Exploring the binding properties of DNA/BSA and cytotoxicity studies with new terpyridine-ester-based metal complexes (M = Fe(III), Ni(II), Cu(II) and Ru(III)) - A comparative analysis.

agronomy Opinion Determining the Benefits of Biomass: Who Wins, and Who Loses? Daniel Taylor * , Joanna Sparks, Katie Chong and Mirjam Röder Energy and Bioproducts Research Institute, Aston University, Birmingham B4 7ET, UK * Correspondence: 210139279@aston.ac.uk Abstract: Beyond the technical challenge of using biomass to achieve net zero, non-technical factors also impact the likelihood of biomass succeeding in displacing fossil fuel use, such as social, environmental, and economic challenges. The political bioeconomy in the United Kingdom (UK) has supported a small but significant role for biomass within the country’s energy mix, with policy determining who benefits, and who will continue to benefit, from its use. The revised UK Biomass Strategy of 2023 signalled how the government perceives biomass looking forward, and the commitment to a cross-sectoral sustainability framework has the potential to support a redistributive policy that creates new winners in the UK biomass sector. Maximising the redistributive effects of policy is hindered by the siloed nature of policymaking around biomass and undermined by a lack of social legitimacy, both of which must be addressed to enable biomass to contribute towards decoupling the UK’s economy from fossil fuels and to ensure a sustainable transition. Keywords: biomass; bioenergy; policy; net zero; sustainability; bioeconomy; political economy 1. Introduction Citation: Taylor, D.; Sparks, J.; Chong, K.; Röder, M. Determining the Benefits of Biomass: Who Wins, and Who Loses? Agronomy 2024, 14, 2350. https://doi.org/10.3390/ agronomy14102350 Academic Editors: Alessandro Suardi and Ralf Pude Received: 4 September 2024 Revised: 24 September 2024 Accepted: 9 October 2024 Published: 11 October 2024 Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). Biomass plays a small but significant role in the United Kingdom’s energy mix, contributing ~12% of total electricity production, representing ~50% of the total renewable electricity produced. This is primarily made up of production from the combustion of wood pellets at the UK’s largest power plant, Drax. Beyond that, several policy incentives aimed at stimulating markets for various forms of bioenergy, such as the Renewable Heat Incentive, the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation, and the Renewables Obligation, have encouraged bioenergy deployment in the UK. This has created winners, such as those generators who have capitalised on the generous subsidies provided under these schemes and phased out their coal usage to convert their plants to run on biomass. However, with schemes ending and no clear subsidised future in sight, who will continue to benefit from biomass in the UK as we look to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050? 2. UK Biomass Policy Challenges The UK released its revised Biomass Strategy in the summer of 2023 [1], signalling the direction in which UK biomass is headed, determining how the government perceives biomass going forward, and how it will be utilised to serve a variety of agendas including energy security, job creation, sustainability, and net zero. Within the new strategy, there is a great emphasis placed on biomass sustainability, including a commitment to a cross-sectoral framework for sustainability, focusing on the limited use of this sustainable biomass supply in “harder-to-decarbonise” sectors such as aviation and shipping. It acknowledges the wide variety of biomass feedstocks and applications available, remaining technology-agnostic, but recognises the growing importance of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) to generate negative emissions. But beyond the technical challenge of utilising a variety of biomass feedstocks, from residual agricultural, process, or forestry materials to purpose grown crops, the success of Agronomy 2024, 14, 2350. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14102350 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/agronomy these feedstocks in displacing fossil fuel use is heavily reliant on support from our political and economic structures. The literature on the success of renewable energy transitions demonstrates that non-technical factors, such as the existence of a social contract between Agronomy 2024, 14, 2350 and the people to provide energy to the nation, have a significant impact a government 2 of 7 on the success of the renewable energy technology displacing fossil fuel use within society [2] (see Figure 1). This is because the transition to renewable energy is a process of envithese feedstocks in displacing fossil fuel use is heavily reliant on support from our political ronmental, social, andand economic well as a technical one.ofThis is