Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Future competitive bioenergy technologies in the German heat sector: Findings from an economic optimization approach

Future competitive bioenergy technologies in the German heat sector: Findings from an economic... Meeting the defined greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets in Germany is only possible by switching to renewable technologies in the energy sector. A major share of that reduction needs to be covered by the heat sector, which accounts for ∼ 35% of the energy based emissions in Germany. Biomass is the renewable key player in the heterogeneous heat sector today. Its properties such as weather independency, simple storage and flexible utilization open up a wide field of applications for biomass. However, in a future heat sector fulfilling GHG reduction targets and energy sectors being increasingly connected: which bioenergy technology concepts are competitive options against other renewable heating systems? In this paper, the cost optimal allocation of the limited German biomass potential is investigated under long- term scenarios using a mathematical optimization approach. The model results show that bioenergy can be a competitive option in the future. Especially the use of biomass from residues can be highly competitive in hybrid combined heat and power (CHP) pellet combustion plants in the private household sector. However, towards 2050, wood based biomass use in high temperature industry applications is found to be the most cost efficient way to reduce heat based emissions by 95% in 2050. Keywords: heat sector, bioenergy, renewable energy, optimization, hybrid heat technologies 1. Introduction house gas emissions in the heat sector both the demand and supply sides need to be addressed. Global climate change, depleting energy resources and Heat demand in buildings needs to be decreased by in- energy security are issues affecting all countries. In Ger- creasing the refurbishment rate. Additionally, the heat many ambitious emission reduction and efficiency improve- transition needs different renewable technological solutions ment targets are defined by the government [13]. GHG that fit this complex market structure, combining renew- emissions are to be reduced by 80 − 95% until 2050 com- able power and biomass energy sources. pared to 1990 by improving efficiency and switching to re- In 2017, biomass was the largest renewable energy con- newable technologies in the energy sector. A major share tributor in Germany (54%), particularly in the heat sec- of that reduction needs to be covered by the heat sector, tor where 87% of the renewable energy was covered by which accounts for ∼ 35% of the energy based emissions biomass. Solid biomass was contributing the highest share [45] and 54% of the final energy demand [11] in Germany of renewable heat with 68% [1]. However, alternative re- today. newable heat options take up more market shares, the re- The German heat sector is characterized by its hetero- source biomass is limited and a great share of the German geneity due to different demand profiles, applications and yearly usable potential is already exploited [8]. On the infrastructures. Heat consumption takes place in millions other hand, bioenergy has clear advantages compared to of residential buildings (which accounts for 43% of the fi- other renewable fluctuating energy sources in the heat sec- nal heat demand), trade and commerce buildings (17%), as tor: weather independency, the possibility of simple stor- well as in many different fields of the industry (40%) [11], age and flexible utilization. These properties open up a mainly the steel and chemical industries in high tempera- wide field of application for biomass within the different ture applications. Within these sectors, different temporal sub-sectors of the heat sector. But in which sub-sectors is demands occur, ranging from seasonal to daily fluctuating biomass competitive against other renewable applications, needs. In addition to this complex demand structure, 8% while fulfilling the GHG reduction targets? of heat is not produced at the location of demand, but dis- Several studies are available on the development of the tributed via district heating grids [11]. To reduce green- German energy transition in general [30–33], focusing on the power sector and examining energy from biomass only ∗ roughly. Thrän et al. [41] investigated the allocation of Corresponding author Email address: matthias.jordan@ufz.de (Matthias Jordan) biomass in different German energy sectors. The results Preprint submitted to Energy August 29, 2019 arXiv:1908.10065v2 [econ.GN] 28 Aug 2019 show that wood based biomass in the transport and power The objective function is minimizing the total system costs sector is only competitive under special circumstances, ex- over all technologies i, all sub-sectors s and the complete pecting to have more competitive applications in the heat timespan t=2015...2050 (1). The total system costs are the sector, which was not modelled in the mentioned study. To sum of the technology specific marginal costs mc, multi- the authors’ knowledge, there is no study modelling the plied with the amount of heat produced π, and the invest- complex structure of the complete heat sector in detail, ment costs ic, discounted with the annuity method (dis- while including hybrid heating technologies and represen- count rate q) [18], multiplied with the number of heating cap tative bioenergy technology concepts, also in combination systems installed n . In the model each (hybrid-)heat- with other renewable technologies. Additionally, reviews technology concept is separated into different modules j, focussing on model-based analysis in the heat sector, do assigned with different lifetimes t and individual invest- not identify any studies combining the above mentioned ment costs. research intentions [7, 24]. In this paper, the cost optimal allocation of biomass between different heat sub-sectors is investigated in the Objective function frame of long-term energy scenarios. The following re- search question is assessed: min mc · π t,i,s,b t,i,s,b - Which bioenergy technology concepts are competitive t,i,s,b (1) options in a future, climate target fulfilling heat sector and ˆ X j q(1 + q) cap + ic · n · how does their potential role differ in different heat sub- t,i,j,s t,i,j,s (1 + q) − 1 t,i,j,s sectors? subject to 2. Materials and method δ = π , ∀(t, i, s, b) ∈ (T, I, S, B) (2) t,s t,i,s,b In this study, the heat sector was divided into several i,b sub-sectors, with different properties in terms of demand profiles and infrastructures. Representative bioenergy-, Res Land φ + Λ · Y ≥ m ˙ , t,b t,i,s,b t t fossil- and other renewable (hybrid-)heat-technology con- i,s,b (3) cepts were defined for each sub-sector and the technolog- ∀(t, i, s, b) ∈ (T, I, S, B ) ical competition was optimized in the system within the bio framework of the German climate protection plan [10, 13] feed max rel in two scenarios. A consistent scenario framework was ε ≥ α · (ε · π + ε · m ˙ ), i,s t,i,s t,i,s,b t t,i,s t,i,s,b set up and detailed biomass feedstock data were defined, i,s,b (4) leading to a set of five biomass types, which can be pro- ∀(t, i, s, b) ∈ (T, I, S, B) cessed into 20 biomass products. With additionally three fossil products, they can be applied to 47 different technol- π = m ˙ · η , ∀(t, i, s, b) ∈ (T, I, S, B) (5) t,i,s,b t,i,s,b t,i,s ogy concepts. Within the model these technology concepts were in competition on 19 different sub-sectors to identify cap initial n = n , ∀(t, i, j, s) ∈ (T, I, J, S) (6) t=2015,i,j,s i,j,s the optimal allocation of biomass in the heat sector. cap cap ext dec n = n + n − n , t+1,i,j,s t,i,j,s t+1,i,j,s t+1,i,j,s 2.1. Modelling (7) ∀(t, i, j, s) ∈ (T, I, J, S) A mathematical optimization approach was chosen to model the heat sector. The approach of the model fol- dec initialdec extdec n = n + n , t,i,j,s t,i,j,s t,i,j,s lows BENOPT (BioENergyOPTimisation model), which (8) has been applied on the transport and power sector [27– ∀(t, i, j, s) ∈ (T, I, J, S) 29]. As a programming environment GAMS [16] is used extdec ext in combination with MATLAB [40]. GAMS is an alge- n = n , ∀(t, i, j, s) ∈ (T, I, J, S) (9) ˆ t,i,j,s t+t ,i,j,s braic modelling language for mathematical optimization. In Matlab the input data is imported from Microsoft Ex- Marginal costs include feedstock costs (fossil or cel [25], edited and automatically sent to GAMS, where biomass), costs for power demand, maintenance and a the minimum costs are calculated. The results from the CO -certificate price. The sum of these costs has a dy- optimizer are exported back to Matlab, where they are namic development, which depends on the time point, used evaluated and graphically prepared. technology, sub-sector and if applicable the consumed feed- The model in this paper is fully deterministic and uses stock product b. Generated power in a combined heat and perfect foresight. The technology choice is optimized power (CHP) system is included as a credit within the within the competition. It is a linear model, using the variable costs. For details on how the credit is calculated Cplex solver. The spatial boundary is Germany as a whole. see section 2.5. 2 The main model restrictions are as follows: First, the eters is required as well as a simplification of the decision heat demand δ in each sub-sector needs to be fulfilled. cases (see section 2.1). Therefore, similar demand cases Therefore the sum of the produced heat within one sub- were aggregated to one sub-sector with mean values and a sector equals the heat demand within a sub-sector in each certain set up of suitable technology options. Special cases year. Second, the yearly consumed biomass m ˙ within with low heat demands were included in the most suitable the system must not be higher as the sum of the lim- sub-sector. res ited biomass potential from residues φ and the limited The main difference in the heat supply depends on Land land use potential Λ multiplied with the correspond- the required temperature level, which is basically distin- ing yield Y of the energy crop. More details on the biomass guished between industrial applications (60 °C to more potential and possible biomass pathways are explained in than 1.000 °C) and building heat demand (usually less section 2.4 and 2.6. Third, the yearly maximal allowed than 95 °C). Considering comparable renewable heating max amount of GHG emissions ε , representing the federal concepts, industrial heat supply was separated into four climate targets in Germany, must be greater or equal to sub-sectors by different temperature levels [20]: rel the sum of the technology-based ε and feedstock-based < 200 °C, 200 - 500 °C, 500 - 1.500 °C and one sub-sector feed ε emissions (4). The relationship between the pro- for special coal demand (fossil or bio-coal) in industrial duced heat and the utilised feedstock product is given in applications for steel production. equation (5) and determined by the conversion efficiency In addition to industrial applications, more than 50% of η of each technology. Equation (6) to (9) explain the the total heat demand in Germany is used for space heat- relationship between the number of heating systems in- ing and hot water supply at a temperature level below cap stalled (n ) at time point t, the number of heating sys- 95 °C [44]. When supplying individual objects of differ- ext tems newly invested in (n ) and the number of heating ent sizes with fossil systems, no major technological dif- dec systems decommissioned (n ). The status quo of all in- ference is required. A heat supply by bioenergy, how- stalled heating systems in 2015 serves as a starting point ever, requires the use of different technological solutions initial (n ). This portfolio is linearly decommissioned over depending on the size of the boiler. From smaller appli- initialdec the corresponding lifetime of each technology (n ). cations in single family houses using stoves or wood log ext Heating systems newly installed in the model (n ) are boilers, through pellet boilers in multi-family houses up to decommissioned after they have reached their lifetime, de- wood chip boilers in e.g. schools or hospitals, a variety of extdec fined by the variable n . Premature decommissioning technological solutions and combinations are possible [19]. of heating systems is only allowed for fossil technologies Additionally, CHP-technologies based on solid biomass fu- and limited to 1%/a. As a restriction for energy crops, els are favourable options for cases with a high base load every type may maximally double its land use per year. demand, such as in indoor swimming pools. Considering these aspects, the private household and trade and com- 2.2. Heat sub-sectors merce sector was structured into 14 sub-sectors according Heat utilisation differs from power utilisation, which is to the peak demand, the relation of hot water demand supplied through one uniform grid with a unique frequency to total heat demand and the required temperature levels and different voltage levels which can be transformed up [23]. The future development of the heat demand in each and down. For heat supply, beside local heating grids, dif- sub-sector is based on the external results of the model fering in temperature, pressure and extension, numerous ’B-STar’ [21]. As a stocks exchange model, it represents single object solutions exist, with temperatures ranging the building stock in Germany and models the future re- from 1.000 °C for industrial processes down to low tem- furbishment in different scenarios. perature heating with about 40 °C [44]. Additionally, the Centralized heating supply was summarized in one sub- amount of heat required differs, with a corresponding ca- sector, determined by the resolution of the data basis. pacity variation for heat generators. Furthermore, heating In total, 19 sub-sectors were defined and described (see systems based on solid fuels (biomass, coal or waste) vary Lenz and Jordan [23] and Table 2 in appendix B). The av- in terms of operation efficiency and emissions depending on erage thermal peak load demand and the annual final heat the load [19]. Differing patterns for peak demand, yearly demand until 2050 serve as input data for the optimization demand variations, temperature requirements and the re- model and the design of the different technology concepts lation between base load (e.g. hot water supply) and the in each sub-sector. varying proportion of the heat demand (e.g. space heating) 2.3. Technology concepts require specially adapted technology concepts. Thus, heat demand can be divided into a whole series of sub-sectors In order to determine the future use of biomass in the in which different heating concepts have to be applied. heat sector, the market competition has to be depicted In reality, each heating object is individually examined in the optimization model. Consequently, different fossil and a decision on the best case is taken by the owner or an and renewable technological systems were selected for the ordered decision maker according to an individual set of competition in each sub-sector. Beside single technology decision parameters and the knowledge of the involved ac- solutions, also hybrid systems were included. Hybrid sys- tors. For an artificial model, a fixed set of decision param- tems are combining different types of fuels, leading to a 3 variety of possible technical solutions. For the final selec- 2.4. Feedstock data tion of the defined heating concepts, the following aspects According to the above described technology concepts, were taken into account: four main feedstocks are considered in this model to gen- erate heat or combined heat and power. Biomass from • The status quo of the national biomass feedstock mix residues and energy crops is used for all bioenergy tech- and all installed heating systems in 2015 were consid- nologies. The basis for all other renewable heat technolo- ered. gies is the usage of electricity and for the most competitive fossil technologies gas and coal have been chosen as a ref- • As the research is focused on biomass, at least one erence. The heat production from plastic waste has been bioenergy heat concept as well as one bioenergy CHP set as a constant to the amount of generation in 2015. De- concept, based on solid fuels, is integrated in each tails on fossil and power based energy prices are shown in sub-sector. Fig. 3. The technical potential for biomass residues are shown • Solar thermal was integrated as an established tech- until 2050 based on Brosowski et al. [8], shown in Fig. nology on the market. 