ARTICLE IN PRESS

Available at www.sciencedirect.com

B I O M A S S A N D B I O E N E R G Y 3 2 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 7 1 7 – 7 2 9

0961-9534/$ - see frodoi:10.1016/j.biomb

�Corresponding auE-mail address:

http://www.elsevier.com/locate/biombioe

Developments in international bioenergy trade

Martin Jungingera,�, Torjus Bolkesjøb, Douglas Bradleyc, Paulo Dolzand, Andre Faaija,Jussi Heinimoe, Bo Hektorf, Øyvind Leistadg, Erik Lingh, Miles Perryi, Erik Piacented,Frank Rosillo-Callei, Yves Ryckmansj, Peter-Paul Schouwenbergk, Birger Solbergl,Erik Trømborgl, Arnaldo da Silva Walterd, Marc de Wita

aCopernicus Institute for Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 2, 3584 CS Utrecht, The NetherlandsbPoint Carbon, P.O. Box 7120 St.Olav, N-0130 Oslo, NorwaycClimate Change Solutions, 402 Third Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1S 2K7dState University of Campinas, 13083-970 Campinas, Sao Paulo, BrazileLappeenranta University of Technology, Energy Technology Cluster Programme, Wredenkatu 2, FI-78250 Varkaus, FinlandfTallOil, Klarabergsviadukten 70, 7D, SE 111 64 Stockholm, SwedengEnova, Abelsgate 5, 7030 Trondheim, NorwayhSveaskog AB, Stockholm, SwedeniImperial College London, Centre for Energy Policy and Technology, Mechanical Engineering, 313A South Kensington Campus,

London SW7 2AZ, UKjLaborelec/Electrabel, Rodestraat, 125, B-1630 Linkebeek, BelgiumkEssent Energy Trading, P.O. Box 689, 5201 AR ‘s-Hertogenbosch, The NetherlandslDepartment of Ecology and Natural Resource Management (INA), Norwegian University of Life Sciences, P.O. Box 5003, 1432 As, Norway

Available online 27 May 2008

a r t i c l e i n f o

Keywords:

International bioenergy trade

Wood pellets

Bio-ethanol

IEA Bioenergy Task 40

nt matter & 2008 Elsevieioe.2008.01.019

thor. Tel.: +31 30 2537613.H.M.Junginger@uu.nl (M.

a b s t r a c t

The aim of this paper is to present a synthesis of the main developments and drivers of

international bioenergy trade in IEA Bioenergy Task 40 member countries, based on various

country reports written by Task 40 members. Special attention is given to pellet and ethanol

trade. In many European countries such as Belgium, Finland, the Netherlands, Sweden and the

UK, imported biomass contributes already significantly (between 21% and 43%) to total biomass

use. Wood pellets are currently exported by Canada, Finland and (to a small extent) Brazil and

Norway, and imported by Sweden, Belgium, the Netherlands, and the UK. In the Netherlands

and Belgium, pellet imports nowadays contribute to a major share to total renewable electricity

production. Trade in bio-ethanol is another example of a rapidly growing international market.

With the EU-wide target of 5.75% biofuels for transportation in 2010 (and 10% in 2020), exports

from Brazil and other countries to Europe are likely to rise as well. Major drivers for

international bioenergy trade in general are the large resource potentials and relatively low

production costs in producing countries such as Canada and Brazil, and high fossil fuel prices

and various policy incentives to stimulate biomass use in importing countries. However, the

logistic infrastructure both in exporting and importing countries needs to be developed to

access larger physical biomass volumes and to reach other (i.e. smaller) end-consumers. It is

concluded that international bioenergy trade is growing rapidly, far beyond what was deemed

r Ltd. All rights reserved.Junginger).

ARTICLE IN PRESS

B I O M A S S A N D B I O E N E R G Y 3 2 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 7 1 7 – 7 2 9718

possible only a few years ago, and may in the future in some Task 40 countries surpass

domestic biomass use, especially for specific applications (e.g. transport fuels).

& 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

IEA Bioenergy Task 40 was established under the Interna-

tional Energy Agency (IEA) Bioenergy Implementing Agree-

ment in December 2003 with the aim of focusing on

international bioenergy trade and its wider implications.

Bioenergy trade has expanded rapidly in recent years.

Forestry and agricultural residues, wood chips, pellets and

briquettes and liquid biofuels such as tall oil vegetable oils,

bio-ethanol and biodiesel are increasingly traded for applica-

tions such as electricity production (e.g. in gas- and coal-fired

power plants), residential space heating and as transportation

fuels. This trade occurs at significant scales in national,

regional and global energy markets. The future vision of IEA

Bioenergy Task 40 for global bioenergy trade is that it will

develop into a ‘‘global commodity market’’, which will secure

supply and demand in a sustainable way. The driving force

behind the expansion in bioenergy is the potential it holds in

providing an affordable and practical renewable source of

energy for climate change mitigation, energy security, and

rural development.

So far, the international trade of biomass is poorly covered.

Existing statistics often do not cover the end-use of traded

commodities such as bio-ethanol or palm oil, or specific

biomass fuels such as wood pellets are included in more

general categories, making it impossible to identify how

much is used for energy purposes. Also, substantial amounts

of biomass trade occur indirectly, e.g. traded roundwood, of

which parts (e.g. bark and sawdust) are used for energy

production [1]. A final obstacle for charting biomass trade

flows are the often still small volumes (compared with other

large-scale commodities, e.g. coal, roundwood, crude oil).

One of the explicit aims of Task 40 is to investigate

developments in international bioenergy trade and exchange

national experiences. To this end, the member countries of

Task 40 have written individual country reports covering

(amongst others) biomass production, policies to stimulate

biomass, international bioenergy trade and opportunities

and barriers for further trade. At the time of writing

(October 2007), the country reports of Belgium, Brazil, Canada,

Finland, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the UK are

available on the Task 40 website [2]. In 2008, updated country

reports, also of the new members Germany and USA will be

published there as well. Scientific articles based on the Dutch,

Finnish, Norwegian and UK country reports are also pub-

lished elsewhere in this issue.

The aim of this paper is to present a synthesis of the main

developments and drivers of international bioenergy trade

identified in IEA Bioenergy Task 40 member countries. As the

member countries of Task 40 are rather heterogeneous, we

did not attempt to make a full-blown overview of all trade

developments in the member countries, but to provide an

overview of the energy characteristics and the contributions

and overall trade volumes of biomass to the total energy mix.

While global bioenergy trade is naturally not confined solely

to Task 40 countries, we aim to provide an overview of trends

which is likely to be similar in many other (OECD) countries.

Furthermore, we selected two specific cases: international

trade in wood pellets and bio-ethanol. We highlight current

developments in domestic production, import and export,

price levels and logistics (the later two only for pellets), and

potential further developments. In Section 5, we summarise a

number of trends, drivers and barriers for international

bioenergy trade derived from the various country reports.

Many of the barriers and opportunities for international

bioenergy trade identified in the country reports have been

described in another output of Task 40 entitled ‘‘Recommen-

dations for bioenergy trade’’ [3], and therefore will only be

considered briefly in this synthesis. The paper ends with a

summary and some short conclusions in Section 6.

2. Overview of the bioenergy markets andtrade in Task 40 member countries

To put the current international bioenergy trade into per-

spective, we present in brief the main characteristics of the

Task 40 member countries. Fig. 1 shows the contribution of all

renewable energy sources in general and bioenergy is shown

as share of the total primary energy supply (TPES) in 2004.