more significant economic change, structures.as The literature on the success renewable energy transitions demonstrates that non-technical factors,ofsuch as the existence a socialand contract between for biomass compared to other renewable sources energy, such asofsolar wind, as ita government and the people to provide energy to the nation, have a significant impact on the involves the interaction with, and extraction of, biomass from the natural environment. success of the renewable energy technology displacing fossil fuel use within society [2] (see Therefore, the politics and1).economics ofthe biomass, termed the “political bioeFigure This is because transition sometimes to renewable energy is a process of environmental, and economic change, as well as environmental, a technical one. This and is more significant for biomass conomy”, govern thesocial, interactions between social, economic systems compared to other renewable sources of energy, such as solar and wind, as it involves the linked to biomass extraction and will determine where wealth and inequality are generinteraction with, and extraction of, biomass from the natural environment. Therefore, the ated within biomass politics supply-chains, where value is applied to the or “political extracted from thegovern bioand economics of biomass, sometimes termed bioeconomy”, the interactions between social,considering environmental,the andUK’s economic systemsaslinked to biomass mass, and who benefits. This is crucial when context, the Biomass extraction and will determine where wealth and inequality are generated within biomass Strategy signals a new direction of travel, and any new policy as a result will generate supply-chains, where value is applied to or extracted from the biomass, and who benefits. trade-offs within theThis UK’s biomass If new policy is aimed at improving UK abiois crucial whensector. considering the UK’s context, as the Biomass Strategy signals new direction travel, and new policy as alosers result will generate within the mass sustainability, this willofcreate newany winners and who will trade-offs be motivated to UK’s ensector. Ifas new policytrade-offs is aimed at improving biomass sustainability, this will gage in policy designbiomass differently, these have theUK potential to change where create new winners and losers who will be motivated to engage in policy design differently, the benefits of biomass use are currently accrued biomass sector andof to whom as these trade-offs have the potentialin tothe change where the benefits biomass usethe are currently accrued in the biomass sector and to whom the profits are going. profits are going. Figure 1. Interactions between policy, industry, and society, governed by legislation, markets, and a Figure 1. Interactions between policy, industry, and society, governed by legislation, markets, and social contract, contextualising the non-technical factors impacting policymaking. a social contract, contextualising the non-technical factors impacting policymaking. In the same way that biomass has a small but significant role to play in the UK’s future energy system, muchbut of the policy that has spurred on thein deployment In the same way thatnet-zero biomass has a small significant role to play the UK’sof bioenergy in the UK has not been biomass-focused; it is just that the policy incentives infuture net-zero energy system, much policy thattheir hascriteria. spurred onwere the aimed deployment of cluded different formsof of the bioenergy within Policies at stimulating development a broad range of renewable energy technologies, suchincentives as wind and bioenergy in the UKthe has not beenofbiomass-focused; it is just that the policy solar, including various forms of bioenergy such as biofuels, biomass heating systems, and included different forms of bioenergy within their criteria. Policies were aimed at stimubioelectricity. The difficulty with engaging in biomass policymaking is the siloed nature lating the development of a broad range of renewable energy technologies, such as wind and solar, including various forms of bioenergy such as biofuels, biomass heating systems, and bioelectricity. The difficulty with engaging in biomass policymaking is the siloed nature of the different policy remits held across various government departments. Whilst Agronomy 2024, 14, 2350 3 of 7 of the different policy remits held across various government departments. Whilst the Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (Defra) is responsible for agricultural and forestry policy, biomass feedstocks from those sectors are required by the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) (formerly the Department for Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy), whose remit covers energy policy, and the Department for Transport (DfT) who are seeking the supply of biomass for biofuels. Therefore, when engaging with policymakers on