1. Additionally, crops for energetic and material use are cultivated on 2.4 Mio ha of land in Germany today [6]. • One heat pump concept per low temperature sub- In this study, the maximum permitted land use is reduced sector was defined, as this technology offers the po- linearly to 2.0 Mio ha in 2050, which is at the lower limit of tential to fulfil the complete heat demand for appli- identified values from currently available long-term energy cations lower than 200 °C in a renewable way. scenario studies [30–33]. On this land area, ten types of energy crops are cultivated for heat and CHP applications • In order to ensure a net renewable power supply for today [5]. In table 7 of appendix B the applied yields and heat pumps, a heat pump concept is always designed the status quo of land use for these crops in the year 2015 in combination with a PV system, which produces the are attached. major share of the electricity demand over the year. Manure Straw Residual wood Log wood As the most competitive fossil references a gas boiler case (a) case (b) or gas boiler in combination with a solar thermal system as well as a gas fuel cell plus solar thermal system were defined in the most cases. Oil-fired boilers were not in- cluded in the modelling as they are more costly and emit more CO equivalents than gas-fired boilers. Every gas- fired concept can either obtain natural gas or biomethane, which is fed into the gas network. Different single bioen- 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 ergy solutions were described according to the amount of heat and the thermal peak demand. Additionally, bioen- ergy hybrid or multibrid systems including a heat-pump, solar thermal or PV were selected according to the heat 1.5 demand parameters of the sub-sector. Future technical im- provements were considered through yearly increase rates of thermal efficiency, electrical efficiency and a decrease in investment costs [23]. For gasification systems, a change 0.5 land use for heating in case (a) from combustion engines to fuel cells is considered within land use for heating in case (b) the next two decades. Table 2 and 3 in appendix B show which concepts are 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 considered in which sub-sectors. As there are some basic Figure 1: Technical biomass potential from residues in Germany [8] (top). Available pre-allocated biomass potential and available land differences in the concepts between heating in buildings area in case (a) and (b) shown by the coloured lines. The model is and industrial/ district heating provisions, these two sec- free to pick from any category of residues and is free to cultivate any tors are shown in separate tables. However, the allocation of the defined energy crops, as long as the defined upper scenario of biomass over the sub-sectors is treated equally. limit is not violated. In total, 42 technical concepts where described. The complete technical and economic data for each technology Different prices arise for the defined feedstocks. A com- concept per sub-sector can be found in a published data mon method to estimate future prices of energy crops is to set [23]. The calculated infrastructure emission factors of add the per hectare profit of a benchmark crop to the per the single technology components as well as the feedstock hectare production costs of the energy crops [47]. In Ger- specific emission factors are attached in table 5 and 6 of many, the most common crop is wheat [34], which holds for appendix B. the benchmark crop in this study. Based on the price in- Biomass (PJ) Land use (Mio ha) allocation factors applied. Wood chips (residues) Log wood Straw 2.5. Sector coupling Manure Corn silage The heat sector is strongly linked to the power sector, Sugar beet especially when CHP and power to heat options are mod- Poplar wood chips elled. To generate conclusive results for the heat sector, Miscanthus chips a linkage to the power sector is inevitable. In order to Silphie Agricultural grass achieve this linkage, a scenario framework was set up. Cer- 40 Sorghum tain input parameters, such as the electricity price, the Grassland electricity-mix specific emission factor and the CO cer- Grain tificate price, which are highly influential for the market Grain Silage development of the heat sector, do also rely strongly on the development of the power sector. These parameters and predicted fossil feedstock price developments are adopted from the ’KS95’ scenario of the study of Repenning et al. [32]. Governmental subsidies, such as e.g. the EEG are not considered in this study. The only market steering instru- ment is the CO price, which is applied on the complete heat sector. As a result, the linkage of the heat sector to 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 the power sector in relation to power prices, feed-in tar- Figure 2: Cost developments of the biomass feedstocks for a yearly iffs, own electricity consumption and emission allocation wheat price increase of 3% (solid lines) and 5% (dotted lines). is shown in Table 1. Repenning et al. [32] projects the future development of crease of wheat in the last decades [48], two biomass price power and gas prices for the energy only markets. The development scenarios are modelled in this study with a required end consumer prices for our investigations are yearly increase of wheat by 3% and 5%. For a detailed calculated consumption-dependent according to the mon- description of the applied method in this paper the reader itoring report of the federal network agency for the model is referred to Millinger and Thrän [26]. Prices for biomass starting year 2015 [12]. The future price developments are products from residues in 2015 are according current prices projected combining both sources [12, 32], see Fig 3. [4, 15, 39]. For the future development, the yearly increase rate of wheat in the corresponding scenario is also applied 2.6. Scenarios to biomass residues. Fig. 2 shows the resulting price de- velopment of the considered biomass feedstocks. Applied In this study, a scenario of 95% GHG emission reduc- surcharges for extra processing steps, such as pelletising tion compared to 1990 is analysed. The focus of the in- etc. can be found in table 8 of appendix B. vestigation lies on the development of biomass in the heat Biomass from residues and energy crops can be con- sector, but still considering the interactions to other en- verted into several secondary energy carriers. In this study, ergy sectors by setting a scenario framework, derived from 20 biomass products and three fossil products have been the ’KS95’ scenario from the study of Repenning et al. defined. Table 4 in appendix B shows which products can [32]. From currently available long term energy scenarios be used in which technologies. All fermentable feedstocks in Germany [30–33], Repenning et al. [32] is the only one are processed into biomethane, which is fed into the gas modelling a transformation path towards a 95% reduction supply network. Since multiple options per technology are scenario and also reaching this target in 2050. However, possible, a differentiation between feedstock specific and within the study of Repenning et al. [32] biomass is de- technology specific emissions has to be made. Table 5 and picted in a rough level of detail and only a minor share of 6 in appendix B give an overview of the technology and the available biomass potential is distributed to the heat feedstock specific emission factors and the corresponding sector in the ’KS95’ scenario. In this paper, a broader Table 1: Model linkage of the heat sector to the power sector in terms of power consumed for heating and power use of CHP / PV technologies. The emissions from grid-based electricity are allocated to the heat sector in accordance to the power mix specific emission factor [32]. Power Price Credit Heat sector emissions external demand Final consumer price 0 Emissions from grid power mix internally used for heating 0 0 Emissions from techn. system internally used for non heating 0 Final consumer price 0 fed into the grid 0 Stock market price 0 5 200 not allowed in order to avoid a shift of negative environ- Household mental effects abroad. For all scenarios, it is assumed that Trade & commerce Europe and especially the neighbouring countries of Ger- Industry many follow similar, ambitious climate targets and that no relocation of industries or imports arise. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is not considered in this study. Within the model a discount rate is considered for the investment costs. According to the recommendations of Steinbach [35], considering the methodology to derive so- cial discount rates as well as discount rates used in anal- ysed energy scenarios, the applied value in this model is set to 4%. Household < 20 GJ Household 20 - 200 GJ Household > 200 GJ 20 3. Results Trade & commerce Industry 3.1. Scenario results In the following paragraph, a transformation path to- wards a 95% emission reduction in 2050 in the heat sector is shown. Modelling results are shown for cases (a) and 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 (b) from 2015 to 2050. The market share of all technology Figure 3: End consumer power (top) and gas (bottom) prices. Own types is shown in Fig. 4. As expected, the major market calculations based on Repenning et al. [32] and Bundesnetzagentur share shifts from natural gas technologies in 2015 to power and Bundeskartellamt [12]. based heat pumps in 2050. The share of bioenergy in the year 2050 is at 29.0 % in scenario (a) and 5.7 % in scenario (b). In both cases, the complete pre-allocated biomass po- range of biomass potential is pre-allocated to the heat sec- tential is used up from the year 2035 onwards. The largest tor. Szarka et al. [38] reviews the role of bioenergy in long- biomass shares are holding wood chip and pellet technolo- term energy scenarios. The allocation of biomass to the gies. Additionally, in case (a), log wood technologies hold heat sector in 2050 varies strongly between the reviewed a constant market share of ∼ 3%. studies, ranging from ∼ 5 − 70% of the overall potential. A more detailed illustration shows which biomass prod- Hence, two extreme scenarios are investigated in this pa- ucts are used for heating or CHP technologies, see Fig. 5. per, where one time a major share of the biomass potential In 2015, one third of the utilised biomass was in the form (case a) and the other time a minor share of the biomass of biogas, mostly based on corn silage. Without federal potential (case b) is pre-allocated for heating applications, subsidies, as it is the case in this model, biogas production for details see Fig. 1. Consequently, the biomass potential is not competitive and market shares decrease rapidly in for heat applications is fixed for each year and scenario, both scenarios. A constant use of log wood over time is but the model is free to pick from any category of residues found in case (a), however, log wood technologies are the and is free to cultivate any of the defined energy crops, as least cost competitive wood based bioenergy technologies, long as the defined upper scenario limit is not violated. In as their market share decreases rapidly with decreasing both scenarios, the actual status quo of national biomass biomass potential in case (b) from 2030 onwards. In 2015 use in 2015 serves as a starting point. Biomass imports are residual wood was mainly used for wood chip technologies. a b 5000 5000 4000 4000 Bio-Coke Wood chip Wood pellet 3000 3000 Log wood Electric heating Heat pump 2000 2000 Solar thermal Biomethane Natural gas 1000 Coal (incl. coke) 1000 0 0 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 Figure 4: Model resulting development of the technology market shares for the complete heat sector in case (a) and (b) in a yearly resolution. Net energy generation (PJ) final power price (Cent/kWh) final gas price (Cent/kWh) a Grain Silage b 1200 1200 Grain Grassland Sorghum 1000 1000 Agricultural grass Silphie 800 Miscanthus pellets 800 Miscanthus chips Poplar pellets 600 600 Poplar briquettes Poplar wood chips Sugar beet 400 400 Corn silage Manure 200 Straw 200 Log wood Pellets (residues) 0 0 Briquettes (residues) 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 Wood chips (residues) Figure 5: Model resulting consumption of biomass products in case (a) and (b) in a yearly resolution. The model results show, that in a 95 % emission reduction cient in high temperature heat applications. scenario the use of residual wood is most competitive over the next three decades in the form of pellets. However, 4. Discussion in the last years until 2050, the use of residual wood in the form of wood chips is the favourable option to fulfil In this paper, the future role of biomass in a sustainable climate targets in a cost optimal way. heat sector is investigated. First of all, the results show The available land area for energy crops is cultivated that a substantial emission reduction of 95% compared to with Miscanthus and processed to chips beginning after 1990 is possible in the German heat sector. A reduction the decreasing cultivation of biogas feedstocks, see Fig. 5. of 98%, as it is the case in other studies using ’backup ca- Due to low feedstock costs and high yields, Miscanthus is pacities’ [21, 32], was not possible. Second, bioenergy is a a competitive option in such a scenario. Notable is the use competitive option within the defined scenario framework, of Miscanthus in form of chips in contrast to the use of which confirms the hypothesis from Thrän et al. [41, 42, 43] residual wood in form of pellets. expecting to have more competitive applications for wood Fig. 6 shows in which specific sub-sectors and technol- based biomass in the heat sector compared to the trans- ogy concepts the biomass potential is distributed. In six port and electricity sector. Third, it is identified which sub-sectors, biomass technologies are competitive options biomass products are most competitive in which technol- in both scenarios. Five of these sub-sectors belong to the ogy systems and on which sub-sectors of the heat sector. private household sector, in which pellet CHP and tor- According to the model results, in the next three decades refied pellet CHP technologies in combination with a heat until 2040-2045 biomass is identified to be most competi- pump and a photovoltaic system are most competitive over tive in the private household sector, which is in line with the next three decades. However, between 2040 and 2050, Koch et al. [21] and Repenning et al. [32]. The most with emission targets to be fulfilled and increasing power favourable options are decentralised hybrid CHP combus- prices, a shift of biomass use towards high temperature tion applications using residual wood as feedstock. Espe- industry applications is carried out. Consequently, pel- cially the combination of a (torrefied-) wood pellet gasifier let technologies are replaced by heat pumps or log wood CHP with a heat pump and a PV-system is a favourable technologies after their lifetime expansion. option. This is a unique finding in energy systems mod- The market share of log wood technologies is strongly elling. One reason for this finding is that in available stud- dependent on the available biomass potential, as it is the ies on the German energy transition, bioenergy is only least competitive wood based option. In case (a), with a considered as single technology option and not analysed high available potential, market shares are constant. Log in hybrid heat systems [30–33, 38]. Additionally, this find- wood achieves a share of ∼ 80% in the 7,5 kW single family ing shows that the future power price development has a houses sector, where the log wood stove is combined with strong impact on the competitiveness of heating systems. a heat pump and photovoltaic system, while in case (b) Fig. 7 shows the merit order of the prime costs for the this technology holds only a minor market share. most competitive biomass options and their correspond- To sum it up: in the trade and commerce sub-sectors ing competitors in selected sub-sectors for 2015, 2035 and none of the defined bioenergy technologies are a compet- 2050. With increasing power prices in 2035 and 2050 (see itive option. Pellet-CHP and log wood technologies are Fig. 3), hybrid heat technology systems develop to be favourable options in the private household sector, but the cheapest options of all. Despite these findings, hybrid only in combination with a heat pump and PV-system. systems seem to offer the highest degree of self-sufficiency Towards 2050, the use of residual wood is more cost effi- and therefore being more resilient to any kind of feedstock Biomass (PJ) a 7.5 kW - SFH 90 b Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV 400 400 Log wood gasification boiler+ST Buffer integrated pellet burner+ST Pellet boiler Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Heat pump+PV Gas fuel cell+ST Gas cond. boiler + ST Gas cond. boiler+Wood log stove+ST Gas cond. boiler 20152020 2030 2040 2050 20152020 2030 2040 2050 10.5 kW - SFH 150, MFH 30-45, Mixed use. 30-45 Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV 400 400 Log wood gasification boiler+ST Buffer integrated pellet burner+ST Pellet boiler Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Heat pump+PV Gas fuel cell+ST Gas cond. boiler + ST Gas cond. boiler+Wood log stove+ST Gas cond. boiler 20152020 2030 2040 2050 20152020 2030 2040 2050 14.9 kW - SFH 180, Apart. Build.30 Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Log wood gasification boiler+ST Buffer integrated pellet burner+ST Pellet boiler Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Heat pump+PV Gas fuel cell+ST Gas cond. boiler + ST Gas cond. boiler+Wood log stove+ST Gas cond. boiler 20152020 2030 2040 2050 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 20 kW - MFH 45-180, Mixed use 90 Torrefied wood pellet gasifier CHP Wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Log wood gasification boiler+ST Pellet boiler Heat pump+PV Gas fuel cell+ST Gas cond. boiler + ST Gas cond. boiler 20152020 2030 2040 2050 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 80 kW - Apart. Build. 