This graph illustrates the different situation in the different

member countries. For example, the Scandinavian countries,

Brazil and Canada have a high share of overall renewable

energy contributions (between 15% and 45% to the TPES). The

specific contribution of bioenergy to the TPES is particularly

high in Brazil (26%, mainly due to the use of bio-ethanol as

transportation fuel) and Finland (19%) and Sweden (16%),

mainly due to the use of various wood fuels in the forest

industries. On the other hand, in Belgium, the Netherlands

and the UK, the contributions of renewable energy are less

than 2% of the total TPES. However, biomass supplies 85–95%

of all renewable energy in these countries (see Fig. 1).

These differences are caused by many different characte-

ristics of these countries: Brazil and Canada are relatively

sparsely populated countries with large hydropower and

biomass potentials. The Scandinavian countries are similarly

characterized by large areas of (boreal) forests, and large

forestry industries. Norway has a special position, being

blessed with both large fossil fuel reserves and large hydro-

power potentials. On the other hand, the UK, Belgium and the

Netherlands are densely populated countries, with only

limited to marginal hydropower and biomass potentials,

though some fossil fuel reserves (e.g. gas and oil in the

Netherlands and the UK).

The contribution of renewable energy (and specifically

biomass) to the total gross electricity supply is even more

diverse as shown in Fig. 2. Perhaps the most extreme case is

Norway, with almost 100% of total electricity production from

ARTICLE IN PRESS

05

1015

202530

3540

4550

UK

Shar

e (%

)

% All renewables of TPES

% combustible renewables of TPES

94873440TPES (PJ):Belgium Brazil Canada Finland Norway Netherlands Sweden

22671594 11582415 8579 11265

Fig. 1 – Overview of total renewable and biomass contribution to the total primary energy supply in 2004 in Task 40 member

countries. Source: IEA [4]. The numbers below the bars give the total primary energy supply (TPES) per country in PJ. For

comparison, 100 PJ equals about 2.4 Mtoe (million tons oil equivalent) or 0.095 quads (1015 BTUs).

0.1

1

10

100

Shar

e (%

)

% Renewables

% Biomass

TGEG(TWh):UKBelgium Brazil Canada Finland Norway Netherlands Sweden

381.3155.898.5110.185.7590.3387.584.8

Fig. 2 – Overview of total renewable and biomass share in the total gross electricity generation (TGEG), defined as gross

production�amount of electricity produced in pumped storage plants. Renewables (and biomass) do not include industrial

waste, non-renewable municipal solid waste and pumped storage production. The numbers below the bars give the TGEG per

country in TWh. Source: IEA [4]. Note that the y-axis is on a logarithmic scale in order to facilitate visual comparison.

0102030405060708090

100

Belgium Braz

il

Canad

a

Finlan

d

Norway

Netherl

ands

Sweden UK

Trad

ed b

ioen

ergy

vol

ume

(PJ) Import

Export

1%

21% / 4%

24% / 32%

26%

43%

2%27% / 6%

13% / 2%

Fig. 3 – Overview of bioenergy imports/exports in IEA Bioenergy Task 40 member countries in 2004 (available at

www.bioenergytrade.org). Figures for Belgium and the UK refer to 2005. Percentages indicate the share of the traded volumes

as part of the domestic primary biomass supply [6]. Numbers should be considered as rough estimates, they do not

necessarily include all biomass streams.

B I O M A S S A N D B I O E N E R G Y 3 2 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 7 1 7 – 7 2 9 719

ARTICLE IN PRESS

B I O M A S S A N D B I O E N E R G Y 3 2 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 7 1 7 – 7 2 9720

hydro and only 0.4% from biomass. Similar patterns of high

shares of hydro power and smaller shares of electricity from

biomass are found in Canada (2%) and Sweden (9%). In the

other member countries, biomass contributes a significant

share to the total renewable electricity production, ranging

from 40% to 65%.

Against this background we now take a closer look at the

traded biomass volumes in the Task 40 member countries. In

Fig. 3, we provide an overview of the imported and exported

biomass volumes, and compare them to the national primary

domestic supply of biomass for energy utilisation in Task 40

member countries. Quantifying the trade volumes is often

difficult because of several reasons:

1.

Biomass can be used for several (energy) purposes, such as

residential heating, electricity production or transporta-

tion fuels. In Fig. 3, these volumes have been added up for

each country. In some cases, not for all biomass applica-

tions data were available.

2.

In our analysis, only biomass imports or exports are

included, for which the intended the end-use was energy.

For example, we needed to make estimates on how much

of Brazilian bio-ethanol exports are used as transportation

fuel abroad, or how much of the waste wood exported

by the Netherlands is co-fired for electricity or heat

production.

3.

International biomass trade can be divided in direct and

indirect trade. Direct trade comprises biomass to be used

directly for energy purposes (for example wood pellets

imported for co-firing), while indirect trade consists of

flows of raw materials that end up as energy fuel after a

prior production process (e.g. roundwood imports to

Norway or Finland, of which a fraction is used for energy

purposes in the form of saw dust or black liquor). Again,

estimates were necessary to calculate the respective

volumes of indirect biomass trade. For a more compre-

hensive analysis of the methodological issues, see [5],

elsewhere in this special issue.

4.

So far, only few organisations keep track of international

bioenergy trade. The IEA renewables statistics [6] also

include ‘net import of biomass’ for various biomass

categories in their statistics. However, in some cases they

report deviating numbers, e.g. zero imports or exports for

Sweden and Canada for 2004, which is not in line with our

findings. Also, reported net import numbers by IEA

statistics only cover biomass trade, while in Fig. 3, for

the Swedish and Finnish data, also indirect imports are

included.

In many cases, the data are (partially) incomplete, or may

only cover either import or export. Thus, the figures should be

considered (rough) estimates. Nevertheless, they can provide

a general overview of the current international trade activities

per country, and also indicate how dependent the biomass-

based economy is on international trade. The situation in the

individual countries is briefly described below.

Belgium: Data were available only on biomass import for co-

firing in gas and coal power plants. The data includes imports

of wood pellets (400 kt in 2005) and vegetal oils (100 kt in 2005).

More biomass streams have been imported for energy

production (e.g. olive cake, coffee ground), but exact amounts

are not known. Furthermore, significant amounts of e.g.

round wood, wood waste and scrap, bio-ethanol and peat

have been both imported and exported, but the end-use

(e.g. energy or material) is not known, and thus has not been

included in Fig. 3. Even when excluding these volumes, the

amount of imported biomass is substantial (ca. 43%) com-

pared with the domestic primary biomass supply. For more

information, see [7].

Brazil: The export data is based on 2.5 Mm3 of bio-ethanol,

and small amount of green wood chips and wood pellets. The

main countries importing Brazilian bio-ethanol are India, the

US, South Korea and Sweden. It was estimated that approxi-

mately 75% of bio-ethanol sold to EU countries, USA, India,

and China, ends up as transportation fuel, for all other

countries this was estimated to be 25%. No data were

available on the import of biomass for energy, but this is

expected to be negligible. Brazil currently only exports a

relatively small amount of biomass (2%) compared with its

domestic biomass production, though this amount may

increase significantly in the future (see also Section 4). For

more information, see [8].

Canada: Exported biomass takes into account amounts to

400 kt of wood pellets in 2004. This is a very small amount

compared the domestic biomass production (an estimated

1%), but as in the case of Brazil, these amounts are expected

to increase strongly in the near future (see Section 3). No

attempt was made to quantify how much of the Canadian

exports of roundwood and other wood products end up

(indirectly) as bioenergy. For more information, see [9].

Finland: Within the frame of IEA Bioenergy Task 40, probably

the most detailed and complete analysis of all biomass flows

have been collected for Finland. The wooden raw material

streams of the forest industry were included in the interna-

tional biofuels trade in addition to biomass streams that are

traded for energy production. In 2004, as much as 45% of the

raw wood imported into Finland ended up indirectly in energy

production. The total international trading of biofuels was

evaluated at 72 PJ, of which the majority, 58 PJ, was raw wood.

