production in engines Only the energy policy can ensure the necessary rules to sell electricity from biomass into the public grid. The electricity regulation 96/2 EG dated 19/12/96 chapter 4, Art. 8 sets the bases.,,article 8, number 3: The member state has the possibility to oblige the grid owners to give priority to electricity being produced by using RES, waste or CHP-technics." Therefore member states have the possibility to give priority to electricity from biomass without restrictions. The only real restriction will be the higher cost of this electricity. Therefore the Commission should propose in the upcoming white book on RES, a minimum share of electricity from renewable energy carriers in such a manner, that each member state has to increase the share of RES in electricity production into that simultaneously as to reduce the existing CO2-emissions. At the same time a minimum paybackrate for electricity from biomass should be set forward for the community. The additional cost should be shared by all electricity consumers, for instance by introducing an extra charge for the use of the grid. As a realistic target for electricity for biomass within 12 years 80 TWhel are proposed. TRANSPORTATION FUELS The existing model - to produce raw materials for the energy sector on set aside land - is not successful. There is no stability in the supply of raw materials for the industry due to the changing set aside rate. Therefore the following steps are proposed: 14

15 Definition of a quantitative and coordinated target for liquid biofuels in the union. The target should be 11 Mtoe liquid biofuels (ethanol, ETBE or biodiesel) by the year Given a total consumption of transportation fuels of 270 mtoe this goal corresponds to 4 %. A blending rate of biofuels to fuels To reach this target the blending of biofuels should be obligatory according to a time schedule such as the following: Year blending rate 1% 2% 3% 4% All oil companies selling fuels in Europe should be obliged to comply with this blending rules by using ethanol, ETBE or RME, these fuels being mutually changable. The system should be flexible. By using a quota system companies blending a higher rate of biofuels as required should have the opportunity to sell this surplus quantities as quotas to companies that do not comply otherwise with the rules. Fees Companies, not able to fullfill these obligations should pay fees per missing ton to the commission. The amount of this fee could be the difference between the cost of fossil fuel and renewable fuels plus 20 %. Contracts Farmers should be offered contracts for several years to provide the raw material for the industry. Land program The commission should define the quantity of arable land in ha (based on proposals of the member countries) being reserved for contracts for the bioenergy sector. The industry has to secure its supply by using these contracts instead of buying the raw materials on the world market. There should be no price differences between the prices of the raw material for the food market and for the energy market. The farmers cultivating energy crops should get the same prime as for voluntary set aside land or ordinary crops. Conclusions: Bioenergy in Europe is in a very slow development, although the capacities are big. 15

16 These capacities only will be used if the economic conditions and the public awareness are in favour of RES. The economic instruments to foster the markets for bioenergy such as subsidies for investment taxes on fossil fuels legal regulations are known and should be applied all over Europe. A more active policy in favour of RES could help to create new employment, to mitigate the COJ -emissions, to avoid overproduction in agriculture and to reduce the dependency of imports. A good combination of private initiatives and favorable economic conditions set by the governments would boost the markets for bioenergy. 16

17 Det nordiske energimarkedet 17

18 Erling Diesen, direktør i Norges vassdrags- og energiverk Bioenergi - dagens bruk og fremtidig satsing i det nordiske energimarkedet Innledning I internasjonal energiterminologi inngår bioenergi i begrepet "nye fornybare energikilder". Som kjent har biobrensel blitt brukt i mange årtusener, først i husholdninger og senere også i større monn av industrien. La oss si at "ny" i denne sammenheng viser til den fornyede og økende interesse for bioenergi som har sett dagens lys de siste årene. Det finnes en rekke gode grunner til å satse på bioenergi: - Bruk av bioenergi til oppvarming kombinert med vannbåren varme bidrar til å øke den nasjonale energifleksibiliteten og er et godt alternativ både til oljefyring og til direkte elektrisk oppvarming, som fra et termodynamisk synspunkt er mindre effektivt. - Bioenergi bidrar ikke til å øke utslippene av drivhusgassen CO2, så lenge uttaket er mindre enn tilveksten - Utnyttet på en riktig måte er bioenergi i de fleste tilfeller, også lokalt, et miljømessig bedre alternativ enn oljefyring. Partikkelutslippene fra eksempelvis vedfyring må reduseres mest mulig, og utviklingen av bedre ildsteder er ett ledd i denne prosessen. - Bioenergi bidrar til en bedre ressursutnyttelse, slik at det som ellers vil være blant annet avfall fra husholdninger, industri eller skogsdrift kan omformes til varme eller el hos kunden - Biobrensel er en lokal og regional ressurs, og større utnyttelse av denne kan gi varige arbeidsplasser i distriktene, samtidig som transportbehovet for eksempelvis petroleumsprodukter reduseres. Større offentlig satsing på bioenergi er forholdsvis nytt i Norge, og markedet begynner nå å synliggjøre seg. I våre naboland, Sverige, Danmark og Finland, har bioenergi i mange år hatt en mye større andel av det totale energiforbruket, og satsingen fortsetter med tyngde på denne energibærer. I Sverige har man nylig besluttet å ta de første kjernekraftverkene ut av drift, og bioenergi skal forutsettes å erstatte en vesentlig del av denne energien. I Sverige og Finland satses det for tiden i stor skala på el- og varmeproduksjon fra fremfor alt trebrensel, mens danskene satser mer på utnyttelse av halm og biogass. I det etterfølgende presenteres litt statistikk og noen sammenligninger mellom de nordiske land, både hva gjelder energitilførsel, energibruk og offentlige satsinger i 19