45 - 180 150 150 Wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Wood pellet gasifier CHP Pellet boiler+ST Heat pump+PV Gas fuel cell+Gas cond. boiler+ST Gas cond. boiler + ST Gas cond. boiler 20152020 2030 2040 2050 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 Industry > 500 °C Direct biomass firing 800 800 Wood chip gasifier Direct biomethane firing Electric arc furnace Direct coal firing Direct gas firing 20152020 2030 2040 2050 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 Figure 6: Model resulting development of the technology shares in selected heat sub-sectors in case (a) and (b). The sub-sectors in which biomass technologies are most competitive are illustrated (6 out of 19). SFH = Single Family Houses; MFH = Multi Family Houses; ST = Solar thermal; PV = Photovoltaic; HP = Heat Pump; CHP = Combined Heat and Power Net energy generation (PJ) 2015 2035 2050 150 150 150 7.5kW 10.5kW 14.9kW Ind>500 7.5kW 10.5kW 14.9kW Ind>500 7.5kW 10.5kW 14.9kW Ind>500 100 100 100 50 50 50 0 0 0 Figure 7: Merit order of the most competitive biomass technologies and their corresponding competitors in selected sub-sectors for the years 2015, 2035 and 2050. Selected sub-sectors are from the private household sector 7.5 kW, 10.5 kW, 14.9 kW and Industry > 500 °C. ST = Solar thermal; PV = Photovoltaic; HP = Heat Pump; CHP = Combined Heat and Power price developments than the competing heating systems. heating, biogas plants exist today as a result of federal Hence, we conclude that the synergies from hybrid heat subsidies in the last decades. Without this support, bio- technology systems and their GHG mitigation potential gas shares are dropping rapidly in case (a) and (b), which are highly underestimated and that such systems can sub- is in line with findings from other studies in literature pro- stantially contribute to the success of the energy transition jecting the use of fermentable residues in the transport in Germany. sector instead of the heat sector, [21, 32, 33, 41]. From the results it is also found that available land for In the long term, in a 95% reduction scenario, bioenergy energy crops is cultivated with Miscanthus. Again, this is is most competitive in high temperature industrial applica- a unique finding in the modelling of the heat sector. While tions in the form of wood chips. From 2040-2045 onwards, the cultivation of Miscanthus is an endogenous model re- biomass use shifts almost entirely from the household sec- sult in this study, the above mentioned scenario analysis tor to high temperature industry applications. This shift from literature set the type of energy crops as an input away from decentralised private households is in line with parameter. In addition, it is notable from our results, Koch et al. [21]. The use of wood based biomass for in- that Miscanthus is almost exclusively used as chips in in- dustry applications towards 2050 confirms the projections dustry applications. One explanation is that in private of several studies ([2, 9, 17, 32, 38]). Derived from the households additional costs for a separator are required if results, see Fig. 6, we conclude that with emission targets Miscanthus is used in pellet technologies. However, high to be fulfilled in 2050 the sub-sector "‘Industry > 500 °C"’ yields and low production costs lead to a monopoly posi- requires a major share of renewable technologies. Possible tion among energy crops. So why does Miscanthus play renewable options are heating from biomass or the use of only a minor role in agriculture today? Witzel and Fin- electric arc furnaces. Prime costs of the electric arc are in- ger [47] identify several major barriers, e.g. a lack of es- creasing strongly in 2050 compared to biomass heating or tablished markets, high establishment costs as well as un- heat pumps, see Fig. 7. In the private household sector, certainties, arising to a large extent from the necessary the heat pump is an additional option, being more effi- long term commitment. These factors are not represented cient and more cost effective than the electric arcs. Con- in our optimization model and must be considered sepa- sequently, biomass use shifts to high temperature industry rately. Nevertheless, to generate an indicator, a model run applications, avoiding the use of electric arcs. However, excluding perennial crops was performed, resulting in the the benefits granted to industry, apart from the generally use of biomethane from maize silage in high temperature lower power prices (see Fig 3), are not depicted in this industry applications in the long term. model, making the electric arc a possibly cheaper option. On the other hand, the use of electric arcs requires signifi- cantly more renewable electricity capacity than the use of Limitations: Modelling of the heat sector, as it is per- heat pumps, which, in contrast, also make use of ambient formed here, depends on several research studies serving as heat. input data. Research insights may change, e.g. the poten- In the trade and commerce sector, as well as in district tial of wood based residues was recently corrected down- heating, biomass is not a favourable option. For district wards [3]. Do the results and conclusions change, when the Gas cond. boiler + ST Heat pump+PV Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Gas cond. boiler + ST Heat pump+PV Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Gas cond. boiler + ST Log wood gasification boiler+ST Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Direct gas firing Direct biomass firing Electric arc furnace Gas cond. boiler + ST Heat pump+PV Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Gas cond. boiler + ST Heat pump+PV Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Gas cond. boiler + ST Log wood gasification boiler+ST Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Direct gas firing Direct biomass firing Electric arc furnace Gas cond. boiler + ST Heat pump+PV Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Gas cond. boiler + ST Heat pump+PV Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Gas cond. boiler + ST Log wood gasification boiler+ST Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Direct gas firing Direct biomass firing Electric arc furnace pre-allocated biomass potential is changed? How would In times of sector coupling, the advantages of such sys- the results change if the share of the projected district tems and their potential for emission reduction should not heating network would be higher or if biomass allocation be underestimated and should be taken into account when is optimized across all energy sectors? The scenario design designing policies. However, in the long term, wood based with a higher and lower amount of biomass pre-allocated biomass use is found to shift almost entirely from the pri- to the heat sector is supposed to represent such shifts of vate household sector to high temperature applications in biomass use, but such an approach is limited. However, the industry. With increasing power prices, the use of the outlined results in this study show the same tendency wood chips from residues and energy crops in high tem- in both scenarios, indicating that these factors might have perature industry applications is found to be the most cost only a minor impact. efficient way to reduce the heat based emissions by 95% in Of course, modelling has its limits, so does this model. Another finding from this study is, that available land The private household sector is depicted in a high level for energy crops is almost entirely cultivated with Mis- of detail, which was not possible for the industry and dis- canthus. Despite several major barriers, arising to a large trict heating sector, due to the limited available data basis. extent from the long term commitment, this finding should Further research in this direction is highly recommended be discussed when designing policies. from the authors’ view. As mentioned before, the power market is not modelled within this study. Therefore a new approach was estab- 6. Acknowledgements lished for linking the power and heat sector, see section 2.5. By setting a scenario framework it is not necessary to have Thank you to Öko-Institut e.V. for sharing the heat de- a high temporal resolution, having the advantage of a short mand data calculated with B-STar (Building Stock Trans- model run time leading to the possibility to represent the formation Model), which have been used in this study for heat sector and their technology concepts in more detail. the defined household, trade and commerce and district To increase the annual resolution to a monthly one seems heating markets [21]. worthwhile to investigate, since the heat demand, PV yield This work was funded by the Helmholtz Association of etc. varies seasonally. However, our model results fit well German Research Centers and supported by Helmholtz into the results of the long-term energy scenarios in liter- Impulse and Networking Fund through Helmholtz Inter- ature studies [21, 30–33, 38]. disciplinary Graduate School for Environmental Research When future long-term modelling is done, uncertainties (HIGRADE). Declarations of interest: none. in the input parameters apply and have an effect on the model outcome. Using the applied model, with its short 7. Appendix A. Supplementary data model run time compared to established energy scenario models, opens up the opportunity to apply a comprehen- Supplementary data related to this article can be found sive sensitivity analysis. In future research we will imple- at http://dx.doi.org/10.17632/v2c93n28rj.1 ment all input parameters, having an uncertainty, into a sensitivity analysis and determine the effect of each param- 8. Appendix B. eter and all its interactions with all other parameters on the model outcome. A detailed description of the method and results goes beyond the scope of this article. 5. Conclusions In this paper, a 95% reduction scenario is investigated with two extreme cases of available biomass potential. In both scenarios, the same trends develop, once in an at- tenuated and once in a stronger manner. It is found that emission targets in the heat sector can be fulfilled in both cases and bioenergy is found to be a future competitive option for heat applications. Especially hybrid heat tech- nology systems were found to be extremely favourable. More specifically, the most cost efficient options for the next decades until 2040 were found to be in the private household sector in form of a hybrid CHP (torrefied-) pel- let combustion plant in combination with a heat pump and a PV-system. A key driver for the competitiveness of these systems is the future development of power prices. 10 Table 2: Applied heating concepts per sub-sector for private households, trade and commerce. Each row represents a technology concept, each column represents a sub-sector. Per sub-sector the required technology capacity and the specific heat demand of the buildings in kWh/m²a are described. SFH = Single Family House; MFH = Multi Family House; FT = Full Time; PT = Part Time; ST = Solar Thermal; HP = Heat Pump; CHP = Combined Heat and Power; 1: additional peak load heat supply of 25% of total heat demand from gas condensing boiler; 2: additional peak load heat supply of 20% of total heat demand from gas condensing boiler Electric direct heating + ST ✕ Gas condensing boiler ✕ ✕ X ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Gas condensing boiler + ST ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Gas boiler + Log wood stove ✕ ✕ ✕ 1 2 2 1 2 1 Gas fuel cell + ST ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Heat pump + PV ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Heat pump + PV + ST ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Heat pump + PV + log wood stove ✕ ✕ ✕ Heat pump + PV + Pellet boiler ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Buffer int. pellet burner + ST ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Pellet boiler ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Pellet boiler + ST ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Log wood stove + ST ✕ Log wood gasification boiler + ST ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Wood chip boiler + ST ✕ Torrefied wood pellet gasifier CHP ✕ ✕ ✕ Torr. wood pellet g. CHP + HP + PV ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Wood pellet gasifier CHP ✕ ✕ Wood pellet gasifier CHP + HP + PV ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Wood pellet gasifier CHP + ST + PV ✕ ✕ ✕ 2.5 kW - SFH 30 kWh/m²a 5 kW - SFH 45, MFH 30, Mixed use. 30 7.5 kW - SFH 90 10.5 kW - SFH 150, MFH 30-45, Mixed use. 30-45 14.9 kW - SFH 180, Apart. Build.30 20 kW - MFH 45-180, Mixed use 90 80 kW - Apart. Build. 45 - 180 45 kW - Apart. Build. 45 27 kW - Mixed use & trade 30-180 31 kW - FT Accommodation since 1984 45 kW - FT Accommodation until 1983 45 kW - PT Accommodation/sport/culture 35 kW - PT Accommodation/sport/culture/trade 60 kW - Sport/culture 180 Details on the defined sub-sectors: thermal peak load, hot water demand 16-19% of total heat demand • 2.5 kW - SFH 30 kWh/m²a: single or two family • 31 kW - FT Accommodation since 1984: newer non- house, very well insulated, low temperature heating private living buildings with full day use, temperature system, 7 MWh/a heating demand; 2.5 kW thermal of heating system in most cases around 70 °C, 100 peak load, hot water demand 30-40% of total heat MWh/a heating demand; 31 kW thermal peak load, demand hot water demand 45-50% of total heat demand • 5 kW - SFH 45, MFH 30, Mixed use. 30: single or • 45 kW - FT Accommodation until 1983: older non- two family house well insulated and very well insu- private living buildings with full day use, temperature lated multi-family houses, mixture of low tempera- of heating system in most cases above 75-85 °C, 145 ture heating system and 70 °C heating, 10.4 MWh/a MWh/a heating demand; 45 kW thermal peak load, heating demand; 5 kW thermal peak load, hot water hot water demand 43-50% of total heat demand demand 20-24% of total heat demand • 45 kW - PT Accommodation/sport/culture: older • 7.5 kW - SFH 90: single or two family house with 60 non-private living buildings with half day use and to 120 kWh/m²a heat demand, mixture of low tem- newer special buildings, temperature of heating sys- perature heating system with at least 45 °C and 70 °C tem at least 50-60 °C sometimes significantly above heating, 14 MWh/a heating demand; 7.5 kW thermal that values, 74 MWh/a heating demand; 45 kW ther- peak load, hot water demand 14-26% of total heat mal peak load, hot water demand 13-16% of total heat demand demand • 10.5 kW - SFH 150, MFH 30-45, Mixed use. 30-45: • 35 kW - PT Accommodation/sport/culture/trade: single or two family house with 120 to 180 kWh/m²a mainly older non-private living buildings with half day heat demand and well insulated multi-family houses use and old special buildings both with high specific and very well insulated mixed use houses, tempera- heating demand, temperature of heating system at ture heating system at least 60 °C, 21 MWh/a heat- least 75-85 °C, 56 MWh/a heating demand; 34 kW ing demand; 10.5 kW thermal peak load, hot water demand 10-40% of total heat demand thermal peak load, hot water demand 15-19% of total heat demand • 14.9 kW - SFH 180, Apart. Build.30: single or two • 60 kW - Sport/culture 180: old special buildings with family house with more than 180 kWh/m²a heat de- more than 180 kWh/m²a heating demand, tempera- mand and well insulated multi-family houses and very ture of heating system at least 75-85 °C, 100 MWh/a well insulated big multi family houses, temperature heating demand; 60 kW thermal peak load, hot water heating system at least 75 °C, 24,5 MWh/a heating demand 13% of total heat demand demand; 14.9 kW thermal peak load, hot water de- mand 8-18% of total heat demand • 20 kW - MFH 45-180, Mixed use 90: mixture of multi family houses and houses with mixed use, tempera- ture of heating system in most cases at least 75 °C, 38 MWh/a heating demand; 20 kW thermal peak load, hot water demand 10-25% of total heat demand • 80 kW - Apart. Build. 45 - 180: mixture of big multi family houses, temperature of heating system in most cases at least 75 °C or even 85 °C, 165 MWh/a heating demand; 80 kW thermal peak load, hot water demand 18% of total heat demand • 45 kW - Apart. Build. 