About 22% of wood-based energy in Finland originated from

imported raw wood. Tall oil and wood pellets composed the

largest export streams of biofuels. The annual turnover of

international biofuels trade was estimated at about h90

million for direct trade and at about h190 million for indirect

trade. The forest industry as the biggest user of wood, and the

producer and user of wood fuels has a central position in

biomass and biofuels markets in Finland. Lately, the interna-

tional biofuels trade in Finland has been dominated by import

of raw wood and export of wood pellets. In the near future,

imports of liquid biofuels for the transportation sector are

likely. Thus, in coming years, the international trading of

biomass for energy purposes can be expected to continue

growing. For more information, see [1].

Norway: In Norway, direct trade of biofuels is currently

limited (less than 3 PJ), and consists mainly of firewood from

Estonia, Latvia and Sweden. Norway is a net exporter of

refined solid biofuels, but the quantities are quite minor

(o1 PJ). The overcapacity of refined biofuel production units

does presumably reflect expectations of a growing market for

bioenergy domestically. Indirect trade of biofuels is more

ARTICLE IN PRESS

B I O M A S S A N D B I O E N E R G Y 3 2 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 7 1 7 – 7 2 9 721

substantial (an estimated import of about 3.8 PJ). For more

information, see [10] and the article of Bolkesjø et al.,

elsewhere in this issue.

Netherlands: Until the year 2000, the Netherlands barely

imported biomass for energy production. Over the last few

years, both the import and export of biomass for energy

purposes have been strongly increasing, over a factor of seven

in terms of electricity produced between 2003 and 2005 alone.

The biomass imported is used to almost 100% in Dutch power

plants (mainly coal and two gas-fired plants), and can be

roughly divided into the following categories: liquid biofuels

like palm oil and fatty acids, and solids, such as agro residues

(e.g. palm kernel expeller), wood chips and wood-derived

fuels (wood pellets), and solid waste streams (e.g. bone meal).

In total, in 2004 about 9.9 PJ was imported. The exported

biomass consists mainly of waste wood and construction

wood, accumulating to 13.4 PJ. As the Netherlands do not have

a large wood-processing industry, no indirect trade volumes

were taken into account. Thus, in 2004, about 24% of the total

primary biomass supply was imported, while an amount

equivalent of 32% was exported for energy production.

Regarding the biofuels for transportation, production and

use of biofuels in the Netherlands was negligible in 2004. To

meet the 5.75% biofuels obligation, the only option will be on

the short term to either importing ethanol and biodiesel, or

their precursors (e.g. grains, vegetable oils or oil seeds). For

more information, see [11] and elsewhere in this issue.

Sweden: The official Swedish statistics is a poor source of

information for biomass import. Biomass is imported under

different definitions and it is often mixed with other

categories of products. This is especially true for wood in

unrefined forms. Round wood in form of pulp wood and saw

logs is normally imported in undebarked form, and as the

bark is used for energy purposes it could be classified as

‘‘imported biomass’’. The same could be the case for saw dust

and other residues from imported logs. Moreover, a portion of

the round wood import consists of energy wood for direct use

(after comminution) for energy generation. However, the

import statistics does not separate the various types of round

wood. In total, it is estimated that Sweden imported 59 PJ of

round wood and chips directly for energy use, and that

another 26 PJ of imported round wood and chips and up

indirectly for energy production. Other imported bioenergy

carriers are wood pellets, ethanol (for transportation) and tall

oil. Regarding future trends, three trends were identified for

Sweden: (1) trade is shifting from local to regional and now

more international; (2) major demand is shifting from Sweden

to (also) demand in other parts of Europe; (3) there is an

increasing fuel quality concern. For more details see [12].

United Kingdom: It is difficult to obtain detailed information

concerning the level of bioenergy imports into the UK since

information at a company level is commercially sensitive in

nature and at sectoral level little information is collected

centrally. At the same time, international trade statistics

often do not classify products (such as wood pellet) in

sufficient detail. Much of the material imported is for co-

firing in coal-fired power plants. Over 1.4 Mt of biomass was

co-fired in 2005, of which about two thirds were imported

biomass. It is difficult to determine trade patterns for co-firing

since imported feedstocks are typically purchased on spot

markets through intermediaries and operators have the

ability to switch between different suppliers and different

feedstocks to pursue best value for money. However, the UK

co-firing market has developed into a key market for

agricultural residues that have few alternative uses. For

example, the UK accounted for over 55% of imports of dry

olive cake into EU Member States. The UK is a nascent

producer and consumer of many forms of bioenergy. This

means that trade in bioenergy exists for products consumed

for energy in the UK that are not yet produced domestically.

For example, 85,000 m3 of bio-ethanol were consumed in road

transport in 2005 even though the UK does not yet produce

bio-ethanol commercially. This represented 0.17% of total fuel

sales by volume [13]. By contrast, over 1.7 PJ of biodiesel was

produced in 2005, while only 1 PJ was consumed in road

transport. For more details see [14].

Summarizing, it is evident that most European Task 40

member countries import significant amounts of biomass,

varying from 12% to 43% of all biomass utilisation, and that

these shares generally tend to increase over the next years.

While in all Task 40 member countries domestic biomass

utilisation still outweighs use of imported biomass, this may

change, especially when regarding specific biomass fuels. For

example, for the Netherlands, meeting the 5.75% biofuels

obligation will (on the short term) only be possible importing

almost 100% of its demand, either in the form of ethanol and

biodiesel, or their precursors (e.g. grains, vegetable oils or oil

seeds). Regarding biomass exports, Brazil and Canada so far

only export a minor fraction of their domestic biomass use

(1–2%), but again, this share is expected to rise rapidly.

3. International pellet trade

Wood pellets are one of the most successful bioenergy-based

commodities traded internationally. Wood pellets offer a

number of advantages compared with other solid biomass

fuels: they generally have a low moisture content and a

relatively high heating value (about 17 MJ/kg), which allows

long-distance transport by ship without affecting the energy

balance. Handling during transport is relatively easy, and they

can be stored over long periods without significant loss of dry

matter. Applications of wood pellets vary from small-scale

residential heating to large-scale co-firing in coal power

plants. As wood pellets generally contain no contaminants

as heavy metals, they are a very ‘clean’ and green fuel as well.

Due to the additional costs of refining pellets from raw

material such as saw dust, production costs per MJ are on

average higher than e.g. of wood chips or agricultural waste

streams. On the other hand, policy support measures for the

production of renewable electricity in various European

countries and rising heating oil prices have enabled wood

pellets to successfully compete with fossil fuels.

These attractive properties have caused the demand for

wood pellets to soar upwards over the last years. In the

sections below, we describe the main developments in

production, consumption, international trade, prices levels

and logistic challenges, mainly from the perspective of the

T40 member countries. For an overview of pellet trade in the

T40 member countries, see Table 1.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 1 – Domestic pellet production, production capacity, domestic consumption, import and export in 2004 in task 40member countries

Domestic production Production capacity Domestic consumption Import Export

Belgium n.a. 18 n.a. 80 n.a.

Brazil 35 n.a. 25 0 10

Canada 450 550 20 0 430

Finland 190 450 47 0 157

The Netherlands 80 100 200 160 n.a.

