Minutes of the Conference
May 18, 2006
14:00 – 20:00
Lithuanian University of Agriculture
Opening word of Gintautas Mozgeris
Short presentation of participants 32 participants (19)
1. Severine Laufer (Germany)
Interreg meeting in Sweden. Our project is one of the most important 15 ongoing
INTERREG projects among over 200.
2. Gintautas Mozgeris discussed possible publication of the conference papers. He has
invited other Lithuanian participants
3. Jonas Saladis (Lithuania). Methodological Aspects of Biomass Assessment.
Lithuanian Forest Research Institute. The largest problem is producing the same data,
he same maps for every country (methodologies unification).
Grzegorz Kunikowski raised the issue of sustainability, which is very important to deal
with. Peter Piorr declared that this is not discussed under this project as sustainability is
the background of any project. We can give only some small examples of sustainability.
4. Vanda Buivydaite (Lithuania). LUA. Existing statistical and geographical soil
data in Lithuania in the context of EU countries.
Piorr – is it possible to find some link between available soil data and productivity of
soils. Buivydaite – yes, we have. Land evaluation is based on productivity of soils –
based on 100 points system.
Piorr – Germany has soil productivity number. Lithuania has also. There is soil
classification system, conversion is more difficult. There is also conversion for forest
sites.
Saladis – it is difficult to explain productivity number of soil. It is more important to
define productivity of biomass – link between productivity of soil and biomass
production. Buivydaite - this can be done from experimental data on using fertilizers.
5. Juris Grinevics (Latvia)
Not quite clear what kind of GIS product is to be produced? It is only clear to have map
set of various products. How conversion to MW, MWh is to be performed? Latvia has no
soils map of required range.
Laufer – first agriculture maps for different crops, then energy conversion. Then we have
potential for biomass, straw, grain, biogas, etc. Every country may use their numbers
used in each country, there is no standards for all countries. There are also moisture
content figures for grain, other products. Every county may use their own numbers, but
must describe them in the methodology.
Bilke – for wood you must have dry tons. Or you must define moisture content.
Juris – what potential, current or future?
Laufer, Piorr – these will be the next steps. We will have to discuss scenarios – you need
some food, there are also other needs, and then decide, hat can be used for energy.
Methodologies must be not complicated. You must define dry matter content for cereals
(in statistics).
Kunikowski – In some states biomass potential in the field is not clear, just map is not
enough, we need some comments.
Laufer – we don’t need statistical data for …
6. Juris Zarins (Latvia). Short summary on existing statistical and geographic
databases. Maps from forests statistics CD information (total biomass). Biomass
information collection. Review of approaches. Introduction of planned activities/
problems.
Piorr – what is compartment? 0.1 Ha.
Lynikas – Is Tukums county covered all? Forest inventor is not mandatory, but 90% is
inventorised in Tukums. Saladis – how old data? Revised every year by model.
(Piorr) Do they use land cover. Not needed earlier. (Lynikas) Forest inventory in
Lithuania has all data.
(Bilke) what is the lowest scale for modeling? 10 000. Data for each compartment.
Compartment data is needed for calculating economic effect.
7. Heikki Parikka (Finland) – Bioenergy GIS data for Spatial planning in North
Karelia.
Piorr – where is data from? Some from statistics, which comes from farmers, who receive
subsidies.
Piorr you have more data that forest owners. Do owners have this info? This data must be
bought from research institute.
Piorr - Are owners willing to sale biomass? Yes, they are compensated the same amount
they lose in this activity.
8. Peeter Muiste (Estonia) Biomass modeling in Estonia. Existing data bases. GIS
information in spatial planning. Planned case studies.
Piorr – Are you going to investigate social effect? Economic effect for the region is
important, employment, etc. This must be taken into account. Unemployment in some
regions of Estonia is important.
Piorr – it is very complicated to make such investigations. Do you have idea, how to
make it simple? Other specialists will do it not in this project.
Saladis – Is “green management” used in Estonia. No, only in some cases
Saladis - What are your contacts with local planners, have you working groups? Up till
now this was not common to discuss.
9. Grzegorz Kunikowski (Poland) Spatial data in Poland. GIS based methods for
biomass modeling at regional level.
Available data, approaches.
Piorr – What land use info do you have? Agriculture, standard, Corine land cover.
How do you estimate future price levels? How this model will be simple enough? Model
is simple. Future prices are analyzed in scenarios. We analyze future situations with
certain se of indicators and come with hypothetical solutions. Risk I on investors side.
Finns earn money on such information. But they can’t live from it.
10. Martas Lynikas, FMI (Lithuania) GIS technology in forest standwise mapping
inventory and mapping.
Piorr – how to gain info for private forests? Thematic maps are for all forests, but
management maps are just for state forests and for those ho order it.
Piorr –you can’t calculate uncertainties in the market. You can develop scenarios. Are
there any other scenarios?
Grzegorz Kunikowski –Support for green electricity, simulation of support for energy.
Saladis – E.g. climate changes in Lithuania, dying of oak-trees.