45: well insulated multi family houses, temperature of heating system in most cases below 70 °C, 92 MWh/a heating demand; 43 kW ther- mal peak load, hot water demand 18-29% of total heat demand • 27 kW - Mixed use & trade 30-180: mixture of mixed used houses and non-private living buildings, temper- ature of heating system in most cases at least 75 °C or even 85 °C, 47 MWh/a heating demand; 25 kW 12 Table 3: Applied heating concepts per sub-sector in industry and district heating. ST = Solar Thermal; CHP = Combined Heat and Power; HT = High Temperature Gas condensing boiler ✕ ✕ Gas fuel cell ✕ HT heat pump + ST (5%) ✕ Wood chip boiler X ✕ Wood chip gasifier CHP ✕ ✕ Heat pump + ST (5%) + Wood chip boiler (40%) ✕ Gas turbine CHP ✕ Biomethane gas turbine CHP ✕ Wood chip gasifier with gas turbine CHP ✕ Direct gas firing ✕ Direct coal firing ✕ Electric arc furnace ✕ Direct biomethane firing ✕ Wood chip gasifier with direct gas firing ✕ Direct biomass firing ✕ Coke ✕ Bio-coke ✕ Coal CHP plant ✕ Gas and steam turbine CHP ✕ Coal CHP plant with 5% wood chips ✕ HT heat pump + ST + Methane CHP boiler ✕ Waste CHP plant + Wood chip boiler ✕ Industry < 200 °C Industry 200 - 500 °C Industry 500 - 1.500 °C Special coal demand District heating Table 4: Defined application possibilities of the feedstocks in the technologies. CHP = Combined Heat and Power Wood chips (residues) ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Briquettes (residues) ✕ Pellets (residues) ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Log wood ✕ ✕ Straw ✕ ✕ Manure ✕ ✕ Corn silage ✕ ✕ Sugar beet ✕ ✕ Poplar wood chips ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Poplar briquettes ✕ Poplar pellets ✕ ✕ ✕ Miscanthus chips ✕ ✕ ✕ Miscanthus briquettes Miscanthus pellets ✕ ✕ Silphie ✕ ✕ Agricultural grass ✕ ✕ Sorghum ✕ ✕ Grassland ✕ ✕ Grain ✕ ✕ Grain Silage ✕ ✕ Natural gas ✕ ✕ Coal ✕ ✕ ✕ Plastic waste ✕ Gas condensing boiler / fuel cell /plant Log wood stove Log wood gasification boiler Wood pellet boiler/gasifier Wood pellet CHP Torrefied wood pellet CHP Wood chip boiler Hard coal CHP / coal coke Wood chip - hard coal CHP Biomethane applications Waste CHP plant Wood chip gasifier CHP Gas turbine / direct heating Wood gasifier gasturbine Coal direct heating Biomass direct heating Bio-Coke Table 5: Applied emission factors caused by infrastructure expenses in 2015 [36, 37, 46] and the calculated allocation factor according the finnish method. The allocation factor is also applied to the deployed Table 6: Applied feedstock emission factors [36, 37, 46]. Emissions feedstock. Infrastructure emissions are linearly reduced by 80% until based on power consumed from the grid are calculated according the 2050. CHP = Combined Heat and Power; PH = Private Household scenario depended, power mix specific emission factor [32]. In rela- tion to biomass emissions: Including the effects on carbon storage in vegetation and soil, biomass can only be considered CO neutral if it would rot quickly without energy use (residual and waste materials), or if land and vegetation are managed in such a way that they ab- sorb more CO than they would without bioenergy use (taking into account indirect land use effects). One example is the establishment of short rotation plantations on pasture land [14]. Electric direct heating 0.75 Gas condensing boiler 0.25 Solar thermal 6.89 Gas fuel cell 125kWe 5.53 0.30 Heat pump 1.87 Wood chips (residues) 1.36 Wood pellet boiler 1.72 Briquettes (residues) 7.94 Log wood gasification boiler 0.55 Pellets (residues) 7.94 Torrefied wood pellet gasifier 0.55 Log wood 4.47 Buffer integrated pellet burner 0.55 Straw 3.93 Wood pellet gasifier CHP 1.93 0.59 Manure 0.00 Gas condensing boiler (Industry) 0.03 Corn silage 7.35 Wood chip boiler (PH) 0.22 Sugar beet 7.20 Wood chip boiler (Industry) 1.60 Poplar wood chips 3.83 Wood chip gasifier CHP (Ind. low Temp.) 0.14 0.29 Poplar briquettes 8.25 Gas Fuel cell (Industry) 5.53 0.46 Poplar pellets 8.25 High temperature heat pump 1.94 Miscanthus chips 4.10 Wood chip gasifier CHP (District heating) 1.27 0.45 Miscanthus briquettes 8.53 Gas turbine CHP 0.11 0.13 Miscanthus pellets 8.53 Biomethane gas turbine CHP 0.11 0.13 Silphie 5.27 Wood chip gasifier CHP (Ind. high Temp.) 0.30 0.13 Agricultural grass 14.83 Direct Gas firing 0.03 Sorghum 16.11 Direct Coal firing 0.03 Grassland 15.41 Electric arc furnace 0.08 Grain 4.78 Direct biomethane firing 0.03 Grain Silage 12.07 Wood chip gasifier with direct gas firing 0.03 Natural gas 59.60 Direct biomass firing 0.03 Coal 108.00 Coal CHP plant 0.11 0.13 Plastic waste 59.75 Gas and steam turbine CHP 0.13 0.34 Coal coke 123.00 Coal CHP plant with 5% wood chips 0.11 0.13 Bio-coke 27.78 Methane CHP boiler 1.14 0.38 Waste CHP plant 0.11 0.64 Photovoltaic system (gCO -eq/kWel) 78.99 Infrastructure emissions in gCO − eq/MJ 2 out Allocation factor Feedstock emissions in gCO − eq/MJ 2 in Table 7: Yield of the defined energy crops [22] and their corresponding land use in 2015 for heat or combined heat and power applications [6]. SRC = Short Rotation Coppice Land use (ha) Yield(GJ/ha) Corn silage 177 872 000 Sugar beet 150 15 600 Grain 91 151 000 Grain Silage 138 123 000 Agr. grass 137 20 150 Grassland 90 157 849 Silphie 126 400 Sorghum 152 0 (est.) SRC 137 6 630 Miscanthus 273 4 500 Table 8: Applied surcharges in the model based on own calculations. Surcharge (e/GJ) Pellets compared to wood chips 5 Pellet torrefication + 14 % Briquettes compared to wood chips 7 Separator for torrefied poplar pellets in pellet technologies 0.3 Separator for miscanthus pellets in pellet technologies 0.2 Separator for poplar briquettes in log wood technologies 0.05 Separator for straw in wood chip technologies 0.4 Separator for poplar wood chips in wood chip gasification technologies 0.2 Separator for miscanthus chips in wood chip technologies 0.2 Transport fee for wood based feedstocks per delivery 50 e 16 References [21] Matthias Koch, Klaus Hennenberg, Katja Hünecke, Markus Haller, and Tilman Hesse. Rolle der bioen- References ergie im strom- und wärmemarkt bis 2050 unter ein- beziehung des zukünftigen gebäudebestandes. URL [1] Übersicht zur entwicklung der energiebedingten emissionen und https://www.energetische-biomassenutzung.de/fileadmin/Steckbriefe/dokumente/03KB114_Bericht_Bio-Strom-W%C3%A4rme.pdf. brennstoffeinsätze in deutschland 1990-2016. [22] Kuratorium für Technik und Bauwesen in der Landwirtschaft [2] Sektorkopplung – optionen für die nächste phase der en- e.V., editor. Energiepflanzen: Daten für die Planung des En- ergiewende. ergiepflanzenanbaus. 2. auflage edition, 2012. [3] Dbfz - data repository: Ressourcendatenbank, 2019. URL [23] Volker Lenz and Matthias Jordan. Technical and economic data http://webapp.dbfz.de/resources. of renewable heat supply systems for different heat sub-sectors., [4] agrarheute. Heu und strohpreise, 2018. URL https://www.agrarheute.com/markt/futtermittel/heu-stroh-preise-extrem-hohen-niveau-551055. [24] Erik Merkel, Russell McKenna, Daniel Fehrenbach, and Wolf [5] A. Becker, D. Peter, and D. Kemnitz. Anbau und ver- Fichtner. A model-based assessment of climate and energy wendung nachwachsender rohstoffe in deutschland. URL targets for the german residential heat system. Journal of https://fnr.de/fileadmin/fnr/pdf/mediathek/22004416.pdf. Cleaner Production, 142:3151–3173, 2017. ISSN 09596526. doi: [6] Raik Becker and Daniela Thrän. Optimal siting of wind farms 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.153. in wind energy dominated power systems. Energies, 11(4):978, [25] Microsoft. Mircrosoft excel, 2019. URL 2018. ISSN 1996-1073. doi: 10.3390/en11040978. https://products.office.com/de-de/excel. [7] Andreas Bloess, Wolf-Peter Schill, and Alexander Zerrahn. [26] M. Millinger and D. Thrän. Biomass price developments inhibit Power-to-heat for renewable energy integration: A review of biofuel investments and research in germany: The crucial future technologies, modeling approaches, and flexibility potentials. role of high yields. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172:1654– Applied Energy, 212:1611–1626, 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy. 1663, 2016. ISSN 09596526. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.175. 2017.12.073. [27] M. Millinger, K. Meisel, and D. Thrän. Greenhouse gas abate- [8] André Brosowski, Philipp Adler, Georgia Erdmann, ment optimal deployment of biofuels from crops in germany. Walter Stinner, Daniela Thrän, and Udo Mantau. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Biomassepotenziale von Rest- und Abfallstoffen: Sta- 69:265–275, 2019. ISSN 13619209. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2019.02. tus Quo in Deutschland, volume 36 of Schriftenreihe nachwachsende Rohstoffe. Fachagentur Nachwachsende [28] Markus Millinger. Systems assessment of biofuels. Mod- Rohstoffe e.V. (FNR), Gülzow-Prüzen, 2015. URL elling of future cost and greenhouse gas abatement com- https://www.bioliq.de/downloads/schriftenreihe_band_36_web_01_09_15.pdf. petitiveness between biofuels for transport on the case [9] Thomas Bründinger, Julian Elizalde König, Oliver Frank, Diet- of Germany. Leipzig, 2018. ISBN 1860-0387. URL mar Gründig, and Christoph Jugel. dena-leitstudie integrierte http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:15-qucosa2-332464. energiewende: Impulse für die gestaltung des energiesystems [29] Markus Millinger. Bioenergyoptimisation model, 2019. bis 2050 teil a: Ergebnisbericht und handlungsempfehlungen [30] Joachim Nitsch, Thomas Pregger, Tobias Naegler, Dominik (dena) teil b: Gutachterbericht (ewi energy research & scenar- Heide, Diego Luca de Tena, Franz Trieb, Yvonne Scholz, ios ggmbh). Kristina Nienhaus, Norman Gerhardt, Michael Sterner, and [10] Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz, Bau und Reak- Tobias Trost. Langfristszenarien und strategien für den ausbau torsicherheit. Klimaschutzplan 2050 - klimaschutzpolitische der erneuerbaren energien in deutschland bei berücksichtigung grundsätze und ziele der bundesregierung: Kurzfassung. URL der entwicklung in europa und global: Schlussbericht. URL http://www.bmub.bund.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Klimaschutz/klimaschutzplan_2050_kurzf_bf.pdf. http://www.dlr.de/dlr/Portaldata/1/Resources/bilder/portal/portal_2012_1/leitstudie2011_bf.pdf. [11] Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und En- [31] Benjamin Pfluger, Bernd Tersteegen, Bernd Franke, Christiane ergie. Energiedaten: Gesamtausgabe. URL Bernath, Tobias Bossmann, Gerda Deac, Rainer Elsland, Tobias https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/DE/Downloads/Energiedaten/energiedaten-gesamt-pdf-grafiken.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=34. Fleiter, André Kühn, Mario Ragwitz, Matthias Rehfeldt, Jan [12] Bundesnetzagentur and Bundeskartellamt. Steinbach, Andreas Cronenberg, Alexander Ladermann, Chris- Monitoringbericht 2016, 2017. URL tian Linke, Christoph Maurer, Sebastian Willemsen, Benedikt https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Sachgebiete/Energie/Unternehmen_Institutionen/DatenaustauschUndMonitoring/Monitoring/Monitoringbericht2016.pdf;jsessionid=907DA6C77633E11849D9FC3746057EC5?__blob=publicationFile&v=2. Kauertz, Martin Pehnt, Nils Rettenmaier, Michael Hartner, [13] Bundesregierung. Energiekonzept für eine umweltschonende, Lukas Kranzl, Wolfgang Schade, Giacomo Catenazzi, Martin zuverlässige und bezahlbare energieversorgung. 2010. URL Jakob, and Ulrich Reiter. Modul 10.a: Reduktion der treibhaus- https://www.bundesregierung.de/ContentArchiv/DE/Archiv17/_Anlagen/2012/02/energiekonzept-final.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=5. gasemissionen deutschlands um 95 % bis 2050 grundsätzliche [14] Selina Byfield. Impulspapier-trialog-bioenergie_23.02.2018. überlegungen zu optionen und hemmnissen: Langfristszenar- ien für die transformation des energiesystems in deutschland - [15] C.A.R.M.E.N. e.V. C.a.r.m.e.n. e.v. - preisindizes, 2018. URL studie im auftrag des bundesministeriums für wirtschaft und https://www.carmen-ev.de/infothek/preisindizes. energie. [16] GAMS Development Corp. Gams, 2019. URL [32] Julia Repenning, Lukas Emele, Ruth Blanck, Hannes Böttcher, https://www.gams.com/. Günter Dehoust, Hannah Förster, Benjamin Greiner, Ralph [17] Philipp Gerbert, Patrick Herhold, Jens Burchardt, Stefan Harthan, Klaus Hennenberg, Hauke Hermann, Wolfram Jörß, Schönberger, Florian Rechenmacher, Almut Kirchner, Andreas Charlotte Loreck, Sylvia Ludig, Felix Matthes, Margarethe Kemmler, and Marco Wünsch. Klimapfade für deutschland. Scheffler, Katja Schumacher, Kirsten Wiegmann, Carina Zell- [18] Klaus Heuck, Klaus-Dieter Dettmann, and Detlef Schulz. Ziegler, Sibylle Braungardt, Wolfgang Eichhammer, Rainer Elektrische Energieversorgung: Erzeugung, Übertragung und Elsland, Tobais Fleiter, Johannes Hartwig, Judit Kockat, Verteilung elektrischer Energie für Studium und Praxis. Vieweg Ben Pfluger, Wolfgang Schade, Barbara Schlomann, Frank + Teubner, 8 edition, 2010. Sensfuß, and Hans-Joachim Ziesing. Klimaschutzszenario [19] Martin Kaltschmitt, Hans Hartmann, and Hermann Hof- 2050: 2. endbericht -studie im auftrag des bundesministeri- bauer, editors. Energie aus Biomasse: Grundlagen, Tech- ums für umwelt, naturschutz, bau und reaktorsicherheit. URL niken und Verfahren. Springer Vieweg, Berlin and Heidelberg, https://www.oeko.de/oekodoc/2451/2015-608-de.pdf. 3., aktualisierte und erweiterte auflage edition, 2016. ISBN [33] Michael Schlesinger, Dietmar Lindenberger, and Chris- tian Lutz. Entwicklung der energiemärkte - energieref- [20] Andreas Kemmler, Samual Straßburg, Friedrich Seefeldt, Na- erenzprognose: Projekt nr. 57/12 studie im auftrag des talia Anders, Clemens Rohde, Tobias Fleiter, Ali Aydemir, bundesministeriums für wirtschaft und technologie. URL Heinrich Kleeberger, Lukas Hardi, and Bernd Geiger. Daten- https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/DE/Publikationen/Studien/entwicklung-der-energiemaerkte-energiereferenzprognose-endbericht.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=7. basis zur bewertung von energieeffizienzmaßnahmen in der [34] Statistisches Bundesamt. Land- und forstwirtschaft, fischerei: zeitreihe 2005 – 2014. 17 Landwirtschaftliche bodennutzung - anbau auf dem ackerland. [35] Jan Steinbach. Modellbasierte Untersuchung von Politikinstru- menten zur Förderung erneuerbarer Energien und Energieef- fizienz im Gebäudebereich. Dissertation, Fraunhofer-Institut für System- und Innovationsforschung and Fraunhofer IRB-Verlag, [36] Swiss centre for life cycle inventories. Ecoinvent 2.2 for umberto, [37] Swiss centre for life cycle inventories. Ecoinvent 3.3 for umberto, [38] Nora Szarka, Marcus Eichhorn, Ronny Kittler, Alberto Bezama, and Daniela Thrän. Interpreting long-term energy scenarios and the role of bioenergy in germany. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 68:1222–1233, 2017. ISSN 13640321. doi: 10. 1016/j.rser.2016.02.016. [39] TFZ. Entwicklung der brennstoffpreise, 2018. URL http://www.tfz.bayern.de/festbrennstoffe/energetischenutzung/035092/index.php. [40] Inc. The MathWorks. Matlab, 2019. URL https://de.mathworks.com/products/matlab.html. [41] Daniela Thrän, Oliver Arendt, Jens Ponitka, Julian Braun, Markus Millinger, Verena Wolf, Martin Banse, Rüdiger Schal- dach, Jan Schüngel, Sven Gärtner, Nils Rettenmaier, Katja Hü- necke, Klaus Hennenberg, Bernhard Wern, Frank Baur, Uwe Fritsche, and Hans-Werner Gress. Meilensteine 2030: Ele- mente und meilensteine für die entwicklung einer tragfähigen und nachhaltigen bioenergiestrategie. [42] Daniela Thrän, Rüdiger Schaldach, Markus Millinger, Verena Wolf, Oliver Arendt, Jens Ponitka, Sven Gärtner, Nils Ret- tenmaier, Klaus Hennenberg, and Jan Schüngel. The mile- stones modeling framework: An integrated analysis of national bioenergy strategies and their global environmental impacts. Environmental Modelling & Software, 86:14–29, 2016. ISSN 13648152. doi: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.09.005. [43] Daniela Thrän, Oliver Arendt, Martin Banse, Julian Braun, Uwe Fritsche, Sven Gärtner, Klaus J. Hennenberg, Katja Hün- neke, Markus Millinger, Jens Ponitka, Nils Rettenmaier, Rüdi- ger Schaldach, Jan Schüngel, Bernhard Wern, and Verena Wolf. Strategy elements for a sustainable bioenergy policy based on scenarios and systems modeling: Germany as example. Chem- ical Engineering & Technology, 40(2):211–226, 2017. ISSN 09307516. doi: 10.1002/ceat.201600259. [44] Umweltbundesamt. Energieverbrauch für fossile und erneuerbare wärme. URL https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/daten/energie/energieverbrauch-fuer-fossile-erneuerbare-waerme#textpart-1. [45] Umweltbundesamt. Erneuerbare energien in zahlen, 2017. URL https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/themen/klima-energie/erneuerbare-energien/erneuerbare-energien-in-zahlen#textpart-1. [46] Umweltbundesamt. Probas - prozessorientierte ba- sisdaten für umweltmanagementsysteme, 2019. URL http://www.probas.umweltbundesamt.de/php/index.php. [47] Carl-Philipp Witzel and Robert Finger. Economic evaluation of miscanthus production – a review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 53:681–696, 2016. ISSN 13640321. doi: 10. 1016/j.rser.2015.08.063. [48] World Bank. Global economic monitor (gem) commodities: Wheat, hrw, 2019. URL databank.worldbank.org. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Quantitative Finance arXiv (Cornell University)

Future competitive bioenergy technologies in the German heat sector: Findings from an economic optimization approach

Loading next page...