Norway 35 80 35 0.2 5.6

Sweden 900 1159 1250 350 0

UK 0 100 n.a.a n.a.a 0

All numbers are in kt. Data sources: IEA Task 40 country reports, with additions from Dahl [20] and Bioenergy international [21]. All data should

be considered estimates.a No data available for 2004. For comparison, for 2005, domestic production was estimated at 52 kt, imports were estimated between 114 and

164 kt and domestic consumption between 216 and 337 kt.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Woo

d pe

llets

(Mt)

Domestic production

Export

Import

Total consumption

20102009200820072006200520042003200220012000199919981997

Fig. 4 – Overview of the Swedish pellet market, including domestic production, imports, domestic consumption and exports.

Figures for 2008–2010 are estimates. Source: PIR [15].

B I O M A S S A N D B I O E N E R G Y 3 2 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 7 1 7 – 7 2 9722

3.1. Domestic wood pellet production and consumption

The most-important pellet producer of the T40 member

countries is Sweden, with a domestic production of a little

under 1 Mt in 2004, and expected increase of production to

about 1.8 Mt until 2008 (see also Fig. 4). Sweden is a leading

producer of pellets in the world, surpassed only by the US.

The raw materials for pellets are by-products of the Swedish

lumbering, milling, woodworking and pulp industries [15].

Total domestic consumption typically exceeds production by

10–20%, making the import of pellets necessary (see also

Fig. 4).

The second most-important producer of wood pellets of the

Task 40 member countries is Canada. Manufacture and export

of wood pellets in Canada has grown exponentially in the

past several years, primarily on the west coast (see Fig. 5). In

2004, there were at least 11 pellet plants in Canada, almost

half in British Columbia (BC). Several plants are currently

being built or upgraded to take advantage not only of the

surplus mill residue situation in BC, but also the huge

potential wood supply from Mountain Pine Beetle affected

stands (for more information, see [9]). The production

capacity in BC could reach 1 Mt within 2 years and 1.5 Mt

within 3 years. However, overseas contracts will have to

be concluded as the expansion progresses. The export to

Europe for 2005 exceeded 400 kt from Western Canada alone

(primarily BC), as shown in Fig. 5. So far BC has produced only

white pellets. BC has also a large potential to produce brown

pellets, which contain large amounts of bark, and have much

less benign combustion properties than white pellets from

sawdust. If brown pellets become accepted in the market

place there is a very large potential sitting in the background

as a reserve. Furthermore, a recent trend is for the large

forest companies to consider building a combination of

ARTICLE IN PRESS

0

200

400

600

800

1.000

1.200

1.400

Woo

d pe

llets

(kt)

Capacity

Production

Domestic Sales

US Sales

Overseas Sales

2006200520042003200220012000199919981997

Fig. 5 – Overview of the (western) Canadian wood pellet production, domestic use and export [8].

B I O M A S S A N D B I O E N E R G Y 3 2 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 7 1 7 – 7 2 9 723

cogeneration and pellet mills with the pellets being exported.

Domestic consumption has been very low (about 20 kt/year)

but recently also started to rise (see also Fig. 5).

A third country with significant wood pellet production is

Finland. Pellets and briquettes are refined solid biomass fuels

and they can be produced from wooden raw material and

peat. In Finland, both products are manufactured and both

raw materials used. Wood pellets have the largest share

among these products at present, while briquette production

and trade is in general (much) lower than pellet trade. Wood

pellet production in Finland started in 1998. Since then pellet

production has increased steadily and was 190 kt (3.2 PJ) in

2004. Dry by-products from the sawn timber-refining industry

are the major raw material in wood pellet production. At the

end of 2005, there were 17 wood pellet factories in operation.

For comparison, also some 20 kt (0.4 PJ) of peat pellets were

produced in Finland [16–18]. The Finnish wood briquette

production has been estimated at 35 kt equalling 0.6 PJ in

2000. Wood briquettes are manufactured in small units and

the largest units produce about 5 kt briquettes annually. In

2000, a total of 21 wood briquette production units existed in

the country [19]. The current production of wood briquettes is

estimated constant compared with the year 2000 volume.

Wood briquettes are mainly used crushed in larger CHP

plants.

Domestic pellet production in the other T40 member

countries was relatively small, see for an overview Table 1.

Domestic pellet consumption on the other had has been

increasing in several countries such as the Netherlands,

Belgium and the UK, but this is mainly covered through import,

see Section 3.2. In these three countries, pellets have

increasingly been used for co-firing in coal power plants.

Also, these markets have grown quickly. For example, while it

was estimated that Belgium imported about 80 kt in 2004 [20],

this amount had increased to 600 kt in 2005 [7].

3.2. International trade of wood pellets

As can be seen from Table 1 and Figs. 4 and 5, Canada and

Finland are major exporters of wood pellets, while Belgium,

the Netherlands, Sweden and the UK are all (major) importing

countries. Only in Norway and Brazil, pellet trade has been

marginal up until 2004.

The greatest opportunity for pellet exports from Canada, as

largest exporting country, is in BC. For companies in BC, with

ocean ports in close proximity, the market is primarily

Europe, such as Sweden, Belgium and the Netherlands.

Similarly, McTara in Nova Scotia sells largely into Europe.

Pellets from these regions are exported to amongst others

Sweden, Belgium, the Netherlands and the UK. Productive

capacity in central Canada (companies in Alberta and Quebec)

is not near ocean ports and thus production is largely

destined for the US market.

The Finnish pellet industry has been founded on exporta-

tion, and in 2004, the export of wood pellets was 157 kt, three

quarters of its total production. Sweden (56%), Denmark (23%)

and the Netherlands (20%) were the main destination for the

exported wood pellets.

Sweden, on the other hand, has a larger domestic demand

than its own wood industry and pellet mills can supply,

and has been importing pellets over the last decade (see

also Fig. 4). Pellets are imported mainly from Canada

(112 kt in 2005), the Baltic states (110 kt in 2005) and Finland

(80 kt).

In the Netherlands, Belgium and the UK, pellets have

increasingly been used for co-firing in coal power plants

during the last 5 years or so. Also, these markets have

grown quickly. For example, while it was estimated that

Belgium imported about 80 kt in 2004 [20], this amount

had increased to 600 kt in 2005 [7]. However, in 2006, wood

pellets originating from one of the early producers in

Wallonia were exported to Italy at a price of 160 h/t, shipment

by train being paid in addition by the importer. Italy has

indeed a booming domestic sector for wood pellets and Italy

is importing from many European countries, Austria being

the largest exporter.

The only two countries with so far low amounts of traded

wood pellets are Brazil (10 kt exports) and Norway (5.6 kt

exports). However, given the presence of a wood industry and

the large resource base in both countries, it is quite possible

that both countries will be exporting larger volumes in the

future.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

B I O M A S S A N D B I O E N E R G Y 3 2 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 7 1 7 – 7 2 9724

3.3. Production costs and price levels

Given the different availability and demand for wood pellets,

production costs and price levels may differ significantly in

the T40 member countries. Next to the available supply

potentials, these price differences are of course the major

driver behind the developing international pellet trade. All

currencies have been converted to Euros using the average

exchange rate of 2004: 1h equalled 1.242 US$, 1.617 Can$ and

0.679 GBP.

Brazil reports the lowest prices, ranging from 0.56h/GJ

(free on board in the Amazon) to 1.37h/GJ (delivered to

ports in the Southeast). Delivered to small end-users,

cheapest prices for packed pellets have been reported at

42h/t (2.18 h/GJ) [22].

Canada, as major exporting country reports average prices

of 2.7h/GJ at the pellet mill (i.e. including raw material,

manufacturing, debt and equity), and about 3.2h/GJ for local

transport to a port, storage and overseas shipment [23],

resulting in a delivered price at e.g. Rotterdam harbour of

5.9h/GJ.

