Parratt & Associates Scoping Biorefineries: Temperate Biomass Value Chains

1.4 Aims and objectives of the report

1. 
   Identify and provide analysis of exemplar process and biorefinery technologies that could be relevant or adopted for Australian temperate biomass sources;
   
2. 
   Consultation with key stakeholders on issues such as;
   
   1. 
      2.1 environmental resource management;
      
   2. 
      2.2 regulatory and policy frameworks;
      
   3. 
      2.3 research funding;
      
   4. 
      2.4 commercialisation and industry engagement;
      
   5. 
      2.5 IP management;
      
   6. 
      2.6 coordination and collaboration across the energy, chemical, manufacturing, biotechnology and biomass production sectors;
      
   7. 
      2.7 work skills and employment; and
      
   8. 
      2.8 access to international technology and best practice.
      
3. 
   Identify and assess the key barriers relating to the development of value chains, including biorefineries based on temperate biomass in Australia;
   
4. 
   Provide an indication of the size of the potential domestic and international markets for products from the temperate biomass-based value chain;
   
5. 
   Undertake an initial analysis of the current skills and capabilities to support temperate biomass value chains;
   
6. 
   Provide an indication of the scale of production necessary to create sustainable value chains;
   
7. 
   Identify relevant issues requiring attention, in terms of capital investment, policy or regulation;
   
8. 
   Provide a range of potential costs and benefits of establishing value chains and biorefineries to produce products with viable markets.
   
9. 
   Examine synergies and potential linkages between development of the use of biomass sources, biorefinery and other biobased and chemical technologies relevant to the Australian and global context, including appropriate regional case studies;
   
10. 
    Identify other issues raised by stakeholders recommended for further attention;
    
11. 
    Provide recommendations on mechanisms to encourage increased collaboration and linkages between biomass industry research providers, partners from manufacturing industries, government(s) and the community.
    

1.5 Methods used

This report is based on reviews of the literature and analysis by a team of authors from the Commonwealth Scientific Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) and private consultancies. We reviewed literature on;

• 
  global drivers for establishing the bioeconomy and green manufacturing;
  
• 
  temperate Biomass availability, costs, location, transport and type;
  
• 
  current and proposed biorefineries internationally;
  
• 
  bioproduct markets and quantities; and
  
• 
  policy and legislative framework that may impact the development of sustainable biomass value chains.
  

Discussions and interviews were held with a broad range of government agencies and officers, industry stakeholders and researchers to validate information and to seek feedback and comments on all aspects of the stated aims and objectives.

Chapter 2. The National and International context for Biomass Value Chains and Biorefineries

2.1 Context setting

The world is currently faced with a range of challenges of increasing complexity. These challenges are growing, due to our increased understanding and an appreciation of the interrelatedness of bio-systems but also the effects of our actions and inactions grow. In order to make a decisive break with this vicious and complex circle of demands and consequences, new ways of thinking and doing are required.¹

In January 2010 the World Economic Forum (WEF)² identified 36 global risks in four categories – geopolitical, environmental, societal and technological – highlighting the increasing risk of systemic failures of complex systems.

One of these critical risks is underinvestment in infrastructure. The term ‘infrastructure’ has a broader meaning within the WEF than elsewhere, as it encompasses risks associated with;

• 
  energy security;
  
• 
  agriculture – the infrastructure necessary for food security and sustainable growth; and
  
• 
  adaptation to climate change.
  

In March 2010, CSIRO released its analysis of global trends, shocks and scenarios³. This analysis identified five interrelated megatrends and eight risks particularly important to Australian science and technology. The five megatrends identified were;

• 
  more from less – a world of limited resources;
  
• 
  a personal touch – personalization of products and services;
  
• 
  on the move – urbanization and increased mobility;
  
• 
  divergent demographics – an older, hungry and more demanding population; and
  
• 
  iWorld – digital and natural convergence.
  

Associated with these megatrends are eight ‘shocks’, four of which are directly relevant to this study;

• 
  asset price collapse;
  
• 
  oil and gas price spikes;
  
• 
  extreme climate change related weather; and
  
• 
  biodiversity loss.
  

Each of these shocks, and nearly all of the megatrends, will have a bearing on the development of policy for replacement of non-renewable resources and hence the development of biorefineries. .

The OECD recently released its interim report on green growth strategies⁴. The two main factors underpinning the demand and rationale for green growth are as follows;

• 
  growing concerns about the environmental sustainability of current economic growth patterns, especially the risk of irreversibly altering the climate. The increased public awareness of a potential future climate crisis has made it clear that the environment and the economy can no longer be considered in isolation from one another; and
  
• 
  the financial crisis and the associated government stimulus packages create room for public policies aimed at encouraging recovery and renewed growth on more environmentally and socially sustainable grounds.
  

In part, as a response to these challenges the Australian Government has directed A$5.6B toward clean energy targets in Australia. In OECD terms, this places Australia 6 behind the USA, China, Japan, South Korea, Spain and Germany in terms of stimulus packages for the energy sector^th. Most of the infrastructure investment in Australia has been directed toward stationary energy production (power via solar, geothermal, responding to environmental issues through such initiatives as Carbon Capture and Storage)⁵. The current lack of a viable renewable energy source for all forms of transportation, as well as the high carbon output of the chemical and material manufacturing industries, remain challenges to be overcome as ‘green’ economies develop.