Biomass energy in industrialised countries—a view of the future

BackgroundThe present study draws motivation from the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and explores the nexus between access to modern cooking energy sources, responsible energy consumption, climate change mitigation, and economic growth. Using 2018 demographic and health survey data, the study examines the influence of key socioeconomic and demographic factors on household choice of cooking energy in Nigeria.ResultsThe empirical results show that traditional energy sources are dominant among Nigerian households (74.24%) compared to modern energy sources (25.76%). Regarding energy demographics, male-headed households show more usage of modern energy sources (19.86%) compared to female-headed households (5.90%). Regional analysis reveals that the northwest region predominantly uses traditional energy sources (18.60% of the share of total traditional energy sources), while the southwest region shows the greatest usage of modern energy sources (10.52% of the share of total modern energy sources). Binary logistic regression analysis reveals the positive and statistically significant influence of wealth index, education, and geopolitical region on the likelihood of utilizing modern energy sources. Conversely, household size and place of residence indicate an inverse relationship with the likelihood of adopting modern energy sources.ConclusionsThese findings have important policy implications for energy efficiency, environmental sustainability, and improving the quality of life in Nigeria, which is currently plagued with significant energy poverty, especially in rural communities.

Using forests to mitigate climate change has gained much interest in science and policy discussions. We examine the evidence for carbon benefits, environmental and monetary costs, risks and trade-offs for a variety of activities in three general strategies: (1) land use change to increase forest area (afforestation) and avoid deforestation; (2) carbon management in existing forests; and (3) the use of wood as biomass energy, in place of other building materials, or in wood products for carbon storage. We found that many strategies can increase forest sector carbon mitigation above the current 162-256 Tg C/yr, and that many strategies have co-benefits such as biodiversity, water, and economic opportunities. Each strategy also has trade-offs, risks, and uncertainties including possible leakage, permanence, disturbances, and climate change effects. Because approximately 60% of the carbon lost through deforestation and harvesting from 1700 to 1935 has not yet been recovered and because some strategies store carbon in forest products or use biomass energy, the biological potential for forest sector carbon mitigation is large. Several studies suggest that using these strategies could offset as much as 10-20% of current U.S. fossil fuel emissions. To obtain such large offsets in the United States would require a combination of afforesting up to one-third of cropland or pastureland, using the equivalent of about one-half of the gross annual forest growth for biomass energy, or implementing more intensive management to increase forest growth on one-third of forestland. Such large offsets would require substantial trade-offs, such as lower agricultural production and non-carbon ecosystem services from forests. The effectiveness of activities could be diluted by negative leakage effects and increasing disturbance regimes. Because forest carbon loss contributes to increasing climate risk and because climate change may impede regeneration following disturbance, avoiding deforestation and promoting regeneration after disturbance should receive high priority as policy considerations. Policies to encourage programs or projects that influence forest carbon sequestration and offset fossil fuel emissions should also consider major items such as leakage, the cyclical nature of forest growth and regrowth, and the extensive demand for and movement of forest products globally, and other greenhouse gas effects, such as methane and nitrous oxide emissions, and recognize other environmental benefits of forests, such as biodiversity, nutrient management, and watershed protection. Activities that contribute to helping forests adapt to the effects of climate change, and which also complement forest carbon storage strategies, would be prudent.

Many rural communities in developing countries continue to rely on biomass for energy, which has a negative impact on their socioeconomic development. Following the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals—zero hunger and affordable modern/clean energy for all—many developing nations are now taking substantial initiatives to enhance rural clean energy access. As a result, this research explored rural household behaviors toward adopting alternative modern energy sources in East Gojjam Zone, Ethiopia. In an attempt to do so, 317 rural households were surveyed, and the data were analyzed using the multivariate probit (MVP) model. According to the MVP model results, education level, land size, credit availability, awareness, distance to market, and early neighbor adopters have positive effects on the choice of solar energy sources, whereas livestock holding, household income, extension contact, distance to biomass sources, and training access have negative effects. Besides this, the estimated MVP for improved cook stoves is positively influenced by livestock holding, income, extension contact, distance to biomass sources, awareness, training access, and early adopters. In contrast, education level, household size, agricultural experience, land size, access to credit, and distance to market all have a negative influence. Moreover, extension contact, distance to biomass sources, and availability of training have a positive impact on the choice of biogas energy sources, whereas credit access, awareness, distance to market, and early adopters have a negative effect. Regarding the propensity to use modern energy sources in the study area, infrastructural development was identified as critical.