The Netherlands as one of the importers of pellets, report

that fuel prices for wood pellets at the plant gate have been

fluctuating between 7 and 7.5h/GJ in 2004, [24], as opposed to

6.4 in 2002/2003 [25]. The higher prices are mainly due to

increased transportation costs (about 1.75h/GJ). In 2005,

prices were quoted by experts around 140 US$/t, i.e. 6.2 h/GJ.

Norway reports the highest pellet prices. Hovi [26] analysed

cost of domestic production and delivery of solid biofuels in

Norway, based on a survey among Norwegian producers.

Production and logistic costs of wood chips from pine

pulpwood, including transport of chips and sales, are

estimated to about 100 h/t dry wood (about 6.1 h/GJ) for annual

production volumes above 10 kt and transport distances of

50 km for the raw material and the chips. Biomass

costs represent almost 50% of the total costs. Correspond-

ing production and logistic costs of pellets are estimated

to 200–220h/t (11.7–12.8h/GJ), when assuming transport

distances of 50 km for roundwood and 150 km for pellets.

In pellets production, biomass takes about 30% of the

total costs, while pelleting takes 15%. Transport of pellets,

storage, packing and sales are other significant cost compo-

nents.

For the UK, prices are reported for the small-scale heating

market. The heat market is very attractive firstly for its size

and secondly for its competitiveness with natural gas e.g.

6.1h/GJ for pellets compared with 9.6h/GJ for natural gas. It is

expected that this market will largely be supplied domes-

tically rather than by imports given that the majority of

applications are small scale. To achieve this, it would require

the development of a good production and supply infra-

structure. So far, the UK lacks experience in the production of

pellets.

In Belgium, average prices for power plants have increased

from 5.5 to about 7.5h/GJ, between 2004 and 2006, mainly due

to a shortage of production versus consumption during the

winter 2005–2006 and increasing margins taken by traders.

Domestic market has developed recently even though it

remains limited and prices including delivery are above

200h/t (11.7h/GJ).

3.4. Pellet logistics

As mentioned above, pellets are very suitable for (long-distance)

transport. Still developing the required logistics is seen as one of

the key challenges to further expand the international pellet

trade, especially from the exporting countries.

In Finland, wood pellets are exported almost totally by

means of maritime transport. As bulk material, wood

pellets are relatively easy to transport and ports suitable for

dry-cargo vessels and barges can be utilised in the transpor-

tation. Available indoor storage and material handling equip-

ment for dry bulk in a port facilitate the loading of pellets into

the vessel. There is plenty of underutilised port capacity in

Finland available for the handling and transportation of

pellets. At least the ports of Oulu, Kokkola, Kaskinen, Inkoo,

Loviisa and Joensuu are used in their export [1].

In Canada and Brazil, logistics are currently more signifi-

cant barriers to the development of wood pellet trade.

In Brazil, a considerable amount of planted forests is

presently located at places were freight is quite expensive

up to maritime ports, mainly because of the high cost of

transporting biomass by trucks. Compared with free on board

values, prices may increase about 50% in some harbours, and

up to a factor of three when transported to Europe. Fluvial

transport may be a solution for the Northern and Western

region due the existence of several rivers appropriate for this

purpose. For the Northeastern and Southeastern regions,

fluvial transport should be mixed with railway as the main

alternatives. For all those regions, crop transport has already

started through a multi-modal way in which some connec-

tions are made by trucks. Mass densification through pellet

and briquettes production may be an alternative to reduce

costs of transport for some cases but it depends on an

appropriate cost–benefit analysis. Recent studies made by

Dolzan and Walter [27] have analysed 17 potential production

sites. If no improvement in logistics is assumed, just one

location (Amapa) may achieve competitive prices for export-

ing pellets to Europe (Netherlands). However, when consider-

ing a series of new configurations and improvements in

logistics, the number of places with competitive pellet prices

for exporting would rise to 14.

Brazil is highly privileged in terms of places for structuring

ports. However, most of the existing ports are public and their

services are both expensive (outstanding tariffs) and ineffi-

cient (there are some exceptions). In addition, they are not

equipped for fast carrying of wood pellets or chips, which

both have low aggregated value. To solve this problem, private

ports located at strategic places and conveniently equipped

with belt-carriers have been used for wood chips exports.

A least three big companies for both energy and pulp

purposes have their own ports. These companies have

presented highly competitive prices at outstanding levels if

ordinary freights and port taxes are taken into account and

the likely reason is efficiency not dumping [27]. Higher

aggregated value products such as high-density briquettes

and packed charcoal for residential uses, may be traded at

higher prices, as their volumes are often lower and generally

they are shipped in containers.

Similarly, developing logistics is also crucial for the rate of

pellet industry expansion in Canada. Due to their geographical

ARTICLE IN PRESS

B I O M A S S A N D B I O E N E R G Y 3 2 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 7 1 7 – 7 2 9 725

position, the central Canadian provinces are only able to

export to the US. For British Columbia and Alberta, lower

costs for railing pellets to the coast, sustained low ocean

freight rates and new loading facilities are required to be

competitive in world markets. A consolidation of railing for

all mills is in the final stage of negotiation. Ocean freight rates

escalated up to 80% at the end of 2003, a painful experience

for individual exporters. However, it did not stop export. In

2006, freight rates were back at the mid 2003 level, however, a

lower cost structure for ocean shipping has to be maintained.

Infrastructural changes in the shipping industry as well as in

the Chinese industrial policy of more domestic raw material

supply will hopefully keep the ocean rates lower. Some

suppliers are locked-in to rates from mid 2003 and have been

somewhat immune to the price roller coaster. To handle the

sharp increases in capacity, more cost-efficient vessel-loading

facilities need to be put in place. A new dedicated pellet

loading facility is being erected in Port of Vancouver and

should be in operation in October 2005. This terminal will

handle 1 Mt/year and could be expanded to handle twice that

volume over time. Construction of a new loading terminal in

Port of Prince Rupert to replace the one just closed is being

pursued and could be a reality in 2 years [9].

On the other hand, infrastructural changes in the importing

countries depend mainly on the final application of the pellet.

In the case of the Netherlands, Belgium, at this moment

pellets are almost exclusively used as fuel for co-firing. Thus,

they can often make use of present supply chains and

infrastructure for coal. When large amounts of pellets are

co-fired, dedicated (un-) loading facilities are needed. For

example, in the Netherlands, Essent built a custom-made

pellet unloading station next to its Amer coal power plant.

The development of logistics has also allowed for the energy-

efficient transport of pellets. For example, in Belgium, the

sustainability criteria implemented within the certification

process include (amongst others) energy efficiency for making

the biofuels and for transporting them. From 26 examples of

suppliers that have been considered by Electrabel, it appears

that all are much more efficient than Belgian authorities

thought at the beginning. Even suppliers located overseas

compete very well with European ones if they put the accent

on efficiency and scale effect. This is also the positive result of

the availability of a large sea harbour like Antwerp that is fairly

well connected to the rest of the country with rivers and

channels, making transportation very efficient.

In Brazil, Sweden, and the UK pellets are also increasingly

used on a small scale e.g. for restaurants and bakeries (Brazil)

and small residential heating (Sweden and the UK). While this

demand is largely covered by local supply, in the future it is

well possible that international pellet trade may also become

relevant for small-scale consumers.

3.5. Barriers to international pellet trade

While pellet trade with Europe is in full swing, there are many

barriers to enhanced trade in pellets and other biofuels,

including:

1.

Indirect trade barriers for import in certain areas of

Europe. For example, the UK is promoting domestic supply

of biomass and restricts subsidies if the imports exceed

certain limits, resulting in almost no trading of pellets into

the UK. Consequently, no receiving facilities exist for

Panamax size vessels, a requirement for BC producers. UK

utilities continually request millions of tonnes of pellets,

but none are able or willing to invest in receiving facilities

due to government subsidy policies (for more information

on the situation in the UK, including subsidy policies,

see [14]).