19 disse landene. Energiproduksjon og -bruk Dagens tilførsel og bruk av energi i de nordiske land sammenlignes i tabellene nedenfor: Norge * Sverige Danmark Finland SUM Bio Olje Kull/ koks Gass Energiproduksjon - Norden Angitte verdier er i TWh/år, millioner innbyggere og prosentandel bioenergiproduksjon. Kjerne-Vannkraft kraft , ,03 NFE** <1 8 2 <1 10 Elimport SUM Innb. [mill.] 4,2 8,5 5,1 4,9 22,7 [% bio] (Kilder: Off. statistikk, innbyggere fra «Forskning och framsteg -Lilla Vårldsatlasen 1994») *.tallene for Norge er foreløpige 1996-tall **:NFE inkluderer sol og vind, samt utnyttelse av spillvarme Tabell 1 Sluttforbruk - Norden 1995 Norge Sverige Danmark Finland Olje/gass Kull El Fjernvarme Bio NFE 47 «NFE» * Marg. Marg. 7 Marg. SUM SUM (Kilder: Off. statistikk, innbyggere fra «Forskning och framsteg - Ulla Vårldsatlasen 1994») Norge skiller seg ut i forhold til sine naboland med den dominans vannkraft har i vår energiforsyning. Kjernekraft har fått en betydelig rolle i Sverige og Finland, mens kull er mer brukt i Danmark enn i de øvrige nordiske land. Når vi fokuserer på bioenergi, står Finland og Sverige som de store foregangslandene i Norden, spesielt når det gjelder trebrensel. Dette forklares naturlig nok av skogindustriens størrelse i disse to landene, men også Danmark har en betydelig andel biobrensel i form av fremfor alt halm og avfall. En sammenligning av biobrenselforbruket i de fire nordiske land gis nedenfor: 20

20 Danmark - bioenergi Halm Trebrensel Biogass Avfall SUM Finland - bioenergi 1995 Svartlut Industrielt treavfall Torv Avfall Ved SUM 1995 TWh 3,65 5,12 0,49 6,81 16,07 TWh 44 12,7 18,7 0,2 0,9 76,5 Sverige - bioenergi 1995 Fjernvarme Trebrensel Torv Avfall Industri Treforedling Sagbruk Øvrig (torv mm) Husholdninger Vedfyring (94) SUM TWh 18,4 10,4 3,6 4,4 47,6 39 8,4 0,2 11,4 77,4 Norge - bioenergi 1994 Trebearb.ind Treforedling Ved Fjernvarme SUM TWh 1,4 3,8 6,1 1,3 12,6 Det fremgår tydelig fra disse tabellene at de forskjellige lands industriprofll gjenspeiler utnyttelsen av bioenergi. Som nevnt er det en klar dominans for halm og avfall i Danmark, mens skogindustrien i Finland og Sverige står for store deler av biobrenselforbruket i disse landene. I Finland er i tillegg torv mye brukt, og ca 60% av denne torven er brukt i kraftvarmeverk. Andre elementer som er med på å forklare forskjellene mellom Norge og våre naboland, er: - Større grad av vannbåren varme - Større andel fjernvarmeanlegg - Større mengde lettere tilgjengelige bioenergiressurser, enklere (flatere) topografi, større tetthet av veier - Mer automatisering i skogbruket og muligens mer effektivt uttak av hogstavfall - Et høyere prisnivå på olje og el til alminnelig forsyning 21

21 Potensialer for utnyttelse av bioenergi. Potensialer for utnyttelse av energikilder kan beregnes på mange måter, og svarene på slike beregninger må benyttes med ydmykhet for følsomheten for hvilke parameterverdier som er lagt til grunn, med andre ord om potensialet gjenspeiler et brutto- eller nettopotensial, teoretisk eller realistisk (praktisk) potensial. Beregnede potensialer for bioenergi, dvs teoretiske realistiske potensialer, er noe forskjellige for de fire nordiske landene, noe som fremgår av tabellen nedenfor. Disse potensialene er ikke utarbeidet med nøyaktig samme forutsetninger, og bør i denne sammenheng kun betraktes som veiledende potensialer: Bioenergipotensial Norge Sverige Danmark Finland SUM TWh (Kilde: NoBio, VTTEnergy) I alle disse landene foreligger en teoretisk mulighet for en økning til omtrent det doble av dagens forbruk. Nå er det mange ting som spiller inn om store økninger i forbruket kommer til å skje. Slike faktorer er i stor grad prisen på de konkurrerende energibærere, internasjonale konjunkturer spesielt innen skog- og jordbruk, samt øvrige rammebetingelser, som eksempelvis lover, avgifter eller støtteordninger. Energimarkedene i Norden og Europa beveger seg i større og større grad vekk fra regulerte regimer og i steden ønskes en større grad av fri prissetting på energi. I Norge, Finland og Sverige er markedene deregulert, og biobrensel skal i utgangspunktet konkurrere på like vilkår som el og olje. Vi vet at eksterne kostnader ved bruk av ulike energikilder ikke alltid er godt nok reflektert i energiprisene, og akkurat miljømessige konsekvenser har også tidligere vært blant drivkreftene bak statlige subsidieordninger for bioenergi. Det satses på bioenergi for å på den ene siden å øke andelen varme- og el-produksjon fra fornybar energi, og på den andre siden redusere bruken av elektrisitet til direkte oppvarming. STATLIG ENGASJEMENT FOR Å STØTTE BIOENERGI: Norge I Norge gis det i 1997 støtte til aktiviteter som skal fremme bruken av bioenergi. Dette kan være investeringer i produksjonsanlegg for pellets eller investering i forbrenningsanlegg. Det er i Norge valgt en ordning hvor større geografiske områder må gå sammen og legge frem en samordnet lokal strategi for hvordan man ønsker å satse, og hvordan dette er forankret i industri, energiverk m.fl. i regionen. Støtte gis med inntil 40% (helst 22