Biomass fuels currently supply around 15 per cent of the World's energy. Much of this is in the form of traditional fuelwood, plant residues and dung, which are often inefficiently used and can be environmentally detrimental. There is great potential for the modernization of biomass fuels to produce convenient energy carriers, such as electricity, gases and transportation fuels, while continuing to provide for traditional uses of biomass; this is already happening in many countries. When produced in an efficient and sustainable manner, biomass energy has numerous environmental and social benefits compared with fossil fuels. These include waste control, nutrient recycling, job creation, use of surplus agricultural land in industrialized countries, provision of modern energy carriers to rural communities of developing countries, improved land management, and a reduction of CO2 levels. Using biomass to substitute for fossil fuels is afar more effective use of available land than simply growing trees as a carbon store. Biomass fuels can form part of a matrix of renewable fuel sources that increases the energy available for economic development in developing countries. In OECD Europe it is calculated that a potential of 9.0–13.5 EJ could be produced in 2050 on available land, which represents 17–30 per cent of projected total energy requirements.

Projection of U.S. forest sector carbon sequestration under U.S. and global timber market and wood energy consumption scenarios, 2010–2060

Biomass energy in Western Europe to 2050

Biomass and biogas energy in Thailand: Potential, opportunity and barriers

Although forest biomass energy was long assumed to be carbon neutral, many studies show delays between forest biomass carbon emissions and sequestration, with biomass carbon causing climate change damage in the interim. While some models suggest that these primary biomass carbon effects may be mitigated by induced market effects, for example, from landowner decisions to increase afforestation due to higher biomass prices, the delayed carbon sequestration of biomass energy systems still creates considerable scientific debate (i.e., how to assess effects) and policy debate (i.e., how to act given these effects). Forests can be carbon sinks, but their carbon absorption capacity is finite. Filling the sink with fossil fuel carbon thus has a cost, and conversely, harvesting a forest for biomass energy – which depletes the carbon sink – creates potential benefits from carbon sequestration. These values of forest carbon sinks have not generally been considered. Using data from the 2010 Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences ‘Biomass sustainability and carbon policy study’ and a model of forest biomass carbon system dynamics, we investigate how discounting future carbon flows affects the comparison of biomass energy to fossil fuels in Massachusetts, USA. Drawing from established financial valuation metrics, we calculate internal rates of return (IRR) as explicit estimates of the temporal values of forest biomass carbon emissions. Comparing these IRR to typical private discount rates, we find forest biomass energy to be preferred to fossil fuel energy in some applications. We discuss possible rationales for zero and near‐zero social discount rates with respect to carbon emissions, showing that social discount rates depend in part on expectations about how climate change affects future economic growth. With near‐zero discount rates, forest biomass energy is preferred to fossil fuels in all applications studied. Higher IRR biomass energy uses (e.g., thermal applications) are preferred to lower IRR uses (e.g., electricity generation without heat recovery).

Modelling the relationship between energy intensity and GDP for European countries: An historical perspective (1800–2000)

The Role of Good Governance in Driving and Promoting Sustainable Development in the Provision of Off-Grid Electricity Solutions in Nigeria

This study reviews the environmental implications of continued and increased use of biomass for energy to determine what concerns have been and need to be addressed and to establish some guidelines for developing future resources and technologies. Although renewable biomass energy is perceived as environmentally desirable compared with fossil fuels, the environmental impact of increased biomass use needs to be identified and recognized. Industries and utilities evaluating the potential to convert biomass to heat, electricity, and transportation fuels must consider whether the resource is reliable and abundant, and whether biomass production and conversion is environmentally preferred. A broad range of studies and events in the United States were reviewed to assess the inventory of forest, agricultural, and urban biomass fuels; characterize biomass fuel types, their occurrence, and their suitability; describe regulatory and environmental effects on the availability and use of biomass for energy; and identify areas for further study. The following sections address resource, environmental, and policy needs. Several specific actions are recommended for utilities, nonutility power generators, and public agencies.

