Forest Biomass in Bioenergy Production in the Changing Geopolitical Environment of the EU

Abstract

The article examines the potential utilization of forest biomass in bioenergy production in Europe, taking into account limiting and developmental factors. The methodology includes a strategic analysis and the use of PEST analysis to evaluate the market for wood biomass. In the context of the current geopolitical situation and the decarbonization goals of the EU, the authors recommend accelerating energy transformation and highlighting forest biomass as an alternative within renewable energy sources. A literature review indicates the need to revise EU assumptions to enable the use of wood for bioenergy production, taking into account the needs of the wood industry. The analysis of economic factors shows competitiveness of forest biomass against coal, yet challenges arise regarding resource availability and competition with other energy sources. Emphasis is placed on the necessity of sustainable forest resource management and technological innovation. In the context of an energy crisis, the article underscores the role of innovation and recycling in alleviating shortages in energy markets. Conclusions highlight the imperative to develop a sustainable energy strategy for forest resource management and engage EU countries in the development of new biofuel and renewable energy sources for energy security and environmental protection.

1. Introduction

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has triggered a global energy crisis, straining all types of global supply chains, including energy, leading to a full-scale energy crisis. High prices of gas and coal accounted for 90% of the pressure on the global rise in electricity costs worldwide, intensifying inflationary pressures and creating a real risk of a recession. This crisis has resulted in substantial excess profits for fossil fuel producers, exceeding their net profits in 2021 by $2 trillion. Faced with energy shortages, efforts have been made to secure alternative fuel supplies and implement new projects related to renewable energy sources.

The accelerated implementation of renewable energy sources and improved efficiency in the European Union are expected to reduce the demand for natural gas and oil by 20% and coal by 50% in this decade. The EU’s strategy for renewable resources aims to limit CO₂ emissions and achieve energy self-sufficiency by reducing the consumption of fossil fuels, requiring countries to transform their energy systems by increasing the share of renewable energy [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]. Bioenergy remains the predominant source of renewable energy in the EU in terms of final gross consumption, despite the rapid growth of wind and solar energy in the last decade. Sustainable bioenergy currently constitutes 12% of the EU’s total energy basket, and this share is expected to increase [10,11]. At the EU level, bioenergy is the most flexible and intensively utilized renewable energy source, with electricity consumption reaching 5.6 Ej/yr [12]. It is anticipated that biomass will continue to provide a substantial portion of renewable energy, with a 50% increase over the next decade until 2030, catering to the electricity and heat demand, as well as meeting the energy needs of the industry [13,14]. In 2017, biomass from forests accounted for 69% of the total biomass used for energy production [15], with the heating and cooling sector consuming about 75% of all bioenergy (bioelectricity and biofuels for transportation being 13% and 12%, respectively) [16]. Forest biomass stands as one of the renewable and sustainable energy sources applicable to the generation of electricity, heat, and biofuels [17]. Wood biomass encompasses forest biomass (branches, logs, logging residues) and remnants from wood processing in the timber industry (e.g., sawmill residues), as well as used wood (e.g., old furniture). Biomass is further categorized into primary (forest) and secondary (by-products in the timber industry plus used wood). It is crucial that only biomass originating from sustainably managed forests qualifies as renewable, as stipulated by the revised EU Renewable Energy Directive (RED III) [11,18]. From a biophysical perspective, the reserves of wood biomass are sufficiently extensive to cover a significant portion of primary energy consumption in 2050. These resources have alternative applications, but their availability is restricted, thereby diminishing their competitiveness compared to other forms of energy [19].

The production and utilization of wood resources are expanding globally, increasingly for energy purposes [20]. Key factors supporting its use as an energy source include diversification and limiting energy consumption associated with greenhouse gas emissions by replacing fossil fuels. Current significant applications of solid bioenergy include household heating and co-firing in the energy sector [21]. Forest biomass in the EU-27 countries demonstrates a steady increase in forested areas (covering over 22 million hectares). The forestry and the timber industry play a pivotal role in bioenergy production. The potential supply of biomass from forests, logging residues, and bark is expected to remain constant until 2030, with an estimated increase in timber industry residues by approximately 30% [22,23].

Certain sectors are prepared for a faster transition to a more sustainable and cost-effective energy system, facilitated by clean electrical energy. Energy efficiency and clean fuels gain competitiveness. Shortages in investments in clean energy are most pronounced in emerging and developing economies, signaling concerns given their rapidly projected increase in energy service demands. Sustainable resolutions to the energy crisis hinge on reducing the reliance on fossil fuels. The primary effort must be directed towards constructing resilient, cost-effective, and secure supply chains for an energy transition. A new paradigm of energy security is needed to maintain reliability and affordability while concurrently reducing CO₂ emissions. Novel solutions based on renewable energy and the resources of energy biomass can aid in effecting changes in evolving coexisting clean energy systems [24,25]. As the EU emerges from the current energy crisis, the development of highly concentrated clean energy supply chains must take place. Failure to address these issues adequately could impede or make the energy transition more costly.

Previous studies primarily focused on the theoretical or technical aspects of bioenergy, with insufficient attention given to its economic potential and policy impact [26]. Thess et al. [27] developed conceptual frameworks to quantitatively assess the impact of ecological and economic constraints on the spatiotemporal availability of wood fuel. The potential of wood fuel is flexible over time and highly sensitive to wood and energy prices. The authors emphasize the importance of strategies to mobilize more wood fuel during the energy transition to fill the gaps in the supply of other renewable energy sources.

In current market conditions, the resources and costs of harvesting and processing appear to be the main barriers to the penetration of the energy market by forest biomass. However, the rapidly growing demand for secure solid fuel resources and their by-products, such as liquid fuels and gas, along with significant technological progress, as well as social, political, economic, and environmental factors, impact the competitiveness of this renewable energy source. In some Scandinavian countries, the rational justification for using wood for energy and renewable fuels has emerged through the utilization of the potential of forest resources supported by funding derived from environmental taxes on fossil fuels or bioenergy credits.