 
/lp/arxiv-cornell-university/future-competitive-bioenergy-technologies-in-the-german-heat-sector-fnxSmyAQkq
ISSN
0360-5442
eISSN
ARCH-3346
DOI
10.1016/j.energy.2019.116194
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Meeting the defined greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets in Germany is only possible by switching to renewable technologies in the energy sector. A major share of that reduction needs to be covered by the heat sector, which accounts for ∼ 35% of the energy based emissions in Germany. Biomass is the renewable key player in the heterogeneous heat sector today. Its properties such as weather independency, simple storage and flexible utilization open up a wide field of applications for biomass. However, in a future heat sector fulfilling GHG reduction targets and energy sectors being increasingly connected: which bioenergy technology concepts are competitive options against other renewable heating systems? In this paper, the cost optimal allocation of the limited German biomass potential is investigated under long- term scenarios using a mathematical optimization approach. The model results show that bioenergy can be a competitive option in the future. Especially the use of biomass from residues can be highly competitive in hybrid combined heat and power (CHP) pellet combustion plants in the private household sector. However, towards 2050, wood based biomass use in high temperature industry applications is found to be the most cost efficient way to reduce heat based emissions by 95% in 2050. Keywords: heat sector, bioenergy, renewable energy, optimization, hybrid heat technologies 1. Introduction house gas emissions in the heat sector both the demand and supply sides need to be addressed. Global climate change, depleting energy resources and Heat demand in buildings needs to be decreased by in- energy security are issues affecting all countries. In Ger- creasing the refurbishment rate. Additionally, the heat many ambitious emission reduction and efficiency improve- transition needs different renewable technological solutions ment targets are defined by the government [13]. GHG that fit this complex market structure, combining renew- emissions are to be reduced by 80 − 95% until 2050 com- able power and biomass energy sources. pared to 1990 by improving efficiency and switching to re- In 2017, biomass was the largest renewable energy con- newable technologies in the energy sector. A major share tributor in Germany (54%), particularly in the heat sec- of that reduction needs to be covered by the heat sector, tor where 87% of the renewable energy was covered by which accounts for ∼ 35% of the energy based emissions biomass. Solid biomass was contributing the highest share [45] and 54% of the final energy demand [11] in Germany of renewable heat with 68% [1]. However, alternative re- today. newable heat options take up more market shares, the re- The German heat sector is characterized by its hetero- source biomass is limited and a great share of the German geneity due to different demand profiles, applications and yearly usable potential is already exploited [8]. On the infrastructures. Heat consumption takes place in millions other hand, bioenergy has clear advantages compared to of residential buildings (which accounts for 43% of the fi- other renewable fluctuating energy sources in the heat sec- nal heat demand), trade and commerce buildings (17%), as tor: weather independency, the possibility of simple stor- well as in many different fields of the industry (40%) [11], age and flexible utilization. These properties open up a mainly the steel and chemical industries in high tempera- wide field of application for biomass within the different ture applications. Within these sectors, different temporal sub-sectors of the heat sector. But in which sub-sectors is demands occur, ranging from seasonal to daily fluctuating biomass competitive against other renewable applications, needs. In addition to this complex demand structure, 8% while fulfilling the GHG reduction targets? of heat is not produced at the location of demand, but dis- Several studies are available on the development of the tributed via district heating grids [11]. To reduce green- German energy transition in general [30–33], focusing on the power sector and examining energy from biomass only ∗ roughly. Thrän et al. [41] investigated the allocation of Corresponding author Email address: matthias.jordan@ufz.de (Matthias Jordan) biomass in different German energy sectors. The results Preprint submitted to Energy August 29, 2019 arXiv:1908.10065v2 [econ.GN] 28 Aug 2019 show that wood based biomass in the transport and power The objective function is minimizing the total system costs sector is only competitive under special circumstances, ex- over all technologies i, all sub-sectors s and the complete pecting to have more competitive applications in the heat timespan t=2015...2050 (1). The total system costs are the sector, which was not modelled in the mentioned study. To sum of the technology specific marginal costs mc, multi- the authors’ knowledge, there is no study modelling the plied with the amount of heat produced π, and the invest- complex structure of the complete heat sector in detail, ment costs ic, discounted with the annuity method (dis- while including hybrid heating technologies and represen- count rate q) [18], multiplied with the number of heating cap tative bioenergy technology concepts, also in combination systems installed n . In the model each (hybrid-)heat- with other renewable technologies. Additionally, reviews technology concept is separated into different modules j, focussing on model-based analysis in the heat sector, do assigned with different lifetimes t and individual invest- not identify any studies combining the above mentioned ment costs. research intentions [7, 24]. In this paper, the cost optimal allocation of biomass between different heat sub-sectors is investigated in the Objective function frame of long-term energy scenarios. The following re- search question is assessed: min mc · π t,i,s,b t,i,s,b - Which bioenergy technology concepts are competitive t,i,s,b (1) options in a future, climate target fulfilling heat sector and ˆ X j q(1 + q) cap + ic · n · how does their potential role differ in different heat sub- t,i,j,s t,i,j,s (1 + q) − 1 t,i,j,s sectors? subject to 2. Materials and method δ = π , ∀(t, i, s, b) ∈ (T, I, S, B) (2) t,s t,i,s,b In this study, the heat sector was divided into several i,b sub-sectors, with different properties in terms of demand profiles and infrastructures. Representative bioenergy-, Res Land φ + Λ · Y ≥ m ˙ , t,b t,i,s,b t t fossil- and other renewable (hybrid-)heat-technology con- i,s,b (3) cepts were defined for each sub-sector and the technolog- ∀(t, i, s, b) ∈ (T, I, S, B ) ical competition was optimized in the system within the bio framework of the German climate protection plan [10, 13] feed max rel in two scenarios. A consistent scenario framework was ε ≥ α · (ε · π + ε · m ˙ ), i,s t,i,s t,i,s,b t t,i,s t,i,s,b set up and detailed biomass feedstock data were defined, i,s,b (4) leading to a set of five biomass types, which can be pro- ∀(t, i, s, b) ∈ (T, I, S, B) cessed into 20 biomass products. With additionally three fossil products, they can be applied to 47 different technol- π = m ˙ · η , ∀(t, i, s, b) ∈ (T, I, S, B) (5) t,i,s,b t,i,s,b t,i,s ogy concepts. Within the model these technology concepts were in competition on 19 different sub-sectors to identify cap initial n = n , ∀(t, i, j, s) ∈ (T, I, J, S) (6) t=2015,i,j,s i,j,s the optimal allocation of biomass in the heat sector. cap cap ext dec n = n + n − n , t+1,i,j,s t,i,j,s t+1,i,j,s t+1,i,j,s 2.1. Modelling (7) ∀(t, i, j, s) ∈ (T, I, J, S) A mathematical optimization approach was chosen to model the heat sector. The approach of the model fol- dec initialdec extdec n = n + n , t,i,j,s t,i,j,s t,i,j,s lows BENOPT (BioENergyOPTimisation model), which (8) has been applied on the transport and power sector [27– ∀(t, i, j, s) ∈ (T, I, J, S) 29]. As a programming environment GAMS [16] is used extdec ext in combination with MATLAB [40]. GAMS is an alge- n = n , ∀(t, i, j, s) ∈ (T, I, J, S) (9) ˆ t,i,j,s t+t ,i,j,s braic modelling language for mathematical optimization. In Matlab the input data is imported from Microsoft Ex- Marginal costs include feedstock costs (fossil or cel [25], edited and automatically sent to GAMS, where biomass), costs for power demand, maintenance and a the minimum costs are calculated. The results from the CO -certificate price. The sum of these costs has a dy- optimizer are exported back to Matlab, where they are namic development, which depends on the time point, used evaluated and graphically prepared. technology, sub-sector and if applicable the consumed feed- The model in this paper is fully deterministic and uses stock product b. Generated power in a combined heat and perfect foresight. The technology choice is optimized power (CHP) system is included as a credit within the within the competition. It is a linear model, using the variable costs. For details on how the credit is calculated Cplex solver. The spatial boundary is Germany as a whole. see section 2.5. 2 The main model restrictions are as follows: First, the eters is required as well as a simplification of the decision heat demand δ in each sub-sector needs to be fulfilled. cases (see section 2.1). Therefore, similar demand cases Therefore the sum of the produced heat within one sub- were aggregated to one sub-sector with mean values and a sector equals the heat demand within a sub-sector in each certain set up of suitable technology options. Special cases year. Second, the yearly consumed biomass m ˙ within with low heat demands were included in the most suitable the system must not be higher as the sum of the lim- sub-sector. res ited biomass potential from residues φ and the limited The main difference in the heat supply depends on Land land use potential Λ multiplied with the correspond- the required temperature level, which is basically distin- ing yield Y of the energy crop. More details on the biomass guished between industrial applications (60 °C to more potential and possible biomass pathways are explained in than 1.000 °C) and building heat demand (usually less section 2.4 and 2.6. Third, the yearly maximal allowed than 95 °C). Considering comparable renewable heating max amount of GHG emissions ε , representing the federal concepts, industrial heat supply was separated into four climate targets in Germany, must be greater or equal to sub-sectors by different temperature levels [20]: rel the sum of the technology-based ε and feedstock-based < 200 °C, 200 - 500 °C, 500 - 1.500 °C and one sub-sector feed ε emissions (4). The relationship between the pro- for special coal demand (fossil or bio-coal) in industrial duced heat and the utilised feedstock product is given in applications for steel production. equation (5) and determined by the conversion efficiency In addition to industrial applications, more than 50% of η of each technology. Equation (6) to (9) explain the the total heat demand in Germany is used for space heat- relationship between the number of heating systems in- ing and hot water supply at a temperature level below cap stalled (n ) at time point t, the number of heating sys- 95 °C [44]. When supplying individual objects of differ- ext tems newly invested in (n ) and the number of heating ent sizes with fossil systems, no major technological dif- dec systems decommissioned (n ). The status quo of all in- ference is required. A heat supply by bioenergy, how- stalled heating systems in 2015 serves as a starting point ever, requires the use of different technological solutions initial (n ). This portfolio is linearly decommissioned over depending on the size of the boiler. From smaller appli- initialdec the corresponding lifetime of each technology (n ). cations in single family houses using stoves or wood log ext Heating systems newly installed in the model (n ) are boilers, through pellet boilers in multi-family houses up to decommissioned after they have reached their lifetime, de- wood chip boilers in e.g. schools or hospitals, a variety of extdec fined by the variable n . Premature decommissioning technological solutions and combinations are possible [19]. of heating systems is only allowed for fossil technologies Additionally, CHP-technologies based on solid biomass fu- and limited to 1%/a. As a restriction for energy crops, els are favourable options for cases with a high base load every type may maximally double its land use per year. demand, such as in indoor swimming pools. Considering these aspects, the private household and trade and com- 2.2. Heat sub-sectors merce sector was structured into 14 sub-sectors according Heat utilisation differs from power utilisation, which is to the peak demand, the relation of hot water demand supplied through one uniform grid with a unique frequency to total heat demand and the required temperature levels and different voltage levels which can be transformed up [23]. The future development of the heat demand in each and down. For heat supply, beside local heating grids, dif- sub-sector is based on the external results of the model fering in temperature, pressure and extension, numerous ’B-STar’ [21]. As a stocks exchange model, it represents single object solutions exist, with temperatures ranging the building stock in Germany and models the future re- from 1.000 °C for industrial processes down to low tem- furbishment in different scenarios. perature heating with about 40 °C [44]. Additionally, the Centralized heating supply was summarized in one sub- amount of heat required differs, with a corresponding ca- sector, determined by the resolution of the data basis. pacity variation for heat generators. Furthermore, heating In total, 19 sub-sectors were defined and described (see systems based on solid fuels (biomass, coal or waste) vary Lenz and Jordan [23] and Table 2 in appendix B). The av- in terms of operation efficiency and emissions depending on erage thermal peak load demand and the annual final heat the load [19]. Differing patterns for peak demand, yearly demand until 2050 serve as input data for the optimization demand variations, temperature requirements and the re- model and the design of the different technology concepts lation between base load (e.g. hot water supply) and the in each sub-sector. varying proportion of the heat demand (e.g. space heating) 2.3. Technology concepts require specially adapted technology concepts. Thus, heat demand can be divided into a whole series of sub-sectors In order to determine the future use of biomass in the in which different heating concepts have to be applied. heat sector, the market competition has to be depicted In reality, each heating object is individually examined in the optimization model. Consequently, different fossil and a decision on the best case is taken by the owner or an and renewable technological systems were selected for the ordered decision maker according to an individual set of competition in each sub-sector. Beside single technology decision parameters and the knowledge of the involved ac- solutions, also hybrid systems were included. Hybrid sys- tors. For an artificial model, a fixed set of decision param- tems are combining different types of fuels, leading to a 3 variety of possible technical solutions. For the final selec- 2.4. Feedstock data tion of the defined heating concepts, the following aspects According to the above described technology concepts, were taken into account: four main feedstocks are considered in this model to gen- erate heat or combined heat and power. Biomass from • The status quo of the national biomass feedstock mix residues and energy crops is used for all bioenergy tech- and all installed heating systems in 2015 were consid- nologies. The basis for all other renewable heat technolo- ered. gies is the usage of electricity and for the most competitive fossil technologies gas and coal have been chosen as a ref- • As the research is focused on biomass, at least one erence. The heat production from plastic waste has been bioenergy heat concept as well as one bioenergy CHP set as a constant to the amount of generation in 2015. De- concept, based on solid fuels, is integrated in each tails on fossil and power based energy prices are shown in sub-sector. Fig. 3. The technical potential for biomass residues are shown • Solar thermal was integrated as an established tech- until 2050 based on Brosowski et al. [8], shown in Fig. nology on the market. 