1 / 16

Harmonized Assessment of Biomass Potential for Energy Method development

CEUBIOM Classification of European Biomass Potential for Bioenergy Using Terrestrial and Earth Observations. Harmonized Assessment of Biomass Potential for Energy Method development. Manuela Hirschmugl, Joanneum Research. Content. 1. General approach 2. User requirements 3. Existing data

caia
Download Presentation

Harmonized Assessment of Biomass Potential for Energy Method development

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CEUBIOM Classification of European Biomass Potential for Bioenergy Using Terrestrial and Earth Observations Harmonized Assessment of Biomass Potential for Energy Method development Manuela Hirschmugl, Joanneum Research

  2. Content 1. General approach 2. User requirements 3. Existing data 4. Making it spatially explicit 5. Flexibility of the method 6. Summary & example

  3. 1. General approach • Special focus on South-East European and Western Balkan countries • Bottom-up approach, i.e. national level assessments • Spatial dimension – Remote sensing as one of the main pillars

  4. 2. User requirements National users (Ministries and National Agencies) • Addressed through personal interviews • Lower number of users can be asked, but the replies are of higher quality • Personal contact important for the feedback

  5. 2. User requirements Based on interviews with 43 national users

  6. 2. User requirements Based on interviews with national users • Theoretical/technical potential – further specific restrictions can be made individually in addition • Full update every 3 – 6 years: longer intervals for forest biomass, shorter for agriculture • Moderate costs • Suitable for policy and planning, dissemination and reporting obligations • Acceptable accuracy in the range of 80 – 85 %, transparent error tracking considered important

  7. 2. User requirements Based on interviews with national users • Simple implementation and fast processing • Main types: forest/agricultural/other biomass first priority; next priorities: wood differentiation, saw material differentiation, crop differentiation • Almost all users considered the spatial dimension needed – specifically wanted is a continuous map with scale of about 1:75.000 – 1:100.000 • Additional requirements from the European perspective are very welcome!!

  8. 3. Existing data Data inventory on different levels: • Existing national biomass potential assessments • Terrestrial national basic data • Spatial national basic data (remote sensing based) • International databases (Eurostat, FAO, etc.) • International projects and initiatives

  9. 3. Existing data Example: National agricultural data

  10. 4. Making it spatially explicit Considering: • What is possible with remote sensing • What the users need in terms of scale • What is already processed / available through existing iniatives, especially GMES core services • What makes sense • e.g. some biomass types ocurr only at a processing plot and are easy to transport, e.g. pressing cake of olives  no need to know the olive yard for this potential • e.g. straw from wheat or corn cobs: they are bulky and have a low energy density  spatial dimension needed

  11. 4. Making it spatially explicit • GMES core services: •  EUROLAND for high resolution land cover • (forest, forest parameters, • agriculture and pastures) • BioPar and SATChMo products more for modeling (not within Ceubiom)

  12. 5. Flexibility of the method regarding boundary conditions For some boundary conditions, harmonization makes no sense (e.g. where different local circumstances occur) Others would be useful, but are difficult to harmonize, because different countries have different priorities, frame conditions, etc.  thus, the method should be flexible in order to comply with these specialities on the one hand, but also deliver a second comparable result on the other hand (similar to national and European unemployment rates) Remote sensing product/data (harmonized) Boundary conditions Set 1 (national) National result (not harmonized) Terrestrial input data (harmonized) Methods (harmonized) National result (harmonized) Local conditions not harmonizable (climate, soil, etc) Boundary conditions Set 2 (EU standard)

  13. 6. Summary & Example Output of CEUBIOM will be method descriptions for assessing the main forest and agricultural biomass types integrating: • Existing (and future) European-level tools and services • Existing terrestrial (statistical) data • Existing EO data and/or data products • Local conditions from local expert knowledge/literature • A) national boundary conditions / assumptions • B) European boundary conditions / assumptions • State-of-the-art techniques of data integration and spatial disaggregation as well as options to substitute data gaps

  14. 6. Summary & Example Main advantages: • Use of existing (and future) already harmonized European-level data and services •  thus cost-efficient • Relatively easy to implement • Flexible to reflect different boundary conditions • Input for modeling approaches

  15. Example Draft: Crops with field-based and plot-based residues for energy

  16. Thank you very much for your attention! manuela.hirschmugl@joanneum.at

More Related