Chapter 3: Bioenergy

Bioenergy from wood, peat and other biological materials is the oldest form of energy. It complements fossil fuels, electricity, wind, and solar power by increasing system flexibility and easing pressure during peak demand or low water/wind conditions. Local bioenergy and biogas production reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels and strengthen energy security, but further investment depends on profitability and local value creation.

This chapter reproduces the content of three Nordic reports: The scoping papers Knowledge transfer in the Nordic-Baltic Region for increased uptake of sustainable energy and Seminars for knowledge transfer on bioenergy in the Nordic-Baltic bioeconomy and the report Integrated Local Solutions for Bioenergy.

3.1 Bioenergy – knowledge transfer in the Nordic-Baltic Region for increased uptake of sustainable energy

Bioenergy can play a vital role for the reduction of CO₂ emissions in the Nordic-Baltic countries. The scoping paper identifies bioenergy innovations of interest for further knowledge transfer efforts within the Nordic-Baltic region and proposes potential knowledge-sharing activities.

The scoping-paper is based on a multi-method approach combining desktop research, document analysis, expert interviews, and previous Nordic studies to map bioenergy innovations and ongoing initiatives. The report finds that bioenergy plays a central role in reducing emissions from heating, electricity generation, and transport, but adoption varies across countries and sectors. Heating and transport are especially critical, given their high share of emissions. Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAFs) are identified as a major opportunity for reducing emissions in aviation, while biogas, biodiesel, and biofuels serve land and maritime transport.

The study also identifies challenges such as competition for biomass resources, uncertainties linked to EU sustainability taxonomy, supply chain vulnerabilities, and differences in biomass classifications and standards. Moreover, knowledge gaps persist across the value chain. The mapping of innovations shows a diverse landscape of projects, but limited mechanisms for regional coordination. Stakeholders highlight the need for integrated local solutions, enhanced collaboration, and better structures for knowledge exchange. These insights point to the importance of a common Nordic-Baltic approach to accelerate sustainable bioenergy development.

3.2 Seminars for knowledge transfer on bioenergy in the Nordic-Baltic bioeconomy

This report follows up on the recommendations developed in the Bioenergy scoping paper summarized above, addressing the challenge of strengthening the Nordic–Baltic bioenergy landscape through structured knowledge-sharing and stakeholder cooperation. Four digital stakeholder seminars were conducted with researchers, bioenergy organisations, practitioners, and policymakers. The seminars combined structured presentations with quantitative ranking and qualitative discussions and were used to assess the proposed policy recommendations.

The most highly prioritised measure was the identification of integrated local solutions, which participants considered essential for practical knowledge transfer. It was followed by the creation of a Nordic-Baltic cooperation platform on bioenergy, although some participants questioned the need for additional knowledge-sharing networks.

The participants raised many challenges for the different stages of the bioenergy value chain and identified potential solutions. Most challenges highlighted related to biomass availability as well as the regulatory and market conditions on national levels and within the EU. Coordination and standardization were generally encouraged across all stages of the value chain to address the identified obstacles.

The report identifies three challenges highlighted in the seminars as particularly relevant for Nordic–Baltic cooperation: Decision-making regarding whether to import or locally source biomass; increasing competition for biomass; and the lack of coherent classification systems.

3.3 Integrated local solutions for bioenergy

The objective of the report was to collect best-cases of integrated local bioenergy solutions across the Nordic-Baltic region.

The report draws on a collection of six case studies; LinkoGas (Denmark) Biogas Gotland (Sweden), Bakkafrost’s FÖRKA (Faroe Islands) Horsens Bioenergi (Denmark) Greve Biogass(Norway) and Fredericia Spildevand Energi AS (Denmark). Sources include earlier Analys Mason reports for SNS/NKJ, Nordic Energy Research material, expert consultations, team networks, and desk research. The final report synthesises the insights from these cases and organises them into common themes intended to support knowledge transfer and policymaking.

Across the collected cases, the report finds that integrated local bioenergy systems rely on predictable feedstock streams, close cooperation between farmers and industry, and diversification of outputs such as biogas, biofertilisers, and captured CO₂. Projects often face permitting challenges, community resistance, logistics costs, and financing barriers. Successful cases demonstrate strong municipal involvement, long-term contracts, anchoring in cooperative structures, and early stakeholder engagement. Diversified revenue streams make plants more resilient to market fluctuations.

3.4 Recommendations

Guided by the insights from the presented reports, the steering group has identified a few key recommendations for the Nordic Council of Ministers.

To support the development and implementation of relevant technological innovations in the bioenergy sector, enhanced knowledge and technology transfer across the Nordic countries is recommended. Through joint projects and networks, stronger collaboration between Nordic researchers, policymakers, and industry actors can be achieved.
Successful case studies of integrated local bioenergy solutions could be identified and compiled to facilitate knowledge sharing amongst relevant stakeholders such as municipalities, farmers, utilities and industry, leveraging local conditions and biomass sources.
The interest in and need for a Nordic-Baltic bioenergy platform, as well as hackathons or workshops to foster regional collaboration, could be explored. Any such initiative should be preceded by a mapping of existing bioenergy networks and initiatives in the Nordic-Baltic region to avoid duplication and instead build synergies.