Vrubliauskas – Hurricane for BBN project is too complicated. We need to investigate
usual evolution.
Bilke – I agree it is not under BBN projects. Discussions on the market issues. Biomass
for energy is regional market, not international.
11. Severine Laufer (Germany). GIS based methods for biomass modeling at
regional level in Baltic countries (agriculture).
12. Bernod Bilke (Germany) Wood fuel potential in Brandenburg
You can activate appr. 20-25% of available resources.
13. Peter Piorr (Germany) BBN concept - summary.
Sustainability, GIS tools, planning, biomass production.
Approach of he UASE Bioenergy group for the assessment of agricultural Biomass for
Biofuels. Criteria are necessary for evaluation of biomass potential.
Saladis – I scheme useful for forest data. They try to bring together the philosophies of
both.
Bilke – both talking about and MWh.
Saladis – this approach for Germany. Political decision means state support tools, etc.
Situation is different in CEE countries.
Vrubliauskas – Political background is more or less the same.
Piorr – political decision is made by politicians. They decide a lot.
Grzegorz Kunikowski – economical frame is formed on political decisions.
Piorr – nice examples
Saladis – discuss thing, that are important for both: forests and agriculture. We don’t have
common platform.
Grzegorz Kunikowski - there must be two separate things – research and technologies.
Saladis – 2 scenarios – usual practice for 10 years and pessimistic scenario.
Lynikas – I think that 2 different approaches must be used, data is different, methods are
different.
Piorr – let’s take today average potential and estimate it for 10 years, the second step –
2005 – 2025.
Piorr - Next few weeks we need to estimate the potential.
May 19, 2006
8:00 – 11:00
Lithuanian University of Agriculture
Piorr – repeat the next steps and milestones.
- Enhancement of data banks.
- Prepare decision tools for local operational and regional biomass resource management
- Exchange technical parameters for modeling between partners
- Workshop in Kaunas;
(i) exchange local modeling methods;
(ii) validate your modeling methods;
(iii) harmonize your modeling methods;
(iv) publish a workshop compendium.
Vrubliauskas – maybe it can be international workshop handbook?
Piorr – I think this will not be enough. We need some kind of links between partners. We
can keep it simple, but we must perform comparison, we have to prepare table of
definition.
How much resources we can derive?
How much straw we can use for energy biomass?
What are water content standards?
Grzegorz Kunikowski – it woud be a good idea to prepare a draft and distribute it to
everybody.
Piorr:
- compare the regions and
- prepare technical parameters
- framework
There must be one responsible partner for each region:
- Stephen Dahle
- Severine Laufer;
- Gintautas Mozgeris;
…
Till June
1. List with all working steps
2. Technical parameters
– forests
– agriculture
3. Spatial level
spatial solution
areas considered (protected areas)
4. Further impacts
environment
economy
social
Modelling biomass for energy
1. Discribe the actual situation of biomass potentials for
(i)
forest biomass
(ii)
agriculture biomass
on the level of municipalities in your investigaton ara
Forest biomass means. (other section)
Agriculture biomass
What is agriculture biomass? We start with actual situation, what we grow now.
1. Status quo: Description of actual situation – statistical data.
We can use our model and our statistical data. We can produce calculating agriculture
biomass.
The farmer is free to sell his product to any sector – energy, food, etc.
We must estimate energy potential outside – how much energy we are producing, how
much energy can be used for energy purposes for all growing energy crops.
2. Energy crops rotation
What crops, yields, with dry matter content;
Cereal corn … 86%
Potatoes…
Maize silage…
Maize corn…
…
Yields of straw from cereals. You can either burn it or process to biomass fuel.
Straw for each type of cereals
50% of straw an be used for energy purposes?. (basic scenario to gain the impression on
the potential). In organic farms we can burn < 20% of straw.
Modeling scenarios for different share of straw that can be used for fuel.
To produce tables, Figures, maps for to illustrate pure biomass potential.
Which amounts for: scenarios
I, %
II
Food;
50
35
Fodder;
25
15
Bioenergy.
25
50
III
25
10
65
Calculate the energy content of the whole biomass if 25% f all produce would be
available (basic scenarios) for all other agriculture biomass. 25% will gain the
impression of the potential.
Energy content:
1. Table! How to calculate energy content of every crop.
Energy content for raw biomass using absolute dry matter.
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
calculate the potential rape oil production
calculate the potential bio-adhered production from cereal corn
calculate the potential straw
3. Produce Tables, Maps, Figures.
1. Raw material
Dry matter
2. Production chains
a) grain of wheat
barley
rye
oats…
b) straw of …
c) oil of rape …
3. Scenarios
Energy crop rotations for:
a) grain → bioethanol
b) straw → bioethanol
c) rape → biodiesel
Energy crop rotations for:
d) grain →
e) straw →
f) rape →
biofuel
biogas
Modeling may be just bringing together answers to all above issues.
Later steps ma be modeling on the basis of soil quality and impact to yields.
BBN model
t/ha
↑
------------------------------------------→
2005
Statistic based
-------------------------
Model based