While each of the six standards is essential to SBP’s certifica-tion process, arguably the first two require the most attention from wood pellet producers as they relate to what feedstock is acceptable and the verification procedures. The Feedstock Com-pliance Standard is concerned with ensuring legal compliance; maintaining biodiversity and high conservation values; forest productivity; soil, air and water quality; labour rights and health and safety; land use rights; continuous improvement; main-taining carbon stocks; impacts of residue harvesting; and com-petition with food and subsistence uses. The Verification Stan-dard provides two methods for demonstrating compliance with compliance with its feedstock standard. The first is if a biomass producer obtains feedstock from certified forests, then SBP will accept FSC or PEFC certification as evidence. The second, for situations where FSC or PEFC certification is not available, then the biomass producer must undertake a detailed supply base evaluation of the areas from which it obtains feedstock. The sup-ply base evaluation consists of a risk assessment and verification procedures. To obtain SBP certification applicants must be audit-ed by an accredited third-party certification body. Certifications are valid for five years, provided that certified organizations pass annual surveillance audits. At the end of five years, organizations wishing to renew their SBP certification must reapply. As an organization, SBP has been diligent in trying to develop a certification program that would comply with the sustainabil-ity requirements of all EU member countries. To that end it has mostly succeeded, although at this time the Netherlands will not accept SBP’s risk assessment procedure for large forest units. One area where SBP’s members have failed is in their relationship with the organizations that they want to become SBP certified. SBP’s members have treated wood pellet producers as adversaries rath-er than as allies. Wood pellet producers have asked to participate as equal partners in developing SBP from the very beginning. Instead, SBP’s partners have maintained absolute control over the SBP and have shut pellet producers out of the governance process. They have given the appearance of acting as a buyers’ cartel exercising absolute authority over the wood pellet industry. In fairness to SBP, the members have now indicated a cautious willingness to include pellet producers as well as environmental groups in the governance of SBP. For them to repair the dam-age they have done to supplier relationships, SBP’s members will need to move a little faster than their current glacial pace. Solid biomass fuel markets have recently begun to develop rapidly in South Korea and Japan. While two countries are mo-tivated by similar concerns about sustainability and GHG reduc-tion, these issues have not evolved as quickly as in Europe and we still have time to apply the lessons learned from our European experience. Sustainably produced biofuels are less polluting and better for our atmosphere than fossil fuels. And when we add the cost of environmental damage to the cost of fossil fuels, we can ar-gue that biofuels are cheaper too. So, for the continued growth and survival of biofuels, it is essential for all participants to demonstrate that they are producing sustainability. Sustainability certification will continue to provide a vital role. • FUEL | AIR | GAS | ASH www.processbarron.com | 205-663-5330 | 2770 Welborn Street Pelham, AL 35124 CBM_ProcessBarron_JulyAug16_CSA.indd 1 Canadian BIOMASS 2016-07-25 10:32 AM 11
Canadian Biomass July/August 2017: Page 11