The objective of this study is to determine the potential of utilizing forest biomass (primary and secondary) for energy purposes, with a particular emphasis on limiting and developmental factors, specifically, the political, economic, social, technological, and environmental factors that constitute opportunities and constraints in the application of wood biomass for energy purposes in Europe.

2. Materials and Methods

Strategic analysis is a valuable methodological tool in developing the strategy of a company or market sector, facilitating the identification of external, cross-sectoral (environmental) factors independent of participants in the supply sector and internal factors dependent on sector participants that shape the strategy. To assess the situation in the wood biomass market and its development opportunities, basic assumptions of PEST analysis were employed (PEST is an acronym for political, economic, social, and technological factors, Figure 1). In this study, ecological factors were combined with social factors. SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis, with PEST analysis, is based on the identification of specific factors and typically employs static rather than dynamic or sequential analysis. As a strategic tool, it helps understand specific elements of the business environment at a given moment rather than predict their changes over time. Nevertheless, considering the added value, the evolution of the examined factors over time is taken into account through the analysis of various types of forecasting models. Recurrent models like LSTM (Long Short-Term Memory) or NARX (Nonlinear AutoRegressive with eXogenous inputs) are highly recommended for implementing such assumptions, considering the influence of exogenous (external) variables on the forecasting process. Integrative analyses utilizing various models can provide comprehensive and valuable information about the factors considered in SWOT/PEST analysis [28].

The assessment of potential (theoretical, technical, and economic) opportunities for using wood biomass for energy purposes is based on available natural resources, economic efficiency, and their utilization based on market-available technologies [29].

The subject of the research is forest/wood biomass, including primary (wood from forests—fuel wood (FW), forest residues (tree tops, branches)) and secondary (wood waste from the wood industry). Harvesting stump wood (tree stumps and roots) for ecological reasons occurs only in exceptional situations (such as acquisition due to investments—road construction, reduction in the occurrence of pathogenic fungi), and its significance for the bioenergy market is negligible, so it has been omitted. Tree plantations for energy purposes serve as an alternative and complement the resources of available primary biomass. Over the last decade, the importance of used post-consumer wood has grown, primarily utilized in the wood industry (e.g., for particleboard production).

Secondary data sources include results from qualitative and quantitative studies published by experts/scientists in the field. The primary and literature data underwent analysis and discussion, with thematic issues being systematized and extracted. The opportunities and threats to the bioenergy market using wood were subjected to a detailed discussion.

3. Results

Factors impacting the wood biomass market stimulatingly and restrictively.

3.1. Political Factors

The scenarios presented in the World Energy Outlook (WEO) differ in terms of the assumptions made regarding government policies. The Stated Policies Scenario (STEPS) illustrates the direction resulting from currently effective policies. The Announced Pledges Scenario (APS) assumes that all goals declared by governments will be achieved on time and in full, including long-term net-zero emission goals and access to energy. The Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario (NZE) outlines a pathway to achieve temperature stabilization at 1.5 °C, ensuring access to modern energy by 2030. Actions arising from policies accelerate the emergence of a clean energy-based economy.

Forestry can play a crucial role in environmental policies, such as renewable energy portfolio standards for bioelectricity, renewable fuel standards for biofuels, and carbon sequestration in forests. Mandatory bioenergy production can significantly reduce carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions, especially by replacing fossil fuels in the electricity sector. The imposition of a carbon dioxide emission tax (EU Emissions Trading System (ETS)) has provided a strong incentive for bioenergy and contributed to its development. A carbon dioxide emission tax (also EU’s carbon border tax) is necessary for renewable energy and biomass energy to become competitive compared to fossil fuels. Global greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced by 20–50%, following EU directives and the Paris Agreements. In Europe, approximately 444 Mt of wood biomass can be obtained annually, including residues from tree cutting and low-quality wood [30], with nearly half available for energy purposes. If this biomass were used for electricity production, significant shares of coal would be displaced from the energy market.

Mather-Gratton et al. [13] identified three recurring narratives related to the role of forests in energy policy. The narrative prioritizing the forestry sector advocates carbon neutrality and sustainable development of wood biomass. Another narrative prioritizes climate and sees the use of wood biomass as an opportunity to mitigate climate change, calling for a holistic carbon balance perspective and legislative actions to avoid ecosystem degradation. The third narrative identifies ecological limits to the use of wood biomass, stating that wood biomass cannot contribute to European renewable energy; authors of [31] conducted a comprehensive analysis of supply chain planning models and political and governmental factors based on five European countries. According to the researchers, wood biomass plays a crucial role in the EU, and stable political support is crucial for its use beyond 2020. This emphasizes that renewed goals must be accompanied by long-term support measures and a common policy vision [32]. Government policies and incentives promoting further investments in biomass-based energy systems play a key role [33]. According to Moiseyev et al. [34], subsidizing wood-based bioenergy production also has limitations. Without subsidies, wood-fired electricity will only have a marginal share in the market due to limited availability of cheap wood from logging residues.