1. Additionally, crops for energetic and material use are cultivated on 2.4 Mio ha of land in Germany today [6]. • One heat pump concept per low temperature sub- In this study, the maximum permitted land use is reduced sector was defined, as this technology offers the po- linearly to 2.0 Mio ha in 2050, which is at the lower limit of tential to fulfil the complete heat demand for appli- identified values from currently available long-term energy cations lower than 200 °C in a renewable way. scenario studies [30–33]. On this land area, ten types of energy crops are cultivated for heat and CHP applications • In order to ensure a net renewable power supply for today [5]. In table 7 of appendix B the applied yields and heat pumps, a heat pump concept is always designed the status quo of land use for these crops in the year 2015 in combination with a PV system, which produces the are attached. major share of the electricity demand over the year. Manure Straw Residual wood Log wood As the most competitive fossil references a gas boiler case (a) case (b) or gas boiler in combination with a solar thermal system as well as a gas fuel cell plus solar thermal system were defined in the most cases. Oil-fired boilers were not in- cluded in the modelling as they are more costly and emit more CO equivalents than gas-fired boilers. Every gas- fired concept can either obtain natural gas or biomethane, which is fed into the gas network. Different single bioen- 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 ergy solutions were described according to the amount of heat and the thermal peak demand. Additionally, bioen- ergy hybrid or multibrid systems including a heat-pump, solar thermal or PV were selected according to the heat 1.5 demand parameters of the sub-sector. Future technical im- provements were considered through yearly increase rates of thermal efficiency, electrical efficiency and a decrease in investment costs [23]. For gasification systems, a change 0.5 land use for heating in case (a) from combustion engines to fuel cells is considered within land use for heating in case (b) the next two decades. Table 2 and 3 in appendix B show which concepts are 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 considered in which sub-sectors. As there are some basic Figure 1: Technical biomass potential from residues in Germany [8] (top). Available pre-allocated biomass potential and available land differences in the concepts between heating in buildings area in case (a) and (b) shown by the coloured lines. The model is and industrial/ district heating provisions, these two sec- free to pick from any category of residues and is free to cultivate any tors are shown in separate tables. However, the allocation of the defined energy crops, as long as the defined upper scenario of biomass over the sub-sectors is treated equally. limit is not violated. In total, 42 technical concepts where described. The complete technical and economic data for each technology Different prices arise for the defined feedstocks. A com- concept per sub-sector can be found in a published data mon method to estimate future prices of energy crops is to set [23]. The calculated infrastructure emission factors of add the per hectare profit of a benchmark crop to the per the single technology components as well as the feedstock hectare production costs of the energy crops [47]. In Ger- specific emission factors are attached in table 5 and 6 of many, the most common crop is wheat [34], which holds for appendix B. the benchmark crop in this study. Based on the price in- Biomass (PJ) Land use (Mio ha) allocation factors applied. Wood chips (residues) Log wood Straw 2.5. Sector coupling Manure Corn silage The heat sector is strongly linked to the power sector, Sugar beet especially when CHP and power to heat options are mod- Poplar wood chips elled. To generate conclusive results for the heat sector, Miscanthus chips a linkage to the power sector is inevitable. In order to Silphie Agricultural grass achieve this linkage, a scenario framework was set up. Cer- 40 Sorghum tain input parameters, such as the electricity price, the Grassland electricity-mix specific emission factor and the CO cer- Grain tificate price, which are highly influential for the market Grain Silage development of the heat sector, do also rely strongly on the development of the power sector. These parameters and predicted fossil feedstock price developments are adopted from the ’KS95’ scenario of the study of Repenning et al. [32]. Governmental subsidies, such as e.g. the EEG are not considered in this study. The only market steering instru- ment is the CO price, which is applied on the complete heat sector. As a result, the linkage of the heat sector to 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 the power sector in relation to power prices, feed-in tar- Figure 2: Cost developments of the biomass feedstocks for a yearly iffs, own electricity consumption and emission allocation wheat price increase of 3% (solid lines) and 5% (dotted lines). is shown in Table 1. Repenning et al. [32] projects the future development of crease of wheat in the last decades [48], two biomass price power and gas prices for the energy only markets. The development scenarios are modelled in this study with a required end consumer prices for our investigations are yearly increase of wheat by 3% and 5%. For a detailed calculated consumption-dependent according to the mon- description of the applied method in this paper the reader itoring report of the federal network agency for the model is referred to Millinger and Thrän [26]. Prices for biomass starting year 2015 [12]. The future price developments are products from residues in 2015 are according current prices projected combining both sources [12, 32], see Fig 3. [4, 15, 39]. For the future development, the yearly increase rate of wheat in the corresponding scenario is also applied 2.6. Scenarios to biomass residues. Fig. 2 shows the resulting price de- velopment of the considered biomass feedstocks. Applied In this study, a scenario of 95% GHG emission reduc- surcharges for extra processing steps, such as pelletising tion compared to 1990 is analysed. The focus of the in- etc. can be found in table 8 of appendix B. vestigation lies on the development of biomass in the heat Biomass from residues and energy crops can be con- sector, but still considering the interactions to other en- verted into several secondary energy carriers. In this study, ergy sectors by setting a scenario framework, derived from 20 biomass products and three fossil products have been the ’KS95’ scenario from the study of Repenning et al. defined. Table 4 in appendix B shows which products can [32]. From currently available long term energy scenarios be used in which technologies. All fermentable feedstocks in Germany [30–33], Repenning et al. [32] is the only one are processed into biomethane, which is fed into the gas modelling a transformation path towards a 95% reduction supply network. Since multiple options per technology are scenario and also reaching this target in 2050. However, possible, a differentiation between feedstock specific and within the study of Repenning et al. [32] biomass is de- technology specific emissions has to be made. Table 5 and picted in a rough level of detail and only a minor share of 6 in appendix B give an overview of the technology and the available biomass potential is distributed to the heat feedstock specific emission factors and the corresponding sector in the ’KS95’ scenario. In this paper, a broader Table 1: Model linkage of the heat sector to the power sector in terms of power consumed for heating and power use of CHP / PV technologies. The emissions from grid-based electricity are allocated to the heat sector in accordance to the power mix specific emission factor [32]. Power Price Credit Heat sector emissions external demand Final consumer price 0 Emissions from grid power mix internally used for heating 0 0 Emissions from techn. system internally used for non heating 0 Final consumer price 0 fed into the grid 0 Stock market price 0 5 200 not allowed in order to avoid a shift of negative environ- Household mental effects abroad. For all scenarios, it is assumed that Trade & commerce Europe and especially the neighbouring countries of Ger- Industry many follow similar, ambitious climate targets and that no relocation of industries or imports arise. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is not considered in this study. Within the model a discount rate is considered for the investment costs. According to the recommendations of Steinbach [35], considering the methodology to derive so- cial discount rates as well as discount rates used in anal- ysed energy scenarios, the applied value in this model is set to 4%. Household < 20 GJ Household 20 - 200 GJ Household > 200 GJ 20 3. Results Trade & commerce Industry 3.1. Scenario results In the following paragraph, a transformation path to- wards a 95% emission reduction in 2050 in the heat sector is shown. Modelling results are shown for cases (a) and 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 (b) from 2015 to 2050. The market share of all technology Figure 3: End consumer power (top) and gas (bottom) prices. Own types is shown in Fig. 4. As expected, the major market calculations based on Repenning et al. [32] and Bundesnetzagentur share shifts from natural gas technologies in 2015 to power and Bundeskartellamt [12]. based heat pumps in 2050. The share of bioenergy in the year 2050 is at 29.0 % in scenario (a) and 5.7 % in scenario (b). In both cases, the complete pre-allocated biomass po- range of biomass potential is pre-allocated to the heat sec- tential is used up from the year 2035 onwards. The largest tor. Szarka et al. [38] reviews the role of bioenergy in long- biomass shares are holding wood chip and pellet technolo- term energy scenarios. The allocation of biomass to the gies. Additionally, in case (a), log wood technologies hold heat sector in 2050 varies strongly between the reviewed a constant market share of ∼ 3%. studies, ranging from ∼ 5 − 70% of the overall potential. A more detailed illustration shows which biomass prod- Hence, two extreme scenarios are investigated in this pa- ucts are used for heating or CHP technologies, see Fig. 5. per, where one time a major share of the biomass potential In 2015, one third of the utilised biomass was in the form (case a) and the other time a minor share of the biomass of biogas, mostly based on corn silage. Without federal potential (case b) is pre-allocated for heating applications, subsidies, as it is the case in this model, biogas production for details see Fig. 1. Consequently, the biomass potential is not competitive and market shares decrease rapidly in for heat applications is fixed for each year and scenario, both scenarios. A constant use of log wood over time is but the model is free to pick from any category of residues found in case (a), however, log wood technologies are the and is free to cultivate any of the defined energy crops, as least cost competitive wood based bioenergy technologies, long as the defined upper scenario limit is not violated. In as their market share decreases rapidly with decreasing both scenarios, the actual status quo of national biomass biomass potential in case (b) from 2030 onwards. In 2015 use in 2015 serves as a starting point. Biomass imports are residual wood was mainly used for wood chip technologies. a b 5000 5000 4000 4000 Bio-Coke Wood chip Wood pellet 3000 3000 Log wood Electric heating Heat pump 2000 2000 Solar thermal Biomethane Natural gas 1000 Coal (incl. coke) 1000 0 0 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 Figure 4: Model resulting development of the technology market shares for the complete heat sector in case (a) and (b) in a yearly resolution. Net energy generation (PJ) final power price (Cent/kWh) final gas price (Cent/kWh) a Grain Silage b 1200 1200 Grain Grassland Sorghum 1000 1000 Agricultural grass Silphie 800 Miscanthus pellets 800 Miscanthus chips Poplar pellets 600 600 Poplar briquettes Poplar wood chips Sugar beet 400 400 Corn silage Manure 200 Straw 200 Log wood Pellets (residues) 0 0 Briquettes (residues) 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 Wood chips (residues) Figure 5: Model resulting consumption of biomass products in case (a) and (b) in a yearly resolution. The model results show, that in a 95 % emission reduction cient in high temperature heat applications. scenario the use of residual wood is most competitive over the next three decades in the form of pellets. However, 4. Discussion in the last years until 2050, the use of residual wood in the form of wood chips is the favourable option to fulfil In this paper, the future role of biomass in a sustainable climate targets in a cost optimal way. heat sector is investigated. First of all, the results show The available land area for energy crops is cultivated that a substantial emission reduction of 95% compared to with Miscanthus and processed to chips beginning after 1990 is possible in the German heat sector. A reduction the decreasing cultivation of biogas feedstocks, see Fig. 5. of 98%, as it is the case in other studies using ’backup ca- Due to low feedstock costs and high yields, Miscanthus is pacities’ [21, 32], was not possible. Second, bioenergy is a a competitive option in such a scenario. Notable is the use competitive option within the defined scenario framework, of Miscanthus in form of chips in contrast to the use of which confirms the hypothesis from Thrän et al. [41, 42, 43] residual wood in form of pellets. expecting to have more competitive applications for wood Fig. 6 shows in which specific sub-sectors and technol- based biomass in the heat sector compared to the trans- ogy concepts the biomass potential is distributed. In six port and electricity sector. Third, it is identified which sub-sectors, biomass technologies are competitive options biomass products are most competitive in which technol- in both scenarios. Five of these sub-sectors belong to the ogy systems and on which sub-sectors of the heat sector. private household sector, in which pellet CHP and tor- According to the model results, in the next three decades refied pellet CHP technologies in combination with a heat until 2040-2045 biomass is identified to be most competi- pump and a photovoltaic system are most competitive over tive in the private household sector, which is in line with the next three decades. However, between 2040 and 2050, Koch et al. [21] and Repenning et al. [32]. The most with emission targets to be fulfilled and increasing power favourable options are decentralised hybrid CHP combus- prices, a shift of biomass use towards high temperature tion applications using residual wood as feedstock. Espe- industry applications is carried out. Consequently, pel- cially the combination of a (torrefied-) wood pellet gasifier let technologies are replaced by heat pumps or log wood CHP with a heat pump and a PV-system is a favourable technologies after their lifetime expansion. option. This is a unique finding in energy systems mod- The market share of log wood technologies is strongly elling. One reason for this finding is that in available stud- dependent on the available biomass potential, as it is the ies on the German energy transition, bioenergy is only least competitive wood based option. In case (a), with a considered as single technology option and not analysed high available potential, market shares are constant. Log in hybrid heat systems [30–33, 38]. Additionally, this find- wood achieves a share of ∼ 80% in the 7,5 kW single family ing shows that the future power price development has a houses sector, where the log wood stove is combined with strong impact on the competitiveness of heating systems. a heat pump and photovoltaic system, while in case (b) Fig. 7 shows the merit order of the prime costs for the this technology holds only a minor market share. most competitive biomass options and their correspond- To sum it up: in the trade and commerce sub-sectors ing competitors in selected sub-sectors for 2015, 2035 and none of the defined bioenergy technologies are a compet- 2050. With increasing power prices in 2035 and 2050 (see itive option. Pellet-CHP and log wood technologies are Fig. 3), hybrid heat technology systems develop to be favourable options in the private household sector, but the cheapest options of all. Despite these findings, hybrid only in combination with a heat pump and PV-system. systems seem to offer the highest degree of self-sufficiency Towards 2050, the use of residual wood is more cost effi- and therefore being more resilient to any kind of feedstock Biomass (PJ) a 7.5 kW - SFH 90 b Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV 400 400 Log wood gasification boiler+ST Buffer integrated pellet burner+ST Pellet boiler Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Heat pump+PV Gas fuel cell+ST Gas cond. boiler + ST Gas cond. boiler+Wood log stove+ST Gas cond. boiler 20152020 2030 2040 2050 20152020 2030 2040 2050 10.5 kW - SFH 150, MFH 30-45, Mixed use. 30-45 Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV 400 400 Log wood gasification boiler+ST Buffer integrated pellet burner+ST Pellet boiler Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Heat pump+PV Gas fuel cell+ST Gas cond. boiler + ST Gas cond. boiler+Wood log stove+ST Gas cond. boiler 20152020 2030 2040 2050 20152020 2030 2040 2050 14.9 kW - SFH 180, Apart. Build.30 Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Log wood gasification boiler+ST Buffer integrated pellet burner+ST Pellet boiler Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Heat pump+PV Gas fuel cell+ST Gas cond. boiler + ST Gas cond. boiler+Wood log stove+ST Gas cond. boiler 20152020 2030 2040 2050 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 20 kW - MFH 45-180, Mixed use 90 Torrefied wood pellet gasifier CHP Wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Log wood gasification boiler+ST Pellet boiler Heat pump+PV Gas fuel cell+ST Gas cond. boiler + ST Gas cond. boiler 20152020 2030 2040 2050 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 80 kW - Apart. Build. 