IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v16y2023i10p4200-d1151292.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

External Environmental Costs of Solid Biomass Production against the Legal and Political Background in Europe

Author

Listed:
  • Ewelina Olba-Zięty

    (Department of Genetics, Plant Breeding and Bioresource Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, Centre for Bioeconomy and Renewable Energies, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-724 Olsztyn, Poland)

  • Jakub Jan Zięty

    (Department of Economic Law and Company Law, Faculty of Law and Administration, Centre for Bioeconomy and Renewable Energies, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-724 Olsztyn, Poland)

  • Mariusz Jerzy Stolarski

    (Department of Genetics, Plant Breeding and Bioresource Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, Centre for Bioeconomy and Renewable Energies, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-724 Olsztyn, Poland)

Abstract

Over the years, the generation of energy from renewable sources (RES) has gained importance because of a number of reasons. One of the most powerful arguments in favor of the development of RES is the deteriorating natural environment, and consequently worse human health, due to energy generation from fossil fuels. The extent of this impact can be determined by identifying external costs. In a circular economy, the estimation of external costs attracts much attention in both the literature and practice. The aim of this article was to review and analyze the latest literature (2018–2022) covering the external environmental costs of solid biomass production for energy purposes in the context of the political, legal and methodological debate concerning the production of energy from biomass, and to make an effort to estimate the external costs of producing energy from solid biomass grown for energy purposes. The methods used in the article were as follows: a comparative analysis of the collected references; a dogmatic analysis of the contents; a meta-analysis of results published in the literature; and an analysis of frequency occurrence and co-occurrence of the key words. The average external environmental costs of the production of biomass for energy purposes were calculated at 20.35 EUR Mg −1 d.m. with a 95% confidence range of 13.86–26.85 EUR Mg −1 d.m. (adjusted to EUR 2021). These values were estimated from the meta-analysis, which was statistically significant despite a rather small sample of studies submitted to the analysis. The European Union (EU) policy and the law passed under this policy over the past 15 years have supported and stimulated the development of renewable energy resources. The political and legal situation arising after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the energy crisis has forced decision-makers to revise the previously developed assumptions, although reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Europe and achieving climate neutrality remain important targets. It is also crucial to make Europe independent from Russian fossil fuels, for example by accelerating activities aiming to raise the production of renewable energy. In this context, the production of solid biomass for energy purposes gains importance, especially since it can be produced locally and become an important contributor to national energy security. Hence, the external costs of the production of biomass and energy from sources other than fossil fuels should be analyzed. Such analyses are significant because they show the actual costs of renewable energy production, including its profitability and competitiveness in relation to fossil fuels.