Meanwhile, the use of wood for energy purposes is controversial (most often due to the problem of defining the concept of climate neutrality and CO₂ emission balance, on the other hand, in many countries around the world and in the EU, wood is treated as an ecological and natural energy source) and the new version of the Renewable Energy Directive (RED III) restricts the use of forest wood for energy purposes, formulating goals in favor of cascade use. Sustainable bioenergy currently constitutes 12% of the total EU energy mix, and this share is expected to increase [25]. In 2017, biomass from forests accounted for 69% of the total biomass used for energy production. However, as part of the 2023 revision of the Renewable Energy Directive, the use of certain forms of woody biomass is set to be significantly restricted [10,11]. The European Commission, guided by a narrative identifying ecological limits to the use of forest biomass, concludes that forest biomass cannot make a decisive contribution to European renewable energy in the future and calls for its exclusion from EU renewable energy policies [11]. Sustainable development criteria for forest biomass are now to be strengthened to protect the health of EU forests. The harvesting ban on woody biomass from primary forests, starting in 2026, means that the use of wood from forests in electricity-generating facilities will no longer be supported. National financial incentives for the use of large-diameter wood, sawmill wood, stumps, and roots for energy production will be prohibited. EU sustainable development criteria will also apply to smaller heat and electricity production [10,11].

Kohl et al. [35] demonstrated inconsistency in the conclusions regarding the new EU forest strategy for 2030, the EU Renewable Energy Directive, and the regulation on land use, land-use change, and forestry concerning their implications for sustainable forest management. The requirements imposed by these three instruments on forest management are inconsistent, dominated by ecological aspects, and do not correspond to sustainable multifunctional forest management. The role of wood as an ecological product is underrated, and the importance of the supply chain is overlooked [35]. It is essential to emphasize that bioenergy contributes to the energy security of the EU by meeting the majority of countries’ energy needs (mainly heat). Biomass supplies for bioenergy production (i.e., primary energy) in the EU reached 140 Mtoe in 2016, with 96% originating from the EU, and the remaining 4% imported from non-EU countries. In the EU, biomass is mostly processed into energy in the member state where it is produced, with only 7.2% processed into energy in another member state.

Many authors appreciate the significance of forest biomass and see potential for increasing the importance of forestry not only in Europe, and the USA. Current European Union (EU) policies impact forests and wood products’ production in other parts of the world, including the United States. This policy led to an increase in the production and export of wood pellets from the US to the EU, which affected US forests and the wood processing market. The demand for wood for energy purposes has resulted in an increase in forest land and an increase in the area of pine plantations on marginal agricultural land [36,37,38].

It is crucial to reach a consensus on the use of biomass for energy purposes, establish acceptable assumptions for wood producers, the timber industry, and the energy industry, while respecting forests and their ecological functions. Mehr et al. [39], based on analyses in Switzerland, note that the use of woody biomass (excluding material suitable for other purposes) is environmentally beneficial and essential for establishing national policies. Monoliz et al. [40] analyzed the ecological constraints to shape the modern legal frameworks regarding the harvesting of forest biomass for energy purposes in Greece and to simultaneously strengthen forest management policies in the Mediterranean region.

Many authors argue that instead of policies aiming to reduce or eliminate wood fuel consumption, a combination of policy interventions focusing on adopting energy-efficient technologies while preserving wood fuel as a primary energy source would bring higher economic, social, and environmental benefits by examining interconnected energy subsystems and resources and the socio-economic context in which wood fuel is used [41,42]. Environmental arguments in favor of bioenergy in the researched economic sectors significantly influence potential synergies with other policy goals, while environmental conservation groups remain skeptical about promoting bioenergy. Martinez-Hernandez et al. [43] emphasize that bioenergy can improve the functioning of societies in the Central American cluster countries, because it reduces environmental impact, water consumption, acidification and eutrophication by 87–53%, and urban smog and ecotoxicity by 29–18%.

Forest bioenergy lacks a natural constituency willing or able to represent it in political debates. Additionally, unequal support for forest bioenergy hinders sustainable political solutions, likely translating into limited utilization opportunities [44]. The forestry industry, the energy industry, academic environments, technical personnel, and rural communities should collaborate on political issues and programs that enhance the efficiency of current forest biomass operations and promote the use of forest biomass for bioenergy [45].

The impact of political factors on the bioenergy market and the possibilities for using wood for energy purposes is ambiguous. Nevertheless, the current geopolitical situation has compelled central-western European countries to accelerate the pace of energy transformation. Ambitious EU decarbonization goals imply a single direction for the development of energy based on renewable energy sources (RES). Wood from sustainably managed forests is and can be an alternative to renewable energy sources, especially for EU countries.

3.2. Economic Factors

3.2.1. Supply Potential—Availability of Forest Biomass

Perspectives on the use of biomass for energy purposes have been extensively explored, with results and estimates varying significantly across studies. Understanding the differences between these estimates can facilitate policy planning and investments. Estimates of bioenergy potentials differ mainly due to variations in the scope of research, methodologies, approaches employed, and assumptions regarding market development. Dijaz et al. [46] emphasize the importance of different geographic areas, methodologies, adopted scenarios, and biomass categories. Approaches to estimating the potential of forest biomass can be categorized into three main groups. When assessing the theoretical and technical potential, attention is given to the structure and increment of forest biomass resources and their availability from forests. Mantau et al. [22] employ a material balance method, where the demand side is considered but not integrated with the supply side. Smeets and Faaij [47] assert that economic–ecological criteria may limit the supply potential from natural forests to the extent that it will be insufficient to meet the projected demand by 2050. The area and stock of Europe’s forests are increasing. The area of forests in the EU is 160 million hectares and has increased by 5.3% over the last 20 years. The stocks of timber in forests increased in every member state, resulting in a 31.2% growth at the EU level in the period of 2000–2021 [48]. The EU countries’ forest resources are presented in Figure 2. Forests perform many functions, but their energy potential is limited and consists of residues from the timber industry and low-quality firewood.

Haninen et al. [26] identified the factors and assumptions influencing the estimates of the bioenergy potential of forests. They point out limitations in the estimates due to the lack of consideration of market factors, including prices and international trade. Precise measurements and analyses of biomass are crucial elements in quantitatively determining carbon resources, sequestration coefficients, assessing potential climate change impacts, locating bioenergy processing facilities, and mapping and planning fuel processing [49]. The authors note that biomass estimation is a complex process and, when possible, should make use of already available resources such as wood density and forest inventory databases. Combining different datasets for model development and using independent datasets for model verification will offer opportunities to improve biomass estimation. Focus should also be made on belowground biomass estimation to accurately estimate the full forest contribution to carbon sequestration.

