Approaches to the Bioenergy Potential in 2050 : An assessment of bioenergy projections

There is an abundance of reports and articles on the extent of future bioenergy usage. Decision-makers might turn to bioenergy projections in hopes of making informed decisions for policies or investments. This report aims to highlight irregularities and differences regarding calculations and results in 15 global bioenergy projection studies for the year 2050, and to find underlying connections by applying a metaanalysis with a methodological focus. Statistical distributions were made for the projected global bioenergy potentials. A growth rate study based on the projected global bioenergy potentials was made and used as a simple “reality check”. Regarding Sweden and the EU, it was investigated whether decisions has been made based on estimated bioenergy potentials. The final aim was to make recommendations for bioenergy decision-makers and policy-makers. There are many statistical distributions fitting the projections for 2050. The distribution functions showed that with a 95 % confidence level, the bioenergy projections in 2050 is 151.3 EJ. The interquartile range of all studies included in this report for primary bioenergy in the year 2050 was shown to be 120-400 EJ, with minimum value of 30 EJ and maximum of 1600 EJ. A mere third of the projection values were in the vicinity of a linear or exponential trendline based on historical values. The historical annual average growth rate for bioenergy from 1971 to 2011 was found to be 1.9 percent. A higher growth rate is required to achieve the larger quantities that are projected in most studies, the most extreme rate was 7.6 percent, which is far above the average. The EU has adopted a biomass action plan partly based on bioenergy projections by the European Energy Agency in 2006. National and international energy projection reports influence Swedish politics, albeit not directly in propositions. The difference between individual reports and articles projected bioenergy level in 2050 is significant. It is recommended to read more than one. Most forecasting models and estimates will likely perform poorly numerically, so it is recommended to look for underlying factors, connected longterm trends, or behavioral consequences