45 - 180 150 150 Wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Wood pellet gasifier CHP Pellet boiler+ST Heat pump+PV Gas fuel cell+Gas cond. boiler+ST Gas cond. boiler + ST Gas cond. boiler 20152020 2030 2040 2050 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 Industry > 500 °C Direct biomass firing 800 800 Wood chip gasifier Direct biomethane firing Electric arc furnace Direct coal firing Direct gas firing 20152020 2030 2040 2050 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050 Figure 6: Model resulting development of the technology shares in selected heat sub-sectors in case (a) and (b). The sub-sectors in which biomass technologies are most competitive are illustrated (6 out of 19). SFH = Single Family Houses; MFH = Multi Family Houses; ST = Solar thermal; PV = Photovoltaic; HP = Heat Pump; CHP = Combined Heat and Power Net energy generation (PJ) 2015 2035 2050 150 150 150 7.5kW 10.5kW 14.9kW Ind>500 7.5kW 10.5kW 14.9kW Ind>500 7.5kW 10.5kW 14.9kW Ind>500 100 100 100 50 50 50 0 0 0 Figure 7: Merit order of the most competitive biomass technologies and their corresponding competitors in selected sub-sectors for the years 2015, 2035 and 2050. Selected sub-sectors are from the private household sector 7.5 kW, 10.5 kW, 14.9 kW and Industry > 500 °C. ST = Solar thermal; PV = Photovoltaic; HP = Heat Pump; CHP = Combined Heat and Power price developments than the competing heating systems. heating, biogas plants exist today as a result of federal Hence, we conclude that the synergies from hybrid heat subsidies in the last decades. Without this support, bio- technology systems and their GHG mitigation potential gas shares are dropping rapidly in case (a) and (b), which are highly underestimated and that such systems can sub- is in line with findings from other studies in literature pro- stantially contribute to the success of the energy transition jecting the use of fermentable residues in the transport in Germany. sector instead of the heat sector, [21, 32, 33, 41]. From the results it is also found that available land for In the long term, in a 95% reduction scenario, bioenergy energy crops is cultivated with Miscanthus. Again, this is is most competitive in high temperature industrial applica- a unique finding in the modelling of the heat sector. While tions in the form of wood chips. From 2040-2045 onwards, the cultivation of Miscanthus is an endogenous model re- biomass use shifts almost entirely from the household sec- sult in this study, the above mentioned scenario analysis tor to high temperature industry applications. This shift from literature set the type of energy crops as an input away from decentralised private households is in line with parameter. In addition, it is notable from our results, Koch et al. [21]. The use of wood based biomass for in- that Miscanthus is almost exclusively used as chips in in- dustry applications towards 2050 confirms the projections dustry applications. One explanation is that in private of several studies ([2, 9, 17, 32, 38]). Derived from the households additional costs for a separator are required if results, see Fig. 6, we conclude that with emission targets Miscanthus is used in pellet technologies. However, high to be fulfilled in 2050 the sub-sector "‘Industry > 500 °C"’ yields and low production costs lead to a monopoly posi- requires a major share of renewable technologies. Possible tion among energy crops. So why does Miscanthus play renewable options are heating from biomass or the use of only a minor role in agriculture today? Witzel and Fin- electric arc furnaces. Prime costs of the electric arc are in- ger [47] identify several major barriers, e.g. a lack of es- creasing strongly in 2050 compared to biomass heating or tablished markets, high establishment costs as well as un- heat pumps, see Fig. 7. In the private household sector, certainties, arising to a large extent from the necessary the heat pump is an additional option, being more effi- long term commitment. These factors are not represented cient and more cost effective than the electric arcs. Con- in our optimization model and must be considered sepa- sequently, biomass use shifts to high temperature industry rately. Nevertheless, to generate an indicator, a model run applications, avoiding the use of electric arcs. However, excluding perennial crops was performed, resulting in the the benefits granted to industry, apart from the generally use of biomethane from maize silage in high temperature lower power prices (see Fig 3), are not depicted in this industry applications in the long term. model, making the electric arc a possibly cheaper option. On the other hand, the use of electric arcs requires signifi- cantly more renewable electricity capacity than the use of Limitations: Modelling of the heat sector, as it is per- heat pumps, which, in contrast, also make use of ambient formed here, depends on several research studies serving as heat. input data. Research insights may change, e.g. the poten- In the trade and commerce sector, as well as in district tial of wood based residues was recently corrected down- heating, biomass is not a favourable option. For district wards [3]. Do the results and conclusions change, when the Gas cond. boiler + ST Heat pump+PV Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Gas cond. boiler + ST Heat pump+PV Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Gas cond. boiler + ST Log wood gasification boiler+ST Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Direct gas firing Direct biomass firing Electric arc furnace Gas cond. boiler + ST Heat pump+PV Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Gas cond. boiler + ST Heat pump+PV Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Gas cond. boiler + ST Log wood gasification boiler+ST Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Direct gas firing Direct biomass firing Electric arc furnace Gas cond. boiler + ST Heat pump+PV Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Gas cond. boiler + ST Heat pump+PV Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Gas cond. boiler + ST Log wood gasification boiler+ST Heat pump+PV+Log wood stove Tor. wood pellet gasifier CHP+HP+PV Direct gas firing Direct biomass firing Electric arc furnace pre-allocated biomass potential is changed? How would In times of sector coupling, the advantages of such sys- the results change if the share of the projected district tems and their potential for emission reduction should not heating network would be higher or if biomass allocation be underestimated and should be taken into account when is optimized across all energy sectors? The scenario design designing policies. However, in the long term, wood based with a higher and lower amount of biomass pre-allocated biomass use is found to shift almost entirely from the pri- to the heat sector is supposed to represent such shifts of vate household sector to high temperature applications in biomass use, but such an approach is limited. However, the industry. With increasing power prices, the use of the outlined results in this study show the same tendency wood chips from residues and energy crops in high tem- in both scenarios, indicating that these factors might have perature industry applications is found to be the most cost only a minor impact. efficient way to reduce the heat based emissions by 95% in Of course, modelling has its limits, so does this model. Another finding from this study is, that available land The private household sector is depicted in a high level for energy crops is almost entirely cultivated with Mis- of detail, which was not possible for the industry and dis- canthus. Despite several major barriers, arising to a large trict heating sector, due to the limited available data basis. extent from the long term commitment, this finding should Further research in this direction is highly recommended be discussed when designing policies. from the authors’ view. As mentioned before, the power market is not modelled within this study. Therefore a new approach was estab- 6. Acknowledgements lished for linking the power and heat sector, see section 2.5. By setting a scenario framework it is not necessary to have Thank you to Öko-Institut e.V. for sharing the heat de- a high temporal resolution, having the advantage of a short mand data calculated with B-STar (Building Stock Trans- model run time leading to the possibility to represent the formation Model), which have been used in this study for heat sector and their technology concepts in more detail. the defined household, trade and commerce and district To increase the annual resolution to a monthly one seems heating markets [21]. worthwhile to investigate, since the heat demand, PV yield This work was funded by the Helmholtz Association of etc. varies seasonally. However, our model results fit well German Research Centers and supported by Helmholtz into the results of the long-term energy scenarios in liter- Impulse and Networking Fund through Helmholtz Inter- ature studies [21, 30–33, 38]. disciplinary Graduate School for Environmental Research When future long-term modelling is done, uncertainties (HIGRADE). Declarations of interest: none. in the input parameters apply and have an effect on the model outcome. Using the applied model, with its short 7. Appendix A. Supplementary data model run time compared to established energy scenario models, opens up the opportunity to apply a comprehen- Supplementary data related to this article can be found sive sensitivity analysis. In future research we will imple- at http://dx.doi.org/10.17632/v2c93n28rj.1 ment all input parameters, having an uncertainty, into a sensitivity analysis and determine the effect of each param- 8. Appendix B. eter and all its interactions with all other parameters on the model outcome. A detailed description of the method and results goes beyond the scope of this article. 5. Conclusions In this paper, a 95% reduction scenario is investigated with two extreme cases of available biomass potential. In both scenarios, the same trends develop, once in an at- tenuated and once in a stronger manner. It is found that emission targets in the heat sector can be fulfilled in both cases and bioenergy is found to be a future competitive option for heat applications. Especially hybrid heat tech- nology systems were found to be extremely favourable. More specifically, the most cost efficient options for the next decades until 2040 were found to be in the private household sector in form of a hybrid CHP (torrefied-) pel- let combustion plant in combination with a heat pump and a PV-system. A key driver for the competitiveness of these systems is the future development of power prices. 10 Table 2: Applied heating concepts per sub-sector for private households, trade and commerce. Each row represents a technology concept, each column represents a sub-sector. Per sub-sector the required technology capacity and the specific heat demand of the buildings in kWh/m²a are described. SFH = Single Family House; MFH = Multi Family House; FT = Full Time; PT = Part Time; ST = Solar Thermal; HP = Heat Pump; CHP = Combined Heat and Power; 1: additional peak load heat supply of 25% of total heat demand from gas condensing boiler; 2: additional peak load heat supply of 20% of total heat demand from gas condensing boiler Electric direct heating + ST ✕ Gas condensing boiler ✕ ✕ X ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Gas condensing boiler + ST ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Gas boiler + Log wood stove ✕ ✕ ✕ 1 2 2 1 2 1 Gas fuel cell + ST ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Heat pump + PV ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Heat pump + PV + ST ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Heat pump + PV + log wood stove ✕ ✕ ✕ Heat pump + PV + Pellet boiler ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Buffer int. pellet burner + ST ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Pellet boiler ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Pellet boiler + ST ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Log wood stove + ST ✕ Log wood gasification boiler + ST ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Wood chip boiler + ST ✕ Torrefied wood pellet gasifier CHP ✕ ✕ ✕ Torr. wood pellet g. CHP + HP + PV ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Wood pellet gasifier CHP ✕ ✕ Wood pellet gasifier CHP + HP + PV ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Wood pellet gasifier CHP + ST + PV ✕ ✕ ✕ 2.5 kW - SFH 30 kWh/m²a 5 kW - SFH 45, MFH 30, Mixed use. 30 7.5 kW - SFH 90 10.5 kW - SFH 150, MFH 30-45, Mixed use. 30-45 14.9 kW - SFH 180, Apart. Build.30 20 kW - MFH 45-180, Mixed use 90 80 kW - Apart. Build. 45 - 180 45 kW - Apart. Build. 45 27 kW - Mixed use & trade 30-180 31 kW - FT Accommodation since 1984 45 kW - FT Accommodation until 1983 45 kW - PT Accommodation/sport/culture 35 kW - PT Accommodation/sport/culture/trade 60 kW - Sport/culture 180 Details on the defined sub-sectors: thermal peak load, hot water demand 16-19% of total heat demand • 2.5 kW - SFH 30 kWh/m²a: single or two family • 31 kW - FT Accommodation since 1984: newer non- house, very well insulated, low temperature heating private living buildings with full day use, temperature system, 7 MWh/a heating demand; 2.5 kW thermal of heating system in most cases around 70 °C, 100 peak load, hot water demand 30-40% of total heat MWh/a heating demand; 31 kW thermal peak load, demand hot water demand 45-50% of total heat demand • 5 kW - SFH 45, MFH 30, Mixed use. 30: single or • 45 kW - FT Accommodation until 1983: older non- two family house well insulated and very well insu- private living buildings with full day use, temperature lated multi-family houses, mixture of low tempera- of heating system in most cases above 75-85 °C, 145 ture heating system and 70 °C heating, 10.4 MWh/a MWh/a heating demand; 45 kW thermal peak load, heating demand; 5 kW thermal peak load, hot water hot water demand 43-50% of total heat demand demand 20-24% of total heat demand • 45 kW - PT Accommodation/sport/culture: older • 7.5 kW - SFH 90: single or two family house with 60 non-private living buildings with half day use and to 120 kWh/m²a heat demand, mixture of low tem- newer special buildings, temperature of heating sys- perature heating system with at least 45 °C and 70 °C tem at least 50-60 °C sometimes significantly above heating, 14 MWh/a heating demand; 7.5 kW thermal that values, 74 MWh/a heating demand; 45 kW ther- peak load, hot water demand 14-26% of total heat mal peak load, hot water demand 13-16% of total heat demand demand • 10.5 kW - SFH 150, MFH 30-45, Mixed use. 30-45: • 35 kW - PT Accommodation/sport/culture/trade: single or two family house with 120 to 180 kWh/m²a mainly older non-private living buildings with half day heat demand and well insulated multi-family houses use and old special buildings both with high specific and very well insulated mixed use houses, tempera- heating demand, temperature of heating system at ture heating system at least 60 °C, 21 MWh/a heat- least 75-85 °C, 56 MWh/a heating demand; 34 kW ing demand; 10.5 kW thermal peak load, hot water demand 10-40% of total heat demand thermal peak load, hot water demand 15-19% of total heat demand • 14.9 kW - SFH 180, Apart. Build.30: single or two • 60 kW - Sport/culture 180: old special buildings with family house with more than 180 kWh/m²a heat de- more than 180 kWh/m²a heating demand, tempera- mand and well insulated multi-family houses and very ture of heating system at least 75-85 °C, 100 MWh/a well insulated big multi family houses, temperature heating demand; 60 kW thermal peak load, hot water heating system at least 75 °C, 24,5 MWh/a heating demand 13% of total heat demand demand; 14.9 kW thermal peak load, hot water de- mand 8-18% of total heat demand • 20 kW - MFH 45-180, Mixed use 90: mixture of multi family houses and houses with mixed use, tempera- ture of heating system in most cases at least 75 °C, 38 MWh/a heating demand; 20 kW thermal peak load, hot water demand 10-25% of total heat demand • 80 kW - Apart. Build. 45 - 180: mixture of big multi family houses, temperature of heating system in most cases at least 75 °C or even 85 °C, 165 MWh/a heating demand; 80 kW thermal peak load, hot water demand 18% of total heat demand • 45 kW - Apart. Build. 