Many researchers have defined biomass resources and estimated biomass resources for energy purposes in Europe and worldwide [50,51]. Toan et al. 2011 [52] attempted a quantitative determination of the size and distribution of global forest biomass. They improved resource assessments, carbon dioxide emission accounting, and carbon dioxide emission models. Hemelin et al. [53] estimated biomass residues in Europe from four types of activities: agriculture, forestry, urban greenery, and food waste. Reviewing and analyzing methods and approaches for estimating biomass and forest biomass potential is crucial for developing guidelines and bioenergy development policies. Long et al. [50] conducted a review of research results on biomass and bioenergy potential, categorizing studies based on statistics and Remote Sensing and Geographical Information Science (RS-GIS).

Estimates of available woody biomass resources in 2050 range from 100 to 400 EJ/year, excluding some extreme results [54]. If all these resources were used for energy production, they could cover 10–40% of global primary energy consumption in 2050 [55]. Lauri et al. [55] estimated the global energy potential of woody biomass for 2050 using the Global Biosphere Management Model (GLOBIOM). The research showed that the global supply of woody biomass is estimated at 0–23 Gm³/year (0–165 EJ/year), while wood prices range from 0 to 30 USD/GJ (0–216 USD/m³). It was demonstrated that woody biomass could meet 2–18% of global primary energy consumption in 2050 [55]. Dafnomilis et al. [56] also compared Green-X energy system model projections with the latest national bioenergy import studies in Northwestern European countries, demonstrating a significant gap in projections beyond 2020. Forecasts, in some cases, may underestimate or overestimate biomass potential, depending on whether they come from national reports or regional models and whether they consider future policy developments. Gonzales Garsija et al. [57] confirm the view that forest residues would be an interesting and potential feedstock for bioenergy purposes, although further research is needed, especially to optimize biomass delivery distances.

Assessing the potential changes in demand for forest biomass for energy purposes in Sweden by 2030 and 2050, authors relied on scenario reviews and predictions of energy system development, considering technical–economic conditions. The authors note that under conditions of marginal efficiency improvement and electrification, additional demand for biomass as an industrial and energy raw material may increase, and in such cases, the use of logging residues alone may not be sufficient, necessitating additional biomass [24]. Viana et al. [58] estimated the availability of logging residues in the context of biomass demand for energy production in Portugal. Regions most suitable for increasing the use of forest fuels were identified. It was shown that the annual availability of biomass depends on forest management and life cycle practices. Portugal has significant biomass potential already utilized by the industry. The potential for residual biomass was assessed using a Geographic Information System (GIS) database in Portugal (Marvão), indicating an annual potential of approximately 10,600 tons of residues, corresponding to an energy production potential of 106,000 GJ per year [59]. Similarly, Welfe et al. [60] applied a biomass resource model to assess and forecast types and potential availability in Brazil. The study suggests that Brazil has extensive biomass resources potentially sufficient to balance its total primary energy demand by 2030. It was demonstrated that if the Brazilian government adopted strategies to use a larger part of its resources for national energy, Brazil could export over 25.8% less biomass by 2030 compared to the export level based on Brazil’s current policy framework [60]. The highest overall potential for forest biomass per land unit can be found in Northern Europe (Southern Finland and Sweden, Estonia, and Latvia), Central Europe (Austria, Czech Republic, and Southern Germany), Slovenia, Southwest France, and Portugal. However, a significant portion of these forest biomass potentials is already being utilized for material and energy production, and the possibilities for further biomass extraction in these areas are limited. The location of currently untapped forest biomass potentials only partially overlaps with regions with currently high levels of wood production. This affects the ability to mobilize and process additional wood quantities [61].

Verkerc et al. [61] utilized the European Forest Information SCENario Model (EFISCEN model—a large-scale forest resource model) and demonstrated that more biomasses could be mobilized in Europe compared to currently reported utilization levels. In contrast to the study by Verkerka et al. [62], the research did not take into account social factors that may limit the mobilization of woody biomass, as decisions by forest owners determine the potential for wood mobilization. Based on a survey conducted among private forest owners in Germany, Portugal, and Sweden, Blennow et al. [63] note that European private forest owners may not be able to contribute to mobilizing large amounts of stem wood for energy purposes.

Woody biomass for energy purposes can be largely produced in Northern Europe from forest lands resulting from forest management practices and from agricultural lands in the form of fast-growing plantations. The results show that 8.5 million m³ of woody biomass can be produced annually from plantations using 5% of the total available agricultural land and 58.5 million m³ from forest lands at current estimates of forest production. The strategy for managing woody biomass resources should be local rather than general: the potential of woody biomass from fast-growing plantations was higher in 19 regions than from forest resources (10 in Denmark, 6 in Norway, and 3 in Lithuania) [64].

There is a need to develop national methodological assumptions for determining woody resources available for energy purposes. An attempt should be made to formulate definitions in this area and establish standards. It is essential to estimate the potential of lands available for afforestation and for planting trees for energy purposes.