2.

No common standard for pellets. Some countries in

Europe have pellet standards, some have none, and even

those that have are different. A common standard is

preferred, and it is understood that initiatives are under-

way (e.g. the CEN/TC 335 biomass standards [28]).

3.

High freight costs. A sharp increase in shipping costs in

2003 made trade between Canada and Europe difficult.

Biomass power facilities require an uninterrupted supply

of feedstock, and Canada was often considered a supplier

of last resort due to supply uncertainties.

4. International bio-ethanol productionand trade

Of the current Task 40 members, Brazil clearly is the most-

important producer and user of bio-ethanol as transportation

fuel. Worldwide, Brazil is the largest producer of sugarcane. It

is estimated that the production in the last harvest season

(2005–2006) has reached 410 Mt [8]. The sugarcane production

has risen during the last 5 harvest seasons (on average

9.7%/year). Besides the rise of bio-ethanol domestic demand,

other factors are pushing the growth of sugarcane industry in

Brazil, such as: (i) high demand for sugar both in the domestic

and international market, (ii) the rise of bio-ethanol exports

and (iii) the continuous improvements in productivity.

Currently, Brazil has around 320 combined sugar mills and

bio-ethanol distilleries with a further 51 under construction,

including new plants and expansion of existing ones. The bio-

ethanol production capacity was estimated as 18 Mm3 in 2005.

Favourable conditions to bioenergy expansion have led to

the situation that nowadays cane-derived fuel ethanol covers

more than 30% of automobile gasoline demand. In compar-

ison, ethanol exports are minor, but rapidly growing in recent

years. Fig. 6 shows Brazil’s bio-ethanol trade since 1970.

Market opportunities and constraints have determined

exports and imports. An expressive amount of alcohol was

imported during the 1990s, first during the supply shortage of

bio-ethanol (1990–1991) and, after, when international sugar

markets were favourable for exports (1993–1997). Tradition-

ally, Brazilian exports of bio-ethanol have been oriented for

beverage production and industrial purposes but, recently,

trade for fuel purposes has enlarged. As can be seen in Fig. 6,

after 2000 Brazilian exports of bio-ethanol have risen steadily.

In 2004, exports reached 2.5 Mm3 and it is estimated that

almost the same amount was exported in 2005. As a rough

estimate, approximately 60% of these exported volumes may

be destined as fuel ethanol.

In Table 2, an overview is given of the major countries

importing and exporting ethanol.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

Bio

-eth

anol

trad

e [M

m3 ]

ImportsExports

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Fig. 6 – Trade in bio-ethanol in Brazil 1970–2005, including all end-uses [8].

Table 2 – Share of total global ethanol exports andimporting per country in 2005 [29]

Import % Export %

USA 18 Brazil 48

Japan 11 USA 6

India 8 France 6

Germany 8 S. Africa 6

Netherlands 8 China 5

UK 6 UK 5

Korea 5 Netherlands 4

France 4 Germany 2

Others 32 Others 18

B I O M A S S A N D B I O E N E R G Y 3 2 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 7 1 7 – 7 2 9726

Canada is also a bio-ethanol producer, though on a much

smaller scale than Brazil. In 2004, six bio-ethanol plants in

Canada produced 0.238 Mm3 of bio-ethanol. All production

was from grain, except 17,000 m3 of wood-based bio-ethanol

from Tembec, a major forest products company. As part of a

major effort to increase bio-ethanol production, in October

2004 the federal government announced its financial support

in the construction of seven new grain bio-ethanol plants

with the capacity to produce over 0.72 Mm3/year The expan-

sion will bring production capacity to 1 Mm3. In spite of this

expansion, it is not expected that a meaningful amount will

be available for export initially as the Canadian market will

absorb most of the bio-ethanol produced to 2008.

In Finland, domestic and imported bio-ethanol is commonly

used as feedstock in the chemical industry (e.g. for ETBE

production). In addition, imported industrial bio-ethanol has

been used as an additive to gasoline. Despite the insignificant

domestic consumption of biofuels in transportation, the

domestic production of liquid biofuels is increasing signifi-

cantly in Finland. The Finnish oil company Neste Oil

Corporation started the production of bio-ETBE (ethyltertio

butyl-ether) at its Porvoo refinery in 2004. ETBE is an additive

that enhances the octane rating of petrol similarly to the

fossil MTBE (replacing lead and benzene in unleaded petrol)

and reduces emissions. ETBE is produced by combining bio-

ethanol and fossil isobutylene. The proportion of the bio-

based component in ETBE is slightly less than half. Neste Oil

has also another ETBE production plant in Portugal and

company’s total ETBE production capacity is approximately

150 kt/year. ETBE production is mainly based on foreign

feedstock acquired from world markets [30]. In 2004, the

production of ETBE in Finland was in total 48 kt, and the

production was predominantly exported. In the same year,

23.8 kt of bio-ethanol was used as feedstock. Neste Oil’s

annual production capacity of ETBE in Finland is currently

85 kt. The import of ETBE was estimated at zero and the entire

production volume of ETBE was calculated to have been

exported in the energy balance.

Sweden is a large-scale importer of liquid biofuels. The

import of propellant biofuel, mainly bio-ethanol for 2004 was

about 0.2 Mm3. Due to changes in the duty regulations

effective 01-01-2006, the quantity for 2006 would be consider-

ably reduced. Propellant biofuels, mainly bio-ethanol have

their origins in southern Europe and in Brazil. The bio-ethanol

from southern Europe is based on the wine industry,

while the Brazilian supply emanates from the sugar industry

[12]. In comparison, Sweden also produces bio-ethanol.

There is a grain bio-ethanol production plant in Norrkoping,

which produces about 50,000 m3/year, and scheduled to

expand to produce additionally 0.11–0.15 Mm3/year from

2008 onwards [31].

Another importer of bio-ethanol is the UK. The UK imported

85,000 m3 of bio-ethanol for use in road transport in 2005. The

only bio-ethanol sold commercially is an E5 blend sold by

Greenergy Fuels [32]. The bio-ethanol used in this blend is

imported from Brazil. This represented 0.17% of total fuel

sales by volume [13]. Bio-ethanol is not yet produced

commercially in the UK. The facility that was to be the first

bio-ethanol plant in the UK, a partnership between BP,

ARTICLE IN PRESS

B I O M A S S A N D B I O E N E R G Y 3 2 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 7 1 7 – 7 2 9 727

DuPont and British Sugar, recently announced that the plant

would produce bio-butanol instead of bio-ethanol [33].

Until the end of 2005, the Netherlands had a negligible

utilisation of biofuels, and also no substantial domestic

production of biofuels for transportation took place. This

does, however, not imply, that there was no trade in biofuels.

Vopak, a major distributor of bio-ethanol, reports that the

transfer of bio-ethanol in the harbour of Rotterdam has

trebled over the past 3 years, from 200 kt in 2001 to 600 kt in

2004 [34]. It is however unclear, whether this bio-ethanol was

used as transportation fuel, and how much was again

exported to e.g. Germany or Sweden. Vopak expects further-

more that the future demand for bio-ethanol is estimated at

10 Mt/year. In addition, Shell reports, that it is the first fuel

supplier in the Netherlands to anticipate, on a large scale, the

government’s requirement compelling suppliers to include a

bio-component in their fuels from 2007 onwards [35]. Shell

has been blending ETBE (ethyl tertiary butyl-ether) into its

Euro 95 petrol since January 2006. This ETBE is based on bio-

ethanol. The total quantities and the origin of the bio-ethanol

are, however, not known.