biomass, it is unhelpful to consider them as simply ‘policymakers’; they are not a homogenous group. Whilst each department takes its cues from overarching government policy, they all have their own agendas, objectives, and perspectives, and the actions of one department will have implications for the others. Each wants to draw benefit from utilising the limited supply of biomass resources available to the UK for their advantage, without much consideration for their counterparts in other departments. A cross-sectoral framework on sustainability could facilitate an increased focus on the crossdepartmental impacts of biomass policy changes, but trade-offs will still occur between conflicting department objectives, depending on the overarching government policy of the time. In addition to variation between different government departments and their intentions for biomass in the UK, there is also variation across different bio-based sectors. This is particularly noticeable in the way that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and sustainability standards are measured, both of which are the primary focus of policy relating to biomass feedstocks. Established sectors, such as the energy and transport sectors, have differing sustainability standards with regard to the sourcing of biomass for producing energy and fuel, whilst both have a strong emphasis on achieving GHG emission reductions (see Figure 2). Beyond GHG emissions and sustainability standards, policies often include environmental factors such as ecosystem services and biodiversity, but they are not quantified under an accounting framework. Reflecting the siloed nature of government policy design around biomass, whereby different departments are seeking to utilise the same biomass resource to achieve differing outcomes (such as decarbonising energy, decarbonising transport, generating agricultural growth, or developing carbon removals), different bio-based sectors also lack a consideration of cross-sectoral impacts. This impacts not only the sourcing and use of biomass feedstocks but the potential for creating co-benefits and coproducts too [3]. Given the disparate nature of both the development of policy on biomass and the bio-based sectors working to utilise biomass feedstocks, the commitment in the revised UK Biomass Strategy to a cross-sectoral framework on sustainability is welcome. This cross-sectoral framework is an opportunity to go beyond the linear utilisation of biomass that the UK currently practises, funnelling imported biomass into large-scale facilities to produce renewable electricity and move to a more circular model with consideration for cross-sectoral feedback loops. It is clear from the UK Government’s “Public Dialogue on the role of biomass in achieving net zero” that the public are concerned that the revised Biomass Strategy could be “dominated by the profit motives” of the large incumbent energy companies [4]. Therefore, for this sustainability framework to mobilise legitimacy within the eyes of the public, it must consider engagement with local communities (such as further public dialogue exercises, clearer communication strategies, or collaboration with academia) across the UK to ensure the bioeconomy is integrated into society at large, by distributing and communicating benefits more widely. Agronomy 2024, 14,14, x FOR Agronomy 2024, 2350PEER REVIEW 4 of 7 4 of 7 Figure 2. A matrix of criteria in different sector policies applicable to biomass. Darker shading indicates the criteria are in accounted lighter shading indicatestothat the criteria are shading considered Figure 2. Athat matrix of criteria differentfor, sector policies applicable biomass. Darker indicates the criteria are accounted for,lightest lighter shading shading indicates indicatesthat thatthe thecriteria criteriaare arenot considered but that not directly accounted for, and the applicablebut not directly accounted for, from and the lightestetshading that the criteria are not applicable within the policy. Adapted Cucuzzella al. (2020)indicates [3]. within the policy. Adapted from Cucuzzella et al. (2020) [3]. 3. Biomass Systems Supporting Sustainability and Society Who will benefit, and how, will be determined how policy navigates competing 3. Biomass Systems Supporting Sustainability andby Society interests it decides whichwill sustainability criteria be focused on. The import Who and willhow benefit, and how, be determined byshould how policy navigates competing of biomass into the UK for renewable electricity production has enabled the energy system interests and how it decides which sustainability criteria should be focused on. The import to move away from a reliance on coal, thus fulfilling the focus on GHG reductions but of biomass into the UK for renewable electricity production has enabled the energy system raising questions about other sustainability factors, such as air quality. Given