Suggested Citation

  • Ewelina Olba-Zięty & Jakub Jan Zięty & Mariusz Jerzy Stolarski, 2023. "External Environmental Costs of Solid Biomass Production against the Legal and Political Background in Europe," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-27, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:10:p:4200-:d:1151292
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/10/4200/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/10/4200/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bartolini, Andrea & Carducci, Francesco & Muñoz, Carlos Boigues & Comodi, Gabriele, 2020. "Energy storage and multi energy systems in local energy communities with high renewable energy penetration," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 595-609.
    2. Mattmann, Matteo & Logar, Ivana & Brouwer, Roy, 2016. "Wind power externalities: A meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 23-36.
    3. Aneta Bełdycka-Bórawska & Piotr Bórawski & Michał Borychowski & Rafał Wyszomierski & Marek Bartłomiej Bórawski & Tomasz Rokicki & Luiza Ochnio & Krzysztof Jankowski & Bartosz Mickiewicz & James W. Dun, 2021. "Development of Solid Biomass Production in Poland, Especially Pellet, in the Context of the World’s and the European Union’s Climate and Energy Policies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-22, June.
    4. Potrč, Sanja & Čuček, Lidija & Martin, Mariano & Kravanja, Zdravko, 2021. "Sustainable renewable energy supply networks optimization – The gradual transition to a renewable energy system within the European Union by 2050," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    5. Xueliang Yuan & Leping Chen & Xuerou Sheng & Mengyue Liu & Yue Xu & Yuzhou Tang & Qingsong Wang & Qiao Ma & Jian Zuo, 2021. "Life Cycle Cost of Electricity Production: A Comparative Study of Coal-Fired, Biomass, and Wind Power in China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-15, June.
    6. Francesca Ceglia & Elisa Marrasso & Carlo Roselli & Maurizio Sasso & Guido Coletta & Luigi Pellegrino, 2022. "Biomass-Based Renewable Energy Community: Economic Analysis of a Real Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-24, August.
    7. Daniele Menniti & Anna Pinnarelli & Nicola Sorrentino & Pasquale Vizza & Giuseppe Barone & Giovanni Brusco & Stefano Mendicino & Luca Mendicino & Gaetano Polizzi, 2022. "Enabling Technologies for Energy Communities: Some Experimental Use Cases," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-26, August.
    8. Christina Wulf & Jasmin Werker & Christopher Ball & Petra Zapp & Wilhelm Kuckshinrichs, 2019. "Review of Sustainability Assessment Approaches Based on Life Cycles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-43, October.
    9. Ewelina Olba-Zięty & Mariusz Jerzy Stolarski & Michał Krzyżaniak, 2021. "Economic Evaluation of the Production of Perennial Crops for Energy Purposes—A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-16, November.
    10. Weidema, Bo Pedersen, 2009. "Using the budget constraint to monetarise impact assessment results," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1591-1598, April.
    11. Cátia da Silva & Ana Paula Barbosa‐Póvoa & Ana Carvalho, 2022. "Towards sustainable development: Green supply chain design and planning using monetization methods," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1369-1394, May.
    12. Khan, Samiha & Murshed, Muntasir & Ozturk, Ilhan & Khudoykulov, Khurshid, 2022. "The roles of energy efficiency improvement, renewable electricity production, and financial inclusion in stimulating environmental sustainability in the Next Eleven countries," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 1164-1176.
    13. Lukas Folkens & Volker Wiedemer & Petra Schneider, 2020. "Monetary Valuation and Internalization of Externalities in German Agriculture Using the Example of Nitrate Pollution: A Case-Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-19, August.
    14. Rosalie Arendt & Till M. Bachmann & Masaharu Motoshita & Vanessa Bach & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2020. "Comparison of Different Monetization Methods in LCA: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-39, December.
    15. Zhang, Guo-Xing & Yang, Yang & Su, Bin & Nie, Yan & Duan, Hong-Bo, 2023. "Electricity production, power generation structure, and air pollution: A monthly data analysis for 279 cities in China (2015–2019)," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    16. Sikkema, Richard & Proskurina, Svetlana & Banja, Manjola & Vakkilainen, Esa, 2021. "How can solid biomass contribute to the EU’s renewable energy targets in 2020, 2030 and what are the GHG drivers and safeguards in energy- and forestry sectors?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 165(P1), pages 758-772.
    17. Vasiliki Tzelepi & Myrto Zeneli & Dimitrios-Sotirios Kourkoumpas & Emmanouil Karampinis & Antonios Gypakis & Nikos Nikolopoulos & Panagiotis Grammelis, 2020. "Biomass Availability in Europe as an Alternative Fuel for Full Conversion of Lignite Power Plants: A Critical Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-26, July.
    18. Sabrina Neugebauer & Silvia Forin & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2016. "From Life Cycle Costing to Economic Life Cycle Assessment—Introducing an Economic Impact Pathway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-23, April.
    19. Jakub Jan Zięty & Ewelina Olba-Zięty & Mariusz Jerzy Stolarski & Michał Krzykowski & Michał Krzyżaniak, 2022. "Legal Framework for the Sustainable Production of Short Rotation Coppice Biomass for Bioeconomy and Bioenergy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-19, February.