Finally, in Norway about 4200 m3 biofuels (mainly bio-

ethanol and biodiesel) was used in the transport sector in

2004. This represents only 0.1% of the total market [10]. For

Belgium, no information on ethanol production and trade was

available.

5. Trends, drivers and barriers forinternational bioenergy trade in T40 countries

Below, a short selection of topics is presented, that were

indicated in one or several of the T40 country reports as main

trends, drivers and barriers for international trade. This list is

not exhaustive. For a more comprehensive overview, see also

the individual country reports and the opportunities and

barriers for trade [3].

5.1. Bioenergy trade: from local to regional,and now more international

A development seen all over Europe is the growth of

international bioenergy trade. A typical example is Sweden:

the bioenergy sector in Sweden started as a local demand and

supply in the late 1970s and 1980s. In the 1990s, energy

facilities started a regional market for biomass by import of

cheap recycled demolished wood from Holland and Germany

and thereafter also wood chips from the Baltics. Now steps

are taken to an international market in which prices of

biomass for energy are set in competition with products from

sources far away, e.g. from south of Europe as well as from

North and South America. Some years ago Sweden was

almost the only country in Europe when it came to demand

for import of biomass for energy. This created a favourable

situation with low prices and reliable sourcing.

5.2. Low data availability and methodological issuesregarding direct and indirect trade

In most cases, national customs and energy statistics include

a varying amount of usable statistical information on inter-

national biomass trade. A positive example is Finland, as the

Finnish energy statistics include the export of wood pellets

and fuel peat, and the volume of imported wood fuels in

primary energy consumption. In most other Task 40 member

countries, such as the Netherlands or the UK, the national

statistics do not include such information. Therefore, the

compilation of statistics on international biomass trade should

be further developed to provide a better view of international

biofuels trade. Next to the lack of information compiled

centrally by government departments or trade organisations,

this is also due to the reluctance of suppliers and consumers to

provide data as this is often regarded as commercially sensitive,

and difficulties with classification of trade statistics as most

imports are not necessarily classified as energy.

Another aspect is the indirect import of biomass, mainly

occurring in countries with a large pulp and paper sector,

such as Finland, Norway and Sweden. Both in Finland and

Norway, the indirect trade of biofuels is emphasised within

the import of raw wood for the forest industry. International

streams of wood and wood-based products and the indirect

trade of biofuels have yet to be extensively studied and would

offer interesting subjects for further research in order to learn

more about biofuels markets.

5.3. Dependency on (varying) policy support

In many European countries, such as Belgium, Sweden, the

Netherlands and the UK, favourable policies for renewable

electricity energy production and use (e.g. electricity, heat and

transportation fuels) are a main driver for the import of

biomass. However, experiences show that this may drive up

prices, as was apparent over the past few years for wood

pellets and other biomass streams. Also, varying policy

incentives can disturb market mechanisms, as was recently

shown for biomass trade between Germany and the Nether-

lands [36]. Also policies in favour of biofuels for transport tend

to work as a driver for import of biofuels.

5.4. Sustainability criteria and certification systemsfor biomass

Within several of the Task 40 member countries, companies,

NGO’s and national governments have realized the necessity

to safeguard the sustainable production of (imported) bio-

mass. Certification of biomass is seen as one possibility to

ensure sustainable production, though there are several

approaches possible (e.g. national vs. international systems,

mandatory vs. voluntary), and a number of apparent draw-

backs. For examples of initiatives in amongst others Belgium,

Germany, the Netherlands and the UK, and an extensive

discussion on possibilities and drawbacks of certification

issues, we refer to another paper in this special issue by van

Dam et al. [37]. Here, we conclude that the sustainable

production of biomass is an issue that will likely increasingly

influence international bioenergy trade in the future.

6. Summary and conclusions

The use of biomass for energy varies between a few percent

of the national energy supply up to significant shares

ARTICLE IN PRESS

B I O M A S S A N D B I O E N E R G Y 3 2 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 7 1 7 – 7 2 9728

(e.g. 15–25% in Finland, Sweden and Brazil). In many

European countries such as Belgium, Finland, the Nether-

lands, Sweden and the UK, imported biomass forms already a

significant part of the total biomass use (between 21% and

43%). Wood pellets are currently exported by Canada, Finland

and (to a small extent) Brazil and Norway, and imported by

Sweden, Belgium, the Netherlands, and the UK. In the

Netherlands and Belgium, pellet imports nowadays contri-

bute to a large share to total renewable electricity production.

Trade in bio-ethanol is another example of a rapidly growing

international market. With the EU-wide target of 5.75%

biofuels for transportation in 2010 (and the recently an-

nounced target of 10% in 2020), exports from Brazil and other

countries to Europe are likely to rise as well. Major drivers for

international bioenergy trade in general are the large resource

potentials and relatively low production costs in producing

countries such as Canada and Brazil, and high fossil fuel

prices and various policy incentives to stimulate biomass use

in importing countries. However, also barriers are somewhat

hindering the market development: (i) developing the re-

quired logistic infrastructure both in exporting and importing

countries is required to access larger physical biomass

volumes and to reach other (i.e. smaller) end-consumers,

(ii) better statistics and methods have to be developed to chart

the growing trade volumes, (iii) policy measure still determine

large parts of the trade flows, and sudden changes in policy

can result in quickly changing trade patterns, (iv) safeguards

are required to ensure the sustainable production of biomass.

It is concluded that international bioenergy trade is growing

rapidly, far beyond what was deemed possible only a few

years ago, and may in the future in some Task 40 countries

surpass domestic biomass use, especially for specific applica-

tions (e.g. transport fuels).

Acknowledgements

This paper was written in the frame of IEA Bioenergy Task 40

on sustainable international bioenergy trade. While the

authors are all member of IEA Bioenergy Task 40, the content

of this paper does not necessarily reflect the position of the

IEA Bioenergy agreement. We would like to thank two

anonymous reviewers for valuable comments on an earlier

draught of this paper, and Johan Vinterback (PIR).

R E F E R E N C E S

[1] Heinimo J, Alakangas E. Solid and liquid biofuels markets inFinland—a study on international biofuels trade. IEA Bioe-nergy Task 40 and EUBIONET II Country Report of Finland,April 2006, p. 95. Available at /http://www.bioenergytrade.org/downloads/finlandcountryreport260406.pdfS. Lastaccessed 2 March 2008.

[2] IEA Bioenergy Task 40: sustainable international bioenergytrade. Available at /http://www/bioenergytrade.orgS. Lastaccessed 2 March 2008.

[3] Junginger M, Faaij A, Schouwenberg PP, Arthers C, Bradley D,Best G, et al. Opportunities and barriers for sustainableinternational bioenergy trade and strategies to overcomethem. A report prepared by IEA Bioenergy Task 40. Available

at /http://www.bioenergytrade.org/downloads/t40opportunitiesandbarriersforbioenergytradefi.pdfS.Last accessed 2 March 2008.

[4] International Energy Agency. Energy balances of OECDcountries, 2003–2004, 2006 edition, see also /http://www.iea.org/Textbase/publications/free_new_Desc.asp?PUBS_ID=1076S. Last accessed 2 March 2008.

[5] Heinimo J. Methodological aspects on international biofuelstrade: international streams and trade of solid and liquidbiofuels in Finland. Biomass and Bioenergy, 2008, doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2008.01.003.

[6] International Energy Agency. Renewables information (2007edition with 2006 data). IEA statistics, 2007, p. 321.

[7] Marchal D, Ryckmans Y. Country report of Belgium, Countryreport for IEA Bioenergy Task 40, September 2006, p. 48.Available at /http://www.bioenergytrade.org/downloads/belgiumcountryreport060906.pdfS. Last accessed 2 March2008.