3.2.2. Specifics of the Market and Product

Forest products in Europe are increasingly being utilized to secure energy supplies and mitigate climate change, moving towards a “bioeconomy” by reducing dependence on fossil fuels [6,7]. Compared to other renewable sources, forest biomass can be stored for later use and transformed into solid, liquid, and gaseous fuels. The production of biomass for energy purposes is considered a crucial step in sustainable community development and, despite controversies, allows for the management of greenhouse gas emissions. Among the various types of biomasses, forest biomass is of great interest, considering its abundance and diversity [65]. The properties of biomass vary and are commonly associated with plant species [66]. McKendry et al. [67] estimated that the following physicochemical characteristics of biomass play a crucial role in directing the available feedstock into both or either of these domains (electrical/heat energy, transportation fuels), Moisture content (intrinsic and extrinsic), caloric value, proportions of fixed carbon and volatile substances, ash content, alkali metal content, and cellulose/lignin ratio. The first five properties largely influence the conversion processes of dry biomass, while the first and the last one are essential for the conversion processes of wet biomass [68]. Softwood species have higher carbon content and higher calorific values than hardwood species due to the presence of more lignin and resinous materials in softwood species. The calorific value of wood fuel decreases with increasing wood moisture content [68].

A barrier to biomass utilization is its variable availability and unpredictable quality, high moisture content, low bulk density, transport costs and complex supply chains, as well as dispersed distribution [17,33]. The substitutive role of wood is also underestimated [69]. They evaluated that the energy contribution from wood to achieving the EU renewable energy target is small because the availability of wood restricts its increased use in energy production. Despite this, the consumption of wood for energy purposes is increasing, not only in Europe (Figure 3).

3.2.3. Competition for Land Resources

Renewable energy sources require significantly more space (surface area), thus establishing a stronger connection between renewable energy and land area. In this context, land scarcity is a significant challenge, especially for densely populated countries [3]. Paschalidou et al. [70] note that biofuel production from energy crops initiates competition for arable land with the agricultural sector and food production. Dagneut et al. [71] found that increased demand for biomass energy increases wood prices and harvest rates but reduces net global carbon dioxide emissions because higher wood prices lead to new investments in forest resources (afforestation of land). On the other hand, the global demand increase for wood pellets results in a shift from natural forests to pine plantations—mainly in the Atlantic coastal region of the USA, which has an impact on environmental services [38]. Changes in land use are associated with significant economic and environmental impacts, with implications for international trade, global climate change, wildlife, and other policy issues [72]. On the other hand, the increased demand for biomass may present an opportunity for many countries, not only in terms of biomass trade but also in expanding forested areas in a given region. According to many researchers, there are numerous land surpluses that can be afforested or transformed into energy crop plantations [73,74].

3.2.4. Production and Transport Costs of Biomass

The nature of the material, but mainly economic factors, such as market conditions and fluctuations in raw material prices, influence the amount of energy produced and its cost [10,75,76]. However, the production costs of bioenergy play a decisive role in the utilization of biomass for energy purposes. The cost of biomass procurement mainly includes the collection and transport of biomass to the forest road or the biomass processing/burning facility. Additionally, the cost of raw material delivery and conversion costs should be calculated not only to determine the cost structure but also to measure its competitiveness with alternative energy sources [33].

Estimated costs of harvesting biomass from the forest differ depending on the processing method. When using the “cut and skid” method, the cost ranges from 30 to 40 dollars per ton of dry wood mass. This cost increases slightly to 34–48 USD per ton of dry mass when using the “cut/chip/logging” method. The average cost of delivered logging residues (with a maximum transport distance of about 100 km) is estimated at 28 USD per dry ton using the marginal cost method and 33 USD per dry ton using the total cost method [77]. The marginal cost method includes only additional costs associated with the conventional wood harvesting operation in the production cost of biomass. The total cost method allocates the total production cost to biomass and conventional wood products, such as sawnwood and cellulose. The cost of producing fast-growing woody plants was estimated at about 75–87 USD per dry ton of wood mass in 2022, while the average European coal price was 350 USD per ton. In comparison with biomass produced from energy plantations and pruning cuts, the amount of forest fuel, logging residues, is less costly, especially when using an integrated wood harvesting system that allows cost-sharing between wood harvesting and residues as explained by Alaejos et al. [78].

Increasing the economic competitiveness of the production and utilization of woody biomass is associated with reducing non-fuel costs in biomass energy production by improving the efficiency of current biomass conversion technologies. Another way is to reduce production costs. Improvements in the efficiency of biomass raw material production and the systems for harvesting and transporting them can significantly lower the cost of bioenergy. The cost of delivering forest biomass and transportation has been mentioned as an influential factor [79,80]. Conversion technology can impact the efficiency of using forest biomass. Mitchell et al. [81,82] emphasize that cost savings resulting from higher efficiency of technological systems may not compensate for high capital costs. The use of modern technologies, mainly gasification and pyrolysis, has proven to be less attractive in district power plants. The drawbacks of these systems are high capital costs and high labor costs. Researchers highlight the role of learning and experience, which, over time and in proportion to technological progress, can influence the cost optimization of producing bioenergy from forest biomass.

Many authors have investigated the economic aspects of utilizing forest biomass for bioenergy production at the national or regional level. Lundmark et al. [83] in Sweden estimated the potential availability and harvesting costs of roundwood, logging residues, and stumps up to 2069 at 10-year intervals. Using cost structures and resource availability, marginal cost curves were constructed to enable an analysis of the effects of changing market conditions and various policy frameworks. The average cost of roundwood harvesting would be 18.75–21.2 USD/m³, depending on the harvesting and wood extraction method. Costs related to logging residues amounted to 20.53–22.32 USD/m³ and 31.81 EUR m³ for stumps. Additionally, Zhang et al. [84] developed a model for wood harvesting costs and life cycle energy and emission assessments in the USA. Zhang et al. [84,85,86] in the USA, using GIS, designed the location of biofuels by applying a set of decision-making factors, as well as biofuel supply chains to minimize total costs. The developed decision support system optimizes costs, energy consumption, and emissions for selected locations [85]. Cambero and Sowlati [87] emphasize that increased use of logging and tree residues for bioenergy and other bioproducts is important for improving the economic performance of the forest products industry and reducing environmental impact. The costs of electricity generation using logging residues vary widely, from 24.54 USD/MWh to 40.90 USD/MWh (total cost). Economic and energy efficiency depends on many variables, such as logistics costs, economies of scale, and the utilization rate of heat, to name a few. System efficiency is expressed through the application of generic functions to describe the performance of facilities and specific investment costs, as well as by expressing the costs and energy consumption of logistics and heat distribution as a function of the power of conversion units [88].

