Innovation and technology in agriculture and alternative foods
Without sustainable agricultural innovation, such as the use of artificial intelligence, the world faces persistent food insecurity and degraded resources.
Biomass can be used to produce bioenergy in the form of electricity, heat, biogas or transport fuels, or to produce materials and chemicals. The Climate Change Committee recommend dedicated energy crops and forest residues as future sources of domestic biomass. This POSTnote summarises the opportunities and challenges surrounding the expansion of UK biomass production.
Biomass for UK energy (596 KB , PDF)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.58248/PN690
Bioenergy is currently the second largest source of renewable energy in the UK, generating 12.9% of the total UK electricity supply in 2021. When combined with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), bioenergy may deliver negative emissions (PN 618), which could contribute towards the UK’s legal commitment to reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050. Demand for biomass is expected to rise in the UK and globally to supply BECCS, transport fuels, and other materials and chemicals. The CCC recommends prioritising the most effective biomass end-uses for carbon sequestration. The UK Government is developing a ‘priority use framework’ that follows this principle and aims to ensure that biomass is targeted towards use in sectors where options for decarbonisation are limited. This framework will be explored further in the UK Government’s upcoming Biomass Strategy.
Alongside the use of forest residues, perennial energy crops have been identified as a future source of domestic biomass as they are fast-growing and energy dense. When planted in the right context, perennial energy crops may also provide positive environmental impacts alongside social and economic co-benefits. The expansion of domestic biomass production faces social, economic and technical challenges. Robust and transparent sustainability and land-use policy frameworks will be required in addition to targeted support schemes across multiple sectors to address these.
Key Points
Acknowledgements
POSTnotes are based on literature reviews and interviews with a range of stakeholders and are externally peer reviewed. POST would like to thank interviewees and peer reviewers for kindly giving up their time during the preparation of this briefing, including:
Members of the POST Board*
Dr Judith Ford, University of Leeds
Dr Geoff Hogan, Forest Research
Dr Jeremy Woods, Imperial College London
William Brandreth, Imperial College London
Ryan O’Shea, Imperial College London
Dr Madeleine Bussemaker, University of Surrey
Prof Gail Taylor, University of California, Davis & University of Southampton
Dr Caspar Donnison, University of California, Davis & University of Southampton*
Dr Alastair Leake, Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust
Dr Rufus Sage, Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust
Dr Charlotte Weaver, University of Leeds
Dr Michael Norton, EASAC*
Dr Robert Holland, University of Southampton*
Dr Gemma Delafield, University of Exeter*
Kevin Lindegaard, Crops for Energy Ltd
Prof Iain Donnison, Aberystwyth University
Dr Muhammad Naveed Arshad, Aberystwyth University
Dr Naomi Vaughan, University of East Anglia*
Dr Julia Tomei, University College London
Oliver Broad, University College London
Dr Isabela Butnar, University College London
Representatives from DraxGroup PLC*
Dr Michael Squance, Terravesta
Dr Andrew Welfle, University of Manchester
Almuth Ernsting, Biofuelwatch
Dr Daniel Quiggin, Chatham House
Dr David Joffe, CCC
Dr Jeanette Whitaker, UK CEH*
Dr Rebecca Rowe, UK CEH*
*denotes individuals and organisations that acted as external reviews for this briefing.
Biomass for UK energy (596 KB , PDF)
Without sustainable agricultural innovation, such as the use of artificial intelligence, the world faces persistent food insecurity and degraded resources.
How can a land use framework best address food security, climate mitigation and adaptation, and nature recovery challenges within England’s finite land area.
This POSTnote examines the relationship between debt and mental health, alongside risk factors and policy considerations for support and interventions.