[8] Walter A, Dolzan P, Piacente E. Biomass energy and bioenergytrade: historic developments in Brazil and current opportu-nities. Country report for IEA Bioenergy Task 40, June 2006.Available at /http://www.bioenergytrade.org/downloads/brazilcountryreport.pdfS. Last accessed 2 March2008.

[9] Bradley D. Canada biomass-bioenergy report, 31 May 2006.Country report for IEA Bioenergy Task 40, May 2006. Availableat /http://www.bioenergytrade.org/downloads/canadacountryreportmay312006.pdfS.

[10] Bolkesjø TF, Trømborg E, Solberg B. Biomass market and tradein Norway: status and future prospects. Updated countryreport 2006, Country report for IEA Bioenergy Task 40,July 2006. Available at /http://www.bioenergytrade.org/downloads/norwegiancountryreport04072006.pdfS. Lastaccessed 2 March 2008.

[11] Junginger M, de Wit M, Faaij A. IEA Bioenergy Task40—country report for the Netherlands, Update 2006, Coun-try report for IEA Bioenergy Task 40, September 2006.Available at /http://www.bioenergytrade.org/downloads/netherlandscountryreportupdate2006.pdfS. Last accessed2 March 2008.

[12] Hektor B, Ling E. Country report, Sweden, Country report for IEABioenergy Task 40, August 2006, p. 10. Available at /http://www.bioenergytrade.org/downloads/swedishcountryreport2006.pdfS.Last accessed 2 March 2008.

[13] DfT, 2006. Promotion and use of biofuels in the UnitedKingdom /http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_roads/documents/pdf/dft_roads_pdf_611908.pdfS. Last accessed2 March 2008.

[14] Rosillo-Calle F, Perry M. Country report for United Kingdom,Country report for IEA Bioenergy Task 40, September 2006,p. 44. Available at /http://www.bioenergytrade.org/downloads/ukcountryreport180906.pdfS. Last accessed 2 March 2008.

[15] PIR, 2008. Swedish Association of Pellet Producers, Informa-tion on Swedish pellet production. Future estimates madeavailable by Johan Vinterback. Available at /http://www.pelletsindustrin.orgS. Last accessed 2 March 2008.

[16] Alakangas E, Paju P. Wood pellets in Finland, technology,economy and market. OPET report 5. OPET Finland, VTT,64pp. Available at /http://www/tekes.fi/opet/pdf/OPET_report5_june2002.pdfS Last accessed 2 March 2008.

[17] Heinimo J, Orava H. Pelletien markkinat ja pelletiliikeotimin-ta Suomessa, Ruotsissa ja Tanskassa. Mikkelinammattikor-keakoulu. Tutkimuksia A6. 951-588–087-4, 2002, 55pp.

[18] Statistics Finland, Energy Statistics 2004. Official statistics ofFinland. Energy 2005:2, Helsinki, 149pp.

[19] Kallio M, Alakangas E. Puubrikettien tuotanto ja kayttoSuomessa (Production and use of wood briquettes in Fin-land). VTT. OPET Report 8, 2002, 39pp. Available at /http://

ARTICLE IN PRESS

B I O M A S S A N D B I O E N E R G Y 3 2 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 7 1 7 – 7 2 9 729

www.tekes.fi/opet/pdf/opet_rap8.pdfS. Last accessed2 March 2008.

[20] Dahl J, Broechner-Andersen M, et al. 2005. Wood pellets—

a growing market in Europe. In: 14th European biomassconference, Paris, France, 17–21 October 2005, p. 1975–8.

[21] Bioenergy International. European pellet map, issue 11,December 2004, p. 1–7. Available for download at /www.bioenergyinternational.comS. Last accessed 2 March2008.

[22] Couto LC, et al. Vias de valor energetico da biomassa.Biomassa and Energia, Vic-osa 2004;1(1):71–92.

[23] Bradley D. Task 40 deliverable no. 4, supply chain analysis,(Canada, Finland, Norway, UK). In: Presentation at the IEABioenergy Task 38/40 joint workshop, Trondheim, April 2006,available at /http://www.bioenergytrade.org/activities2004/norway.htmlS. Last accessed 2 March 2008.

[24] Van Sambeek EJW, de Vries HJ, Pfeiffer AE, Cleijne JW.Onrendabele toppen van duurzame elektriciteitsopties. Ad-vies ten behoeve van de vaststelling van de MEP-subsidiesvoor de periode juli tot en met december 2006 en 2007.November 2004, ECN-C–04-101, p. 38. Available at /http://www.ecn.nl/publicaties/default.aspx?nr=ECN-C–04-101S.Last accessed 2 March 2008.

[25] Eubionet, Eubionet fuel rpices in Europe 2002/2003, Jyvaskyla,March 2003, available at /http://www.eubionet.net/ACFiles/Download.asp?recID=3072S. Last accessed 2 March2008.

[26] Hovi IB. Logistikkjeder og kostnadskomponenter for uliketyper av biobrensler [Logistic chains and cost componentsfor different types of biofuels]. Working paper. Oslo:Institute of Transport Economics (TØI); 14 September 2005[in Norwegian].

[27] Dolzan PBH, Walter A. Comercio Internacional de Sustenta-vel de Bioenergia: Avaliac- ao Preliminar dos Custos Agregadospelas Barreiras Logısticas versus Competitividade Brasileirana Exportac- ao de Biomassa Florestal, Universidade Estadualde Campinas, Faculdade de Engenharia Mecanica, Campinas,2006. 9pp.

[28] BEC, Biomass Energy Centre. CEN/TC 335 biomass standards,2007, see for more information /http://www.biomassenergycentre.org.ukS. Last accessed 2 March 2008.

[29] Walter A, Rosillo-Calle R, Dolzan PB, Piacente E, Borges daCunha K. Market evaluation: fuel ethanol, Task 40 sustain-able bio-energy trade; securing supply and demand, deliver-able 8, Unicamp, January 2007. Available at /http://www.bioenergytrade.org/downloads/finalreportethanolmarkets.pdfS. Last accessed 2 March 2008.

[30] Neste Oil. Biofuels (Nesteoil.com/Businesses/Components/Biofuels), 2006. Retrieved 17 February 2006 from /http://www.nesteoil.com/default.asp?path=1,41,539,2008,2253S.Last accessed 2 March 2008.

[31] Agroetanol. Swedish ethanol producer expands, pressrelease, 2007. Available at /http://here.alfalaval.com/?pageID=3&articleID=830S. Last accessed 2 March 2008.

[32] Greenergy Fuels. Overview of fuel sales, available at /http://www.greenergy.comS. Last accessed 2 March 2008.

[33] BP: BP and DuPont announce partnership to develop ad-vanced biofuels. Press release, available at /http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=2012968&contentId=7018942S. Last accessed 2 March 2008.

[34] Vopak, Information on Vopak ethanol trading on the GAVEwebsite. 2006. Available at /http://www.gave.novem.nl/figuur025/project/voorbeeld_eng.html#vopakS. Last accessed2 March 2008.

[35] Shell. Information on Shell ETBE blending on the GAVEwebsite. 2006. Available at /http://www.gave.novem.nl/figuur025/project/voorbeeld_eng.html#shell1S Last accessed2 March 2008.

[36] Faber J, Bergsma G, Vroonhof J. Bioenergy in Europe, 2005,Policy trends and issues, CE, Delft, the Netherlands, p. 64.Available at: /http://www.rapportsysteem.nl/artikel/index.php?id=406&action=read#S. Last accessed 15 May 2008.

[37] van Dam J, Junginger M, Faaij A, Jurgens I, Best G, Fritsche U.Overview of recent developments in sustainable biomasscertification. Biomass and Bioenergy 2008, doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2008.01.018.