    20. Piotr F. Borowski, 2022. "Mitigating Climate Change and the Development of Green Energy versus a Return to Fossil Fuels Due to the Energy Crisis in 2022," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-16, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nikolaos Apostolopoulos & Alexandros Kakouris & Panagiotis Liargovas & Petar Borisov & Teodor Radev & Sotiris Apostolopoulos & Sofia Daskou & Eleni Ε. Anastasopoulou, 2023. "Just Transition Policies, Power Plant Workers and Green Entrepreneurs in Greece, Cyprus and Bulgaria: Can Education and Retraining Meet the Challenge?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-21, November.
    2. Kamila Słupińska & Marek Wieruszewski & Piotr Szczypa & Anna Kożuch & Krzysztof Adamowicz, 2022. "Public Perception of the Use of Woody Biomass for Energy Purposes in the Evaluation of Content and Information Management on the Internet," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-11, September.
    3. Troullaki, Katerina & Rozakis, Stelios & Kostakis, Vasilis, 2021. "Bridging barriers in sustainability research: Α review from sustainability science to life cycle sustainability assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    4. Felipe Romero-Perdomo & Miguel Ángel González-Curbelo, 2023. "Integrating Multi-Criteria Techniques in Life-Cycle Tools for the Circular Bioeconomy Transition of Agri-Food Waste Biomass: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-27, March.
    5. Benedetta Nucci & Fabio Iraldo & Maria Rosa De Giacomo, 2016. "The relevance of Life Cycle Costing in Green Public Procurement," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2016(1), pages 91-109.
    6. Stolarski, Mariusz J. & Stachowicz, Paweł & Dudziec, Paweł, 2022. "Wood pellet quality depending on dendromass species," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 498-508.
    7. Shubhra Chaudhry & Arne Surmann & Matthias Kühnbach & Frank Pierie, 2022. "Renewable Energy Communities as Modes of Collective Prosumership: A Multi-Disciplinary Assessment, Part I—Methodology," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-16, November.
    8. Sorin Daniel Vâtcă & Ștefania Gâdea & Roxana Vidican & Mignon Șandor & Vlad Stoian & Anamaria Vâtcă & Adrian Horvath & Valentina Ancuța Stoian, 2022. "Primary Growth Effect of Salix viminalis L. CV. Inger and Tordis in Controlled Conditions by Exploring Optimum Cutting Lengths and Rhizogenesis Treatments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-21, July.
    9. Ceglia, Francesca & Marrasso, Elisa & Roselli, Carlo & Sasso, Maurizio, 2023. "Energy and environmental assessment of a biomass-based renewable energy community including photovoltaic and hydroelectric systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    10. Ayşe Bayazıt Subaşı & Elçin Filiz Taş, 2023. "Single Score Environmental Performances of Roof Coverings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-15, March.
    11. Anni Orola & Anna Härri & Jarkko Levänen & Ville Uusitalo & Stig Irving Olsen, 2022. "Assessing WELBY Social Life Cycle Assessment Approach through Cobalt Mining Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-26, September.
    12. Simone Blanc & Stefano Massaglia & Filippo Brun & Cristiana Peano & Angela Mosso & Nicole Roberta Giuggioli, 2019. "Use of Bio-Based Plastics in the Fruit Supply Chain: An Integrated Approach to Assess Environmental, Economic, and Social Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-18, April.
    13. Eid Gul & Giorgio Baldinelli & Pietro Bartocci, 2022. "Energy Transition: Renewable Energy-Based Combined Heat and Power Optimization Model for Distributed Communities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-18, September.
    14. Kristina Henzler & Stephanie D. Maier & Michael Jäger & Rafael Horn, 2020. "SDG-Based Sustainability Assessment Methodology for Innovations in the Field of Urban Surfaces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-32, June.
    15. Wei Chen & Yongle Tian & Kaiming Zheng & Nana Wan, 2023. "Influences of mechanisms on investment in renewable energy storage equipment," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(11), pages 12569-12595, November.
    16. Andrade, Carlos & Selosse, Sandrine & Maïzi, Nadia, 2022. "The role of power-to-gas in the integration of variable renewables," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).
    17. Kledja Canaj & Andi Mehmeti & Julio Berbel, 2021. "The Economics of Fruit and Vegetable Production Irrigated with Reclaimed Water Incorporating the Hidden Costs of Life Cycle Environmental Impacts," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-13, September.
    18. Sekoai, Patrick T. & Chunilall, Viren & Msele, Kwanele & Buthelezi, Lindiswa & Johakimu, Jonas & Andrew, Jerome & Zungu, Manqoba & Moloantoa, Karabelo & Maningi, Nontuthuko & Habimana, Olivier & Swart, 2023. "Biowaste biorefineries in South Africa: Current status, opportunities, and research and development needs," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    19. Witold Chmielarz & Marek Zborowski, 2022. "On the Assessment of e-Banking Websites Supporting Sustainable Development Goals," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, January.
    20. Sima, Catalina Alexandra & Popescu, Claudia Laurenta & Popescu, Mihai Octavian & Roscia, Mariacristina & Seritan, George & Panait, Cornel, 2022. "Techno-economic assessment of university energy communities with on/off microgrid," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 538-553.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:10:p:4200-:d:1151292. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.