the diversity toofmove away from a reliance on coal, thus fulfilling the focus on GHG reductions but biomass feedstocks and applications, there are a variety of factors involved when deterraising questions about other factors, suchthe asinterlinkages air quality. Given thenatural, diversity mining the sustainability of a sustainability given system, considering between ofsocial, biomass and applications, aretogether. a variety factors involved when deandfeedstocks economic systems that biomassthere brings Forofexample, different applicatermining the sustainability a given considering thehave interlinkages between nattions of biomass to displaceof fossil fuel system, use within society will varied consequences ural, social,and andeconomic economic systems that brings together. For example, different for social systems, such asbiomass employment opportunities, infrastructure, and applications biomassthere to displace fossil use withinfor society will havesystems varied conseinnovation. of However, will likely be fuel consequences environmental too, quences for social and economic systems, such as employment opportunities, infrastructure, and innovation. However, there will likely be consequences for environmental systems too, such as biodiversity, water, and land use if this requires the cultivation of Agronomy 2024, 14, 2350 quently crop up [5]. It is these trade-offs that policymakers will have to tackle if aiming to maximise sustainability benefits in support of public policy agendas, such as net zero (see Figure 3). The beneficiaries of utilising biomass to achieve net zero will also be determined by 5 of 7 system design, incentivised by different policy mechanisms. Within each system, not only is there a diverse set of factors involved, but there is also a diverse set of stakeholders. Therefore, system toland deliver in anthe efficient way,ofor the highest level such asoptimising biodiversity,awater, and use ifenergy this requires cultivation different biomass feedstocks. These interlinkages are unavoidable given the nature of biomass extraction[6]. of carbon captured, will lock in different costs and outcomes for different stakeholders from our natural systems. Achieving a particular policy objective by incentivising bioenergy systems to maximise Despite that theregoal being arguments for bioenergy beyond a primary focus outputs towards creates trade-offs, winners,projects and losers. Understanding howonand emission reduction, such as benefits for soil health and improved energy access, there are why these decisions are made, and who is involved in making them, will highlight inealso risks associated with carbon stocks and the technoeconomics of projects that frequently quality in the design of policy around biomass and where this undermines sustainability crop up [5]. It is these trade-offs that policymakers will have to tackle if aiming to maximise efforts. sustainability benefits in support of public policy agendas, such as net zero (see Figure 3). Figure 3. Situating biomass sustainability trade-offs from Welfle et al. (2023) [5] within the interactions Figure 3. Situating biomass sustainability trade-offs from Welfle et al. (2023) [5] within the interacbetween policy, industry, and society, in the context of how the relationships are governed by markets, tions between policy, industry, and society, in the context of how the relationships are governed by legislation, and a social contract. markets, legislation, and a social contract. The beneficiaries of utilising biomass to achieve net zero will also be determined 4. Conclusions by system design, incentivised by different policy mechanisms. Within each system, not only is there a diverse of factors involved, but there is also a diverse of stakeholdUtilising biomass to set decouple economies from fossil fuels has thesetpotential to put ers. Therefore, optimising a system to deliver energy in an efficient way, or the highest into practice alternative forms of economics, with redistributive qualities, that both tackle level of carbon captured, will lock in different costs and outcomes for different stakeinequality and mobilise a wider set of actors to support transitions away from fossil fuels. holders [6]. Achieving a particular policy objective by incentivising bioenergy systems to However, increasing the number of beneficiaries through policy change introduces a level maximise outputs towards that goal creates trade-offs, winners, and losers. Understandof complexity thatwhy is not present when with the of single-asset, large-scale ing how and these decisions are dealing made, and who is kind involved in making them, will highlight inequality in the design of policy around biomass and where this undermines sustainability efforts. 