In Spain, mapping of the potential forest biomass was conducted, considering local delivery nodes by regions, as well as available biomass, total cost (sum of harvesting and transport costs), and the energy content ratio of available biomass. The results indicated a diversity of potential, with the average total cost of biomass in Spain being 76.54 USD per metric ton, a value lower than the average cost of delivering pellets to facilities in Europe. Savings ranging from 48% to 81% were noted by utilizing available forest biomass for heating residences compared to other major systems [58]. In Japan, Kamimura et al. [89] estimated the delivery costs of woody biomass and supply potential to determine the optimal quantity for suppliers and energy facilities utilizing woody biomass. They created supply models for all municipalities to estimate marginal costs (MC) and average costs (AC). It was observed that by improving the efficiency of forestry machinery and container trucks, pre-commercial thinning costs were reduced by approximately 25%, logging and commercial thinning costs by 32% (including bark, leaves and branches, and low-quality wood), bark costs in mills by 25%, sawdust by 16%, and wood chips by 10%.

Biomass transport constitutes a significant portion of the final price of biomass intended for energy, and the transport itself requires fuel, the combustion of which increases greenhouse gas emissions. Schonhoff et al. [90], based on expert interviews, conducted a techno-economic analysis of biomass transport for major forest wood products in Switzerland (firewood and wood chips). Their research found that the transport of forest wood is more efficient than the transport of, for example, manure. In the case of Switzerland, the main barrier to biomass transport is cost, not energy or emission efficiency. The energy required to deliver biomass to end consumers represents 0.4% to 1.8% of the primary energy contained in forest wood [82]. Whittaker et al. [91] emphasize the form of transported biomass and the need to chip it close to the energy generation site. Keffe et al. [92] also analyzed supply chains for woody biomass, which vary depending on the region and type of land ownership. They highlighted systems, equipment for harvesting and processing, aspects related to the transport of wood mass, and logistics and cost management.

In addition to local production and transport costs of biomass for energy purposes, the trade between regions and countries plays a crucial role. The dynamics of trade in woody biomass depend on the product (its concentration), product prices, and transport costs. Trade-in firewood, influenced by policies, is also most significant in Europe, where it is mainly used for household heating. Trade is mainly regional or transboundary and is driven by differences in prices in the local market, winter conditions, and regional supply shortages. Both market factors and policy have defined the magnitude of trade in woody biomass, while policy changes have not had as dramatic of an impact on development as in the liquid biofuels sector. Economic profitability is a key factor limiting the trade of woody biomass “goods” and most exporting countries have low raw material costs [93,94]. In the Baltic Sea region, woody fuels have been the subject of international trade on a relatively large scale, with trade primarily taking place from the Baltic countries to Sweden and Denmark, due to the demand for renewable energy in Scandinavia and inexpensive wood resources in the Baltic countries, as well as the relatively low maritime transport costs [95]. Dafnomilis et al. [56] notes that a significant portion of woody biomass is imported into Northwestern Europe due to inadequate domestic supply or higher production costs in the country. The total biomass import in the region may range from 14 to 44.3 million tons by 2020 and 18.5–60 million tons by 2030 [56]. Johansson et al. [96] notes that EU member states will likely need to increase biomass imports from wood-rich regions, undoubtedly disrupting the international markets for wood products.

The majority of the volume in international trade consists of wood pellets and wood chips for consumption in the European Union (EU). Europe is a key consuming region for wood pellets from major exporters such as the United States (south USA), Canada, Russia and Brazil. The main markets for wood pellets for industrial and heating purposes are in the European Union (especially Great Britain, Belgium and the Netherlands). Global consumption of wood pellets for industrial and heating purposes increased by 60% between 2010 and 2016. Industrial demand for wood pellets is dominated by a small number of high-capacity consumers, such as coal-fired power plants converted to biomass, and therefore demand may be subject to significant changes as a result of technical, economic or political factors [97].

3.3. Socio-Ecological Factors

3.3.1. Local Importance of Biomass

When considering the potential utilization of biomass for bioenergy production, its impact on society and the environment must be taken into account. Firewood is the oldest source of energy in households and is still widely used worldwide. Particularly, it holds local significance and contributes to reducing global energy poverty. The utilization of forest biomass in local energy systems creates jobs and promotes socio-economic development in communities [98]. Titus et al. [99] analyzed 32 guidelines on forest biomass harvesting, covering the USA, Canada, Europe, and Asia, regarding ecologically sustainable harvesting of forest residues for bioenergy and bioproducts. They confirmed social approval for the emerging bioeconomy. In Sweden, a survey was conducted on 1500 households using firewood. One-third of households produced 11–20 solid cubic meters of firewood annually. A large portion of young producers indicated the long-term continuation of using firewood. The volume of produced firewood corresponded to 4–8% of the roundwood quantity in the region harvested for industrial purposes. It is suggested that the use of firewood influences decisions of private forest owners regarding forest management and harvesting of forest biomass, thus impacting bioenergy supply [100]. In Slovenia, Halaj and Brodrechtova [101] conducted interviews with experts to explore opinions on biomass for energy purposes, demonstrating that it should be based on tree residues and be a by-product of forest management.