This study reviews the environmental implications of continued and increased use of biomass for energy to determine what concerns have been and need to be addressed and to establish some guidelines for developing future resources and technologies. Although renewable biomass energy is perceived as environmentally desirable compared with fossil fuels, the environmental impact of increased biomass use needs to be identified and recognized. Industries and utilities evaluating the potential to convert biomass to heat, electricity, and transportation fuels must consider whether the resource is reliable and abundant, and whether biomass production and conversion is environmentally preferred. A broad range of studies and events in the United States were reviewed to assess the inventory of forest, agricultural, and urban biomass fuels; characterize biomass fuel types, their occurrence, and their suitability; describe regulatory and environmental effects on the availability and use of biomass for energy; and identify areas for further study. The following sections address resource, environmental, and policy needs. Several specific actions are recommended for utilities, nonutility power generators, and public agencies.

Rural household energy consumption is an important component of national energy consumption. This paper explores the rural household energy consumption status and influencing factors on different sources of rural household energy consumption in western China. Using data from a survey of 240 households conducted in 2017, this study finds that rural households' energy consumption structure in the study area is a combination of traditional biomass energy and commercial energy sources. Fuelwood is the most commonly used fuel in the study area, while modern energy sources only occupy a low proportion. Rural household energy consumption is influenced by various factors. Individual perceptions of climate change, social trust and networks, and households' socio-economic and demographic factors (gender, age, education, income per capita, household size, household location, and number of household appliances) are identified as having significant effects on rural households' consumption of biomass and commercial energies. The research results provide implications for policy makers to formulate related rural energy policies to improve the rural energy consumption structure and future energy policy design in China and other developing countries.

Lighting and cooking fuel choices of households in Kisumu City, Kenya: A multidimensional energy poverty perspective

Currently fossil fuel often use for fulfilment of energy demand of the world. With the rising demand of energy, fossil fuel is at the risk of depletion within 40-50 years. With the environmental and health effects of burning fossil fuel, world is shifting to renewable energy sources. Hydro power, solar energy, wind energy, geothermal energy, biomass energy, dendro power, wave energy etc are considered as renewable energy sources which used all around the world including Sri Lanka. With reference to biomass all materials derived from living organisms, or recently living organisms (plants and animals) are considered as biomass such as rice husk, straw, paddy bran, wood chips, saw dust, pruned branches, leaves animal waste. This research was conducted with the objectives of to determine the suitable mixing ratio of binders with the tea fibrous waste and to test the physical properties of densified biomass. The process of compaction of residues into a product of higher bulk density than the original raw material is known as densification. Various types of binders can be used in densification process to enhance the ability of binding. Wheat flour and paper pulp used as binding agents with different mixing ratio of 2.5%, 5%, 7.5%, 10% and 12.5% (w/w) of each binder with 40 ml water and 40 g of tea fibrous material as base material. Considering the fuel quality, densification increases the calorific value and bulk density, densified biomass fuel with wheat flour binder shows a higher compressive strength (0.4246 MPa to 0.4564 MPa) and paper pulp binder has highest tensile strength. Highest calorific value, 22.65MJ/kg observed in 2.5% of wheat binder though it doesn’t have favourable tensile strength value (10.02 MPa). Densified biomass, 7.5% of wheat binder has favourable calorific value 21.29 MJ/kg, compressive strength 0.4529 MPa and tensile strength 13.06 MPa. Considering paper pulp binder, 10% of paper pulp binder has favourable tensile strength 15.83 MPa, Calorific value 21.01 MJ/kg and compressive strength 0.4228 MPa. According to ranking index method, 7.5% of wheat binder and 10% of Paper pulp binder are most appropriate to produce biomass fuel as alternative to the fuel wood. Keywords: Calorific value, Compressive strength, Densification, Tensile strength