4. Conclusions Utilising biomass to decouple economies from fossil fuels has the potential to put into practice alternative forms of economics, with redistributive qualities, that both tackle Agronomy 2024, 14, 2350 6 of 7 inequality and mobilise a wider set of actors to support transitions away from fossil fuels. However, increasing the number of beneficiaries through policy change introduces a level of complexity that is not present when dealing with the kind of single-asset, large-scale projects that are favoured by policymakers in the UK. This complexity presents a challenge to siloed policymaking in the UK, which is not set up to address or consider the crosssectoral impacts of policy changes and lacks a joined-up approach. The diversity of actors involved is further complicated by a diversity of factors too, particularly the challenge of balancing biomass sustainability trade-offs in the pursuit of net zero. Biomass supply-chains, from feedstock to fuel for energy or fibre for bio-based industries, involve many different actors who are set to win or lose, if policy aims to adjust certain aspects of the system to achieve net zero. Feedstock producers, such as those from the agricultural or forestry sectors, are likely to be impacted differently from energy and bioproduct producers, who benefit from the conversion of biomass to valuable vectors. Beyond the technical challenge of optimising biomass systems and supply-chains to achieve goals such as carbon reductions or removals, energy access, or bioproduct creation, there are social, environmental, and economic challenges to overcome too. To determine who benefits from the continued utilisation of biomass to achieve net zero requires an understanding of the UK’s political bioeconomy, warranting further study into where the inequalities lie within UK biomass systems. These inequalities will illuminate where policy mechanisms will impact future biomass deployment and who sets to benefit from such deployment. This will enable the assessment of sustainability implications and trade-offs across the environmental, social, and economic factors impacting biomass use in the UK and will contribute to understanding the impact of policy on industry and society in relation to markets and the social contract for energy provision. This is timely, given the revised UK Biomass Strategy’s commitment to a new, cross-sectoral framework on sustainability and the challenges facing the social legitimacy of continued biomass use in the UK. Author Contributions: Conceptualisation, J.S., D.T. and M.R.; writing—review and editing, K.C., D.T. and M.R.; supervision, K.C. and M.R.; visualisation; D.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research is funded by a studentship from the College of Engineering and Physical Sciences at Aston University, under the EPSRC/BBSRC Supergen Bioenergy Hub (EP/S000771/1) and EPSRC/BBSRC Supergen Bioenergy Impact Hub (EP/Y016300/1). Data Availability Statement: No new data were created or analysed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article. Acknowledgments: This research is part of Dan Taylor’s PhD research at the Energy and Bioproducts Research Institute (EBRI), based at Aston University, and funded through the College of Engineering and Physical Sciences as part of the EPSRC/BBSRC Supergen Bioenergy Hub. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest. References 1. 2. 3. 4. Department for Energy Security and Net Zero. Biomass Strategy. 2023. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov. uk/media/64dc8d3960d123000d32c602/biomass-strategy-2023.pdf (accessed on 22 August 2024). Taylor, D.; Chong, K.; Röder, M. Designing biomass policy: The political economy of renewable energy for net zero. WIREs Energy Environ. 2024, 13, e512. [CrossRef] Cucuzzella, C.; Welfle, A.; Röder, M.; Harmonising GHG and Sustainability Criteria for Low Carbon Transport Fuels, Bioenergy, and Other Bio-Based Sectors. Supergen Bioenergy Hub Report No. 04/2020. 2020. Available online: https://www.supergenbioenergy.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Harmonising-sustainability-standards-report.pdf (accessed on 22 August 2024). Department for Energy Security and Net Zero. A Public Dialogue on the Role of Biomass in Achieving Net Zero. 2023. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/64d4b4d7667f340014549d33/public-dialogue-on-role-biomassin-achieving-net-zero-sciencewise-report.pdf (accessed on 22 August 2024). Agronomy 2024, 14, 2350 5. 6. 7 of 7 Welfle, A.J.; Almena, A.; Arshad, M.N.; Banks, S.W.; Butnar, I.; Chong, K.J.; Cooper, S.G.; Daly, H.; Freites, S.G.; Güleç, F.; et al. Sustainability of bioenergy—Mapping the risks & benefits to inform future bioenergy systems. Biomass Bioenergy 2023, 177, 106919. [CrossRef] Almena, A.; Thornley, P.; Chong, K.; Röder, M. Carbon dioxide removal potential from decentralised bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and the relevance of operational choices. Biomass Bioenergy 2022, 159, 106406. [CrossRef] Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.