3.3.2. Carbon Sequestration and Climate Impact

In light of the fact that trees sequester carbon through photosynthesis, the production and consumption of bioenergy is considered a carbon-neutral process, balancing the CO₂ emissions from the burning of fossil fuels [102]. The use of logging residues and energy biomass in electricity generation justifies economically and socially viable options for mitigating the effects of carbon dioxide emissions compared to other more costly technologies. Optimism accompanied the initial adoption of biomass by the EU under renewable energy policies. It was expected that regulations regarding agriculture, forestry, and land use would ensure sustainable biomass for energy purposes. However, misunderstandings arose regarding the concept of carbon neutrality and carbon debt, and whether sustainable use of forest biomass could be guaranteed [13]. Additionally, uncertainty about whether climate changes will maintain the current level of CO₂ absorption by forests is largely overlooked in the debate on the best forest management strategy to limit the rise of CO₂ concentration in the atmosphere, but it is significant enough to alter the priority of various alternatives [103].

Sulaiman and Abdul-Rahim [104] conducted an analysis of the impact of wood biomass energy consumption on CO₂ emissions in 27 European Union (EU) member countries from 1990 to 2017. Using the Dynamic Ordinary Least Squares (DOLS) panel method, the results revealed that CO₂ emissions decrease with the increase in wood biomass energy consumption. The use of biomass for energy purposes and the growing demand for wood usually result in an increase in forest cover. In turn, the growing area of afforestation and plantations affects CO₂ absorption. Biligil et al. [105] pointed out that the energy intensity of biomass per capita reduces CO₂ emissions per capita and increases GDP per capita in the USA. Energy consumption from biomass can be an effective policy tool for environmentally sustainable development in the USA [105].

Buchholz et al. [106] analyzed 59 studies on greenhouse gas emissions from forest biomass published between 1991 and 2014. They emphasized the need for consistent criteria for evaluating projects, accounting principles, reporting, time scales, and the inclusion of greenhouse gas emission indicators.

3.3.3. Protection of Nature and Biodiversity

Forest residues are a by-product of logging and are the main source of biomass used for energy. The conversion of biomass into bioenergy creates an opportunity to reconcile goals related to biodiversity and climate protection, mitigating changes [107,108,109]. Harvesting wood from forests for energy purposes raises numerous controversies among ecologists, primarily due to the need of biodiversity and the need to leave deadwood in the forest (does not apply to wood waste). Deadwood is crucial for biodiversity conservation and forest stability, especially considering the changing climate. Large-scale removal of firewood from forests can impact ecosystem stability by reducing biodiversity. Harvesting wood for bioenergy production affects both saprophytic and non-saproxylic biodiversity through physical (e.g., soil compaction and disturbance) and chemical changes in soil properties associated with firewood removal and increased machinery movement [110]. On the other hand, leaving significant amounts of wood on the forest floor may pose a risk of forest fire and affect the sanitary condition of the forest stands (risk of gradation). Giuntoli et al. [111] qualitatively assessed the potential impacts of 24 archetypal bioenergy pathways on forest ecosystems and biodiversity. They proposed a series of recommendations beneficial for the development of bioenergy, climate, and ecosystems. As noted by Giuntoli et al. [111], further empirical research is needed to gather data on the impact of different forestry practices on ecosystem conditions and biodiversity.

3.4. Technological Factors

The European Union is heavily investing in research and development in the field of bioenergy, which positively impacts the production of energy biomass and the consumption of bioenergy for both societal and industrial purposes. Improvements in the efficiency of biomass raw material production and their harvesting and transportation systems can significantly reduce the costs of delivered raw materials. Improving forest productivity, which is the result of research and technological development, is important because the increase in the productivity of forests and pine plantations affects the increase in the supply of wood. Fox et al. [112] reported a more than four-fold increase in productivity in pine plantations in the southern United States over 4–5 decades. Reyes et al. [42] emphasize the role of energy-efficient technologies while maintaining woody fuel as a primary source of energy, which would yield higher economic, social, and environmental benefits.

Direct utilization of biomass could reduce carbon dioxide emissions associated with conventional production systems. However, direct use of forest biomass has certain drawbacks, including a low energy conversion rate and emissions and residues of soot. To address this issue, co-firing, involving the combustion of both coal and biomass pellets, is recommended. Co-firing could reduce carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, and sulfur emissions during the process [65].

Technological innovations aimed at increasing productivity and reducing costs pose the main challenges for further expanding the share of renewable energy carriers. Efforts should focus on developing more user-friendly and cost-efficient technologies on various scales to attract more investment in the field [113]. Tsekos et al. [114] in the year 2021 showed that the innovative steam reformer technology with a fluidized bed (IHBFBSR) with a capacity of 50 kWth represents a promising advance in the field of allothermal biomass gasification. Technological processes influence the efficiency of biomass utilization. Moleman et al. [115] emphasize that, through cascade utilization, the efficiency factor of wood utilization (cascade factor) in the European timber sector would increase by over 20%, and greenhouse gas emissions would be reduced by over 40%. Cascade utilization of biomass is a recognized strategy contributing to the efficient development of the bioeconomy. The efficiency factor of wood utilization (cascade factor) in the European timber sector would increase by 23% (S0 vs. S1) and 31% (S0 vs. S2), and greenhouse gas emissions (from cradle to gate energy consumption) would be reduced by 42% (28 MtCO₂-eq/year) and 52% (35 MtCO₂-eq/year) in scenarios S1 and S2. However, increased cascading of timber products is counteracted in the short term by a 49% and 48% reduction in savings in the energy sector (−43 and −42 MtCO₂-eq/year) in scenarios S1 and S2 due to delayed availability of waste wood and pulp fibers.