45: well insulated multi family houses, temperature of heating system in most cases below 70 °C, 92 MWh/a heating demand; 43 kW ther- mal peak load, hot water demand 18-29% of total heat demand • 27 kW - Mixed use & trade 30-180: mixture of mixed used houses and non-private living buildings, temper- ature of heating system in most cases at least 75 °C or even 85 °C, 47 MWh/a heating demand; 25 kW 12 Table 3: Applied heating concepts per sub-sector in industry and district heating. ST = Solar Thermal; CHP = Combined Heat and Power; HT = High Temperature Gas condensing boiler ✕ ✕ Gas fuel cell ✕ HT heat pump + ST (5%) ✕ Wood chip boiler X ✕ Wood chip gasifier CHP ✕ ✕ Heat pump + ST (5%) + Wood chip boiler (40%) ✕ Gas turbine CHP ✕ Biomethane gas turbine CHP ✕ Wood chip gasifier with gas turbine CHP ✕ Direct gas firing ✕ Direct coal firing ✕ Electric arc furnace ✕ Direct biomethane firing ✕ Wood chip gasifier with direct gas firing ✕ Direct biomass firing ✕ Coke ✕ Bio-coke ✕ Coal CHP plant ✕ Gas and steam turbine CHP ✕ Coal CHP plant with 5% wood chips ✕ HT heat pump + ST + Methane CHP boiler ✕ Waste CHP plant + Wood chip boiler ✕ Industry < 200 °C Industry 200 - 500 °C Industry 500 - 1.500 °C Special coal demand District heating Table 4: Defined application possibilities of the feedstocks in the technologies. CHP = Combined Heat and Power Wood chips (residues) ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Briquettes (residues) ✕ Pellets (residues) ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Log wood ✕ ✕ Straw ✕ ✕ Manure ✕ ✕ Corn silage ✕ ✕ Sugar beet ✕ ✕ Poplar wood chips ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ ✕ Poplar briquettes ✕ Poplar pellets ✕ ✕ ✕ Miscanthus chips ✕ ✕ ✕ Miscanthus briquettes Miscanthus pellets ✕ ✕ Silphie ✕ ✕ Agricultural grass ✕ ✕ Sorghum ✕ ✕ Grassland ✕ ✕ Grain ✕ ✕ Grain Silage ✕ ✕ Natural gas ✕ ✕ Coal ✕ ✕ ✕ Plastic waste ✕ Gas condensing boiler / fuel cell /plant Log wood stove Log wood gasification boiler Wood pellet boiler/gasifier Wood pellet CHP Torrefied wood pellet CHP Wood chip boiler Hard coal CHP / coal coke Wood chip - hard coal CHP Biomethane applications Waste CHP plant Wood chip gasifier CHP Gas turbine / direct heating Wood gasifier gasturbine Coal direct heating Biomass direct heating Bio-Coke Table 5: Applied emission factors caused by infrastructure expenses in 2015 [36, 37, 46] and the calculated allocation factor according the finnish method. The allocation factor is also applied to the deployed Table 6: Applied feedstock emission factors [36, 37, 46]. Emissions feedstock. Infrastructure emissions are linearly reduced by 80% until based on power consumed from the grid are calculated according the 2050. CHP = Combined Heat and Power; PH = Private Household scenario depended, power mix specific emission factor [32]. In rela- tion to biomass emissions: Including the effects on carbon storage in vegetation and soil, biomass can only be considered CO neutral if it would rot quickly without energy use (residual and waste materials), or if land and vegetation are managed in such a way that they ab- sorb more CO than they would without bioenergy use (taking into account indirect land use effects). One example is the establishment of short rotation plantations on pasture land [14]. Electric direct heating 0.75 Gas condensing boiler 0.25 Solar thermal 6.89 Gas fuel cell 125kWe 5.53 0.30 Heat pump 1.87 Wood chips (residues) 1.36 Wood pellet boiler 1.72 Briquettes (residues) 7.94 Log wood gasification boiler 0.55 Pellets (residues) 7.94 Torrefied wood pellet gasifier 0.55 Log wood 4.47 Buffer integrated pellet burner 0.55 Straw 3.93 Wood pellet gasifier CHP 1.93 0.59 Manure 0.00 Gas condensing boiler (Industry) 0.03 Corn silage 7.35 Wood chip boiler (PH) 0.22 Sugar beet 7.20 Wood chip boiler (Industry) 1.60 Poplar wood chips 3.83 Wood chip gasifier CHP (Ind. low Temp.) 0.14 0.29 Poplar briquettes 8.25 Gas Fuel cell (Industry) 5.53 0.46 Poplar pellets 8.25 High temperature heat pump 1.94 Miscanthus chips 4.10 Wood chip gasifier CHP (District heating) 1.27 0.45 Miscanthus briquettes 8.53 Gas turbine CHP 0.11 0.13 Miscanthus pellets 8.53 Biomethane gas turbine CHP 0.11 0.13 Silphie 5.27 Wood chip gasifier CHP (Ind. high Temp.) 0.30 0.13 Agricultural grass 14.83 Direct Gas firing 0.03 Sorghum 16.11 Direct Coal firing 0.03 Grassland 15.41 Electric arc furnace 0.08 Grain 4.78 Direct biomethane firing 0.03 Grain Silage 12.07 Wood chip gasifier with direct gas firing 0.03 Natural gas 59.60 Direct biomass firing 0.03 Coal 108.00 Coal CHP plant 0.11 0.13 Plastic waste 59.75 Gas and steam turbine CHP 0.13 0.34 Coal coke 123.00 Coal CHP plant with 5% wood chips 0.11 0.13 Bio-coke 27.78 Methane CHP boiler 1.14 0.38 Waste CHP plant 0.11 0.64 Photovoltaic system (gCO -eq/kWel) 78.99 Infrastructure emissions in gCO − eq/MJ 2 out Allocation factor Feedstock emissions in gCO − eq/MJ 2 in Table 7: Yield of the defined energy crops [22] and their corresponding land use in 2015 for heat or combined heat and power applications [6]. SRC = Short Rotation Coppice Land use (ha) Yield(GJ/ha) Corn silage 177 872 000 Sugar beet 150 15 600 Grain 91 151 000 Grain Silage 138 123 000 Agr. grass 137 20 150 Grassland 90 157 849 Silphie 126 400 Sorghum 152 0 (est.) SRC 137 6 630 Miscanthus 273 4 500 Table 8: Applied surcharges in the model based on own calculations. Surcharge (e/GJ) Pellets compared to wood chips 5 Pellet torrefication + 14 % Briquettes compared to wood chips 7 Separator for torrefied poplar pellets in pellet technologies 0.3 Separator for miscanthus pellets in pellet technologies 0.2 Separator for poplar briquettes in log wood technologies 0.05 Separator for straw in wood chip technologies 0.4 Separator for poplar wood chips in wood chip gasification technologies 0.2 Separator for miscanthus chips in wood chip technologies 0.2 Transport fee for wood based feedstocks per delivery 50 e 16 References [21] Matthias Koch, Klaus Hennenberg, Katja Hünecke, Markus Haller, and Tilman Hesse. Rolle der bioen- References ergie im strom- und wärmemarkt bis 2050 unter ein- beziehung des zukünftigen gebäudebestandes. URL [1] Übersicht zur entwicklung der energiebedingten emissionen und https://www.energetische-biomassenutzung.de/fileadmin/Steckbriefe/dokumente/03KB114_Bericht_Bio-Strom-W%C3%A4rme.pdf. brennstoffeinsätze in deutschland 1990-2016. [22] Kuratorium für Technik und Bauwesen in der Landwirtschaft [2] Sektorkopplung – optionen für die nächste phase der en- e.V., editor. Energiepflanzen: Daten für die Planung des En- ergiewende. ergiepflanzenanbaus. 2. auflage edition, 2012. [3] Dbfz - data repository: Ressourcendatenbank, 2019. URL [23] Volker Lenz and Matthias Jordan. Technical and economic data http://webapp.dbfz.de/resources. of renewable heat supply systems for different heat sub-sectors., [4] agrarheute. Heu und strohpreise, 2018. URL https://www.agrarheute.com/markt/futtermittel/heu-stroh-preise-extrem-hohen-niveau-551055. [24] Erik Merkel, Russell McKenna, Daniel Fehrenbach, and Wolf [5] A. Becker, D. Peter, and D. Kemnitz. Anbau und ver- Fichtner. A model-based assessment of climate and energy wendung nachwachsender rohstoffe in deutschland. URL targets for the german residential heat system. Journal of https://fnr.de/fileadmin/fnr/pdf/mediathek/22004416.pdf. Cleaner Production, 142:3151–3173, 2017. ISSN 09596526. doi: [6] Raik Becker and Daniela Thrän. Optimal siting of wind farms 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.153. in wind energy dominated power systems. Energies, 11(4):978, [25] Microsoft. Mircrosoft excel, 2019. URL 2018. ISSN 1996-1073. doi: 10.3390/en11040978. https://products.office.com/de-de/excel. [7] Andreas Bloess, Wolf-Peter Schill, and Alexander Zerrahn. [26] M. Millinger and D. Thrän. Biomass price developments inhibit Power-to-heat for renewable energy integration: A review of biofuel investments and research in germany: The crucial future technologies, modeling approaches, and flexibility potentials. role of high yields. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172:1654– Applied Energy, 212:1611–1626, 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy. 1663, 2016. ISSN 09596526. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.175. 2017.12.073. [27] M. Millinger, K. Meisel, and D. Thrän. Greenhouse gas abate- [8] André Brosowski, Philipp Adler, Georgia Erdmann, ment optimal deployment of biofuels from crops in germany. Walter Stinner, Daniela Thrän, and Udo Mantau. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Biomassepotenziale von Rest- und Abfallstoffen: Sta- 69:265–275, 2019. ISSN 13619209. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2019.02. tus Quo in Deutschland, volume 36 of Schriftenreihe nachwachsende Rohstoffe. Fachagentur Nachwachsende [28] Markus Millinger. Systems assessment of biofuels. Mod- Rohstoffe e.V. (FNR), Gülzow-Prüzen, 2015. URL elling of future cost and greenhouse gas abatement com- https://www.bioliq.de/downloads/schriftenreihe_band_36_web_01_09_15.pdf. petitiveness between biofuels for transport on the case [9] Thomas Bründinger, Julian Elizalde König, Oliver Frank, Diet- of Germany. Leipzig, 2018. ISBN 1860-0387. URL mar Gründig, and Christoph Jugel. dena-leitstudie integrierte http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:15-qucosa2-332464. energiewende: Impulse für die gestaltung des energiesystems [29] Markus Millinger. Bioenergyoptimisation model, 2019. bis 2050 teil a: Ergebnisbericht und handlungsempfehlungen [30] Joachim Nitsch, Thomas Pregger, Tobias Naegler, Dominik (dena) teil b: Gutachterbericht (ewi energy research & scenar- Heide, Diego Luca de Tena, Franz Trieb, Yvonne Scholz, ios ggmbh). Kristina Nienhaus, Norman Gerhardt, Michael Sterner, and [10] Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz, Bau und Reak- Tobias Trost. Langfristszenarien und strategien für den ausbau torsicherheit. Klimaschutzplan 2050 - klimaschutzpolitische der erneuerbaren energien in deutschland bei berücksichtigung grundsätze und ziele der bundesregierung: Kurzfassung. URL der entwicklung in europa und global: Schlussbericht. URL http://www.bmub.bund.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Klimaschutz/klimaschutzplan_2050_kurzf_bf.pdf. http://www.dlr.de/dlr/Portaldata/1/Resources/bilder/portal/portal_2012_1/leitstudie2011_bf.pdf. [11] Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und En- [31] Benjamin Pfluger, Bernd Tersteegen, Bernd Franke, Christiane ergie. Energiedaten: Gesamtausgabe. URL Bernath, Tobias Bossmann, Gerda Deac, Rainer Elsland, Tobias https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/DE/Downloads/Energiedaten/energiedaten-gesamt-pdf-grafiken.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=34. Fleiter, André Kühn, Mario Ragwitz, Matthias Rehfeldt, Jan [12] Bundesnetzagentur and Bundeskartellamt. Steinbach, Andreas Cronenberg, Alexander Ladermann, Chris- Monitoringbericht 2016, 2017. URL tian Linke, Christoph Maurer, Sebastian Willemsen, Benedikt https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Sachgebiete/Energie/Unternehmen_Institutionen/DatenaustauschUndMonitoring/Monitoring/Monitoringbericht2016.pdf;jsessionid=907DA6C77633E11849D9FC3746057EC5?__blob=publicationFile&v=2. Kauertz, Martin Pehnt, Nils Rettenmaier, Michael Hartner, [13] Bundesregierung. Energiekonzept für eine umweltschonende, Lukas Kranzl, Wolfgang Schade, Giacomo Catenazzi, Martin zuverlässige und bezahlbare energieversorgung. 2010. URL Jakob, and Ulrich Reiter. Modul 10.a: Reduktion der treibhaus- https://www.bundesregierung.de/ContentArchiv/DE/Archiv17/_Anlagen/2012/02/energiekonzept-final.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=5. gasemissionen deutschlands um 95 % bis 2050 grundsätzliche [14] Selina Byfield. Impulspapier-trialog-bioenergie_23.02.2018. überlegungen zu optionen und hemmnissen: Langfristszenar- ien für die transformation des energiesystems in deutschland - [15] C.A.R.M.E.N. e.V. C.a.r.m.e.n. e.v. - preisindizes, 2018. URL studie im auftrag des bundesministeriums für wirtschaft und https://www.carmen-ev.de/infothek/preisindizes. energie. [16] GAMS Development Corp. Gams, 2019. URL [32] Julia Repenning, Lukas Emele, Ruth Blanck, Hannes Böttcher, https://www.gams.com/. Günter Dehoust, Hannah Förster, Benjamin Greiner, Ralph [17] Philipp Gerbert, Patrick Herhold, Jens Burchardt, Stefan Harthan, Klaus Hennenberg, Hauke Hermann, Wolfram Jörß, Schönberger, Florian Rechenmacher, Almut Kirchner, Andreas Charlotte Loreck, Sylvia Ludig, Felix Matthes, Margarethe Kemmler, and Marco Wünsch. Klimapfade für deutschland. Scheffler, Katja Schumacher, Kirsten Wiegmann, Carina Zell- [18] Klaus Heuck, Klaus-Dieter Dettmann, and Detlef Schulz. Ziegler, Sibylle Braungardt, Wolfgang Eichhammer, Rainer Elektrische Energieversorgung: Erzeugung, Übertragung und Elsland, Tobais Fleiter, Johannes Hartwig, Judit Kockat, Verteilung elektrischer Energie für Studium und Praxis. Vieweg Ben Pfluger, Wolfgang Schade, Barbara Schlomann, Frank + Teubner, 8 edition, 2010. Sensfuß, and Hans-Joachim Ziesing. Klimaschutzszenario [19] Martin Kaltschmitt, Hans Hartmann, and Hermann Hof- 2050: 2. endbericht -studie im auftrag des bundesministeri- bauer, editors. Energie aus Biomasse: Grundlagen, Tech- ums für umwelt, naturschutz, bau und reaktorsicherheit. URL niken und Verfahren. Springer Vieweg, Berlin and Heidelberg, https://www.oeko.de/oekodoc/2451/2015-608-de.pdf. 3., aktualisierte und erweiterte auflage edition, 2016. ISBN [33] Michael Schlesinger, Dietmar Lindenberger, and Chris- tian Lutz. Entwicklung der energiemärkte - energieref- [20] Andreas Kemmler, Samual Straßburg, Friedrich Seefeldt, Na- erenzprognose: Projekt nr. 57/12 studie im auftrag des talia Anders, Clemens Rohde, Tobias Fleiter, Ali Aydemir, bundesministeriums für wirtschaft und technologie. URL Heinrich Kleeberger, Lukas Hardi, and Bernd Geiger. Daten- https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/DE/Publikationen/Studien/entwicklung-der-energiemaerkte-energiereferenzprognose-endbericht.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=7. basis zur bewertung von energieeffizienzmaßnahmen in der [34] Statistisches Bundesamt. Land- und forstwirtschaft, fischerei: zeitreihe 2005 – 2014. 17 Landwirtschaftliche bodennutzung - anbau auf dem ackerland. [35] Jan Steinbach. Modellbasierte Untersuchung von Politikinstru- menten zur Förderung erneuerbarer Energien und Energieef- fizienz im Gebäudebereich. Dissertation, Fraunhofer-Institut für System- und Innovationsforschung and Fraunhofer IRB-Verlag, [36] Swiss centre for life cycle inventories. Ecoinvent 2.2 for umberto, [37] Swiss centre for life cycle inventories. Ecoinvent 3.3 for umberto, [38] Nora Szarka, Marcus Eichhorn, Ronny Kittler, Alberto Bezama, and Daniela Thrän. Interpreting long-term energy scenarios and the role of bioenergy in germany. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 68:1222–1233, 2017. ISSN 13640321. doi: 10. 1016/j.rser.2016.02.016. [39] TFZ. Entwicklung der brennstoffpreise, 2018. URL http://www.tfz.bayern.de/festbrennstoffe/energetischenutzung/035092/index.php. [40] Inc. The MathWorks. Matlab, 2019. URL https://de.mathworks.com/products/matlab.html. [41] Daniela Thrän, Oliver Arendt, Jens Ponitka, Julian Braun, Markus Millinger, Verena Wolf, Martin Banse, Rüdiger Schal- dach, Jan Schüngel, Sven Gärtner, Nils Rettenmaier, Katja Hü- necke, Klaus Hennenberg, Bernhard Wern, Frank Baur, Uwe Fritsche, and Hans-Werner Gress. Meilensteine 2030: Ele- mente und meilensteine für die entwicklung einer tragfähigen und nachhaltigen bioenergiestrategie. [42] Daniela Thrän, Rüdiger Schaldach, Markus Millinger, Verena Wolf, Oliver Arendt, Jens Ponitka, Sven Gärtner, Nils Ret- tenmaier, Klaus Hennenberg, and Jan Schüngel. The mile- stones modeling framework: An integrated analysis of national bioenergy strategies and their global environmental impacts. Environmental Modelling & Software, 86:14–29, 2016. ISSN 13648152. doi: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.09.005. [43] Daniela Thrän, Oliver Arendt, Martin Banse, Julian Braun, Uwe Fritsche, Sven Gärtner, Klaus J. Hennenberg, Katja Hün- neke, Markus Millinger, Jens Ponitka, Nils Rettenmaier, Rüdi- ger Schaldach, Jan Schüngel, Bernhard Wern, and Verena Wolf. Strategy elements for a sustainable bioenergy policy based on scenarios and systems modeling: Germany as example. Chem- ical Engineering & Technology, 40(2):211–226, 2017. ISSN 09307516. doi: 10.1002/ceat.201600259. [44] Umweltbundesamt. Energieverbrauch für fossile und erneuerbare wärme. URL https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/daten/energie/energieverbrauch-fuer-fossile-erneuerbare-waerme#textpart-1. [45] Umweltbundesamt. Erneuerbare energien in zahlen, 2017. URL https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/themen/klima-energie/erneuerbare-energien/erneuerbare-energien-in-zahlen#textpart-1. [46] Umweltbundesamt. Probas - prozessorientierte ba- sisdaten für umweltmanagementsysteme, 2019. URL http://www.probas.umweltbundesamt.de/php/index.php. [47] Carl-Philipp Witzel and Robert Finger. Economic evaluation of miscanthus production – a review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 53:681–696, 2016. ISSN 13640321. doi: 10. 1016/j.rser.2015.08.063. [48] World Bank. Global economic monitor (gem) commodities: Wheat, hrw, 2019. URL databank.worldbank.org.

Journal

Quantitative FinancearXiv (Cornell University)

Published: Aug 27, 2019

There are no references for this article.