Electricity generation processes in an integrated coal gasification combined cycle system and in a conventional combustion system are fundamental technological solutions in the generation of heat and power. In this scenario, logging residues may be more cost-competitive than short rotation crops. There is a noticeable trend towards the increasing utilization of biomass resources for energy production. Multistage thermal chemical biomass conversion is the most promising gasification technology, yielding nearly tar-free generator gas and remaining competitive with alternative technologies for energy production [116]. Cambero and Sowlati [87] presented a bi-objective optimization model of the supply chain (considering the energy flow) to produce bioenergy and biofuels using woody residues.

The global market value of bio-waste-to-bioenergy processing technology is estimated to be around 25.32 billion US dollars and is predicted to reach 40 billion US dollars by 2023 [117]. Wood waste from a range of sources (e.g., construction or demolition wastes, waste from manufacturing of wood-based products) can potentially be used for bioenergy and biofuels production. Wood waste is widely used as local fuel sources across the world, through combustion in wood burners or larger biomass boilers. The direct use of forest residues and wood waste for energy purposes has disadvantages such as low heating value (low energy conversion efficiency), low bulk density increasing transportation costs, and the lack of continuous access poses challenges for the long-term stability of biomass energy production from forests [118]. Many technical forecasts and goals regarding future bioenergy utilization may be impossible to achieve sustainably. Therefore, it is necessary to improve conversion technologies to lower the costs of bioenergy production [119,120]. More efficient utilization of forest residues could help balance the high costs associated with forest renewal, fire hazard removal, crop residue management, and overall forest management. Forest residues have long been underutilized and treated as waste due to the high costs of collection and low market value.

4. Conclusions

The impact of political factors on the bioenergy market and the potential use of wood for energy purposes is ambiguous. Nevertheless, the current geopolitical situation has compelled countries in central-western Europe to accelerate the pace of energy transformation. The ambitious decarbonization goals of the EU imply a singular direction for the development of energy, based on renewable sources. Wood from sustainable forestry is and can be an alternative within renewable energy sources, especially for EU countries with significant wood resources. It is necessary to revise EU assumptions and ensure the possibility of using wood for bioenergy production, primarily securing the industrial material production needs. The introduced principles should be stable and possess a long-term policy nature. Only legal stability can guarantee the sustainable development of the bioenergy market through increased investments (technological advancements, afforestation) in this area.

A well-thought-out policy regarding the use of wood for bioenergy can contribute to the growth of renewable energy sources (mainly locally) and likely enhance the carbon sequestration process through technological innovations. It may also contribute to afforestation on privately-owned lands in EU countries.

An element of energy policy should determine the potential wood supply in the EU market, including energy wood. The supply of wood from European forests is increasing due to forest density and stand richness growth. Consequently, there is an increase in logging waste, woody residues, and low-quality firewood. This wood is increasingly used in wood processing, leading to growing competition for resources between the energy sector and industry, mainly due to technological progress. There is a need to develop national methodological assumptions for determining potentially available wood resources for energy purposes. An attempt should be made to formulate definitions in this area, establish standards, and implement certification systems. Clear and stable assumptions of the bioenergy policy will increase the efficiency of wood utilization and the protection of forest ecosystems. It is necessary to estimate the area of land potentially available for afforestation and tree planting for energy purposes.

Economic factors, mainly the costs of wood harvesting, transportation, and biomass conversion, are decisive in bioenergy production. The price of alternative fuels determines the demand for forest biomass. In energy crises, the demand for energy wood increases, along with its price, mainly in poorer regions and rural areas. Compared to biomass produced from energy plantations and maintenance cuts, utilizing residues from logging is more cost-effective, especially when using an integrated wood harvesting system, which allows cost sharing between wood harvesting and residues.

Uncertainty regarding the availability of wood (due to seasonal harvesting), varied calorific values, moisture content, bulk density, and quality, but above all, uncertainty regarding the policy and economic approach to biomass make investors reluctant to invest in bioenergy projects. Although wood biomass energy production proves costly in many countries, in certain EU regions, it may be cost-effective, mainly due to resource access, more efficient technologies, or policies promoting biomass use. EU countries with high forest cover, often lacking alternative renewable energy sources (i.e., conditions for wind, solar, or water energy production), strive to use biomass for energy purposes. Forest biomass features the best parameters for energy production per hectare, increases bioenergy production efficiency, and influences optimizing land resource use.

In the current market conditions, forest biomass may be a competitive energy raw material in relation to fossil coal (due to high coal prices). The most economical biomass source, logging residues, is cost-competitive in bioenergy production. Generating electricity using modern co-generation technologies with woody biomass and logging residues proves to be an economically viable option, impacting carbon dioxide emission reduction. Bioenergy production from forest biomass and forestry waste can help reduce dependence on imported crude oil, generate positive socio-economic effects (especially in terms of environmental protection, changes in forest management, employment, and income), and contribute to the economic development of rural areas. With a policy that incentivizes producers and consumers, considering environmental and socio-economic benefits, forest biomass and bioenergy markets will represent a significant potential for ensuring energy security and environmental protection. Ecological and social aspects of using forest biomass for energy purposes have not been well understood. The multitude of opinions in this area calls for further analysis. A strategy for sustainable forest resource management, using new technologies and cost–benefit calculation for optimal and sustainable biomass harvesting, with acceptable consequences for forest ecosystems and society, needs to be developed.

Innovations and technology, as well as recycling, are fundamental possibilities/factors for mitigating shortages in energy markets. High dependence on individual EU countries in terms of key fossil fuel supplies and many clean technologies’ supply chains poses a risk to transformation, similar to options for diversifying sources, including renewable fuels. The energy crisis is a turning point towards a cleaner and safer energy system. Environmental arguments in favor of clean energy do not require strengthening, but arguments about the potential of biomass resources in favor of competitive technologies are particularly important, as are arguments about energy security. EU countries need to engage in a new energy economy. The path to a safer and more sustainable energy system may be challenging, but the current development of new biofuel and renewable energy sources clearly shows a significant growth potential.