The attractiveness of a certain country/region as trade partner for the EU not relates to the availability of biomass, but also to the political stability and local governance, the investment climate and potential projections to use the available biomass for domestic applications (energy and other). Also sustainability governance for forestry or agriculture are considered as this will be an important requirement from EU side for potentially imported biomass. The table below gives an overview of the main strengths and weaknesses of the USA as a trade partner for biomass with the EU.
| SWOT principle | Indicator/criterion | Strength | Weakness | Opportunity | Threat |
| Mobilisation opportunities | Options to mobilise the production/ harvest of biomass for exports | SE USA has a well developed forest industry. Technical capacity and infrastructure exist to mobilise from large areas of regularly managed forests. | Rather fragmented forest ownership with on average a property of 30-40 hectares. | Low share of traditional biomass use in the US allows for mbilisation for commercial pellet production. Also the decline in paper production has allowed the rise of peelt production | Substantial efforts are needed in renewable energy domestically, which may induce a much higher use of domestic biomass and reduce availability for export. |
| Security of supply | Stable amount of exportable biomass available over next 10 years | The SE USA has a well developed forest industry. Technical capacity and infrastructure exist to supply from large areas of regularly managed forests. | Competition for low quality grades may start to occur when large quantities are needed (> ~several tens of millions of tonnes) | Forest owners are in majority aiming at an economic return at regular intervals. They will respond to higher biomass prices, as well as agricultural land owners who may decide to afforest | Domestic criteria for sustainability or strong certification demands from the EU may slow down or even stop export. Also the rise of other uses of wood (biorefineries) may lead to competition and high raw material prices. |
| Cost of biomass in ARA ports | €/ton DM and €/GJ |
Costs are relatively low (~8€/GJ) . prices are relatively stable |
Most locations of forest areas where pulp production declined are in use now for pellets. More expensive regions are located more inland.
| Land owners may respond to higher raw material prices | Certification issues, high biodiversity requirements may increase the price. |
| Environmental issues (air, water, biodiversity and soil) are not negatively affected | Feedstock production does not affect negatively local environmental conditions | Almost all production comes from regularly managed plantations that are intensively monitored. The basis for forest management in the US are Federal and State legislation Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, and Best Management Practices (BMPs). BMPs are either required or voluntary depending on the State, but in practice there is over 90% implementation rate. There is a lot of focus on sector education, including loggers and procurement foresters. | Relatively high share of arable land needs irrigation Relatively low uptake of sustainable forest management Certification (FSC or PEFC) - high share of private ownership of forests | Relatively high share of forest has a management plan. State Acts on water and biodiversity are monitored
| Average carbon content in the topsoil is relatively low. Further, the forest of SE USA are biodiversity rich even though they are plantations. Protection issues and certification may hamper production. |
| Life cycle GHG emissions incl. direct LUC | GHG LCA assessment in agreement with IPCC guidelines along the supply chain | Modest increase in forest area, with increasing carbon stock. Good data quality and availability | Emissions are ~20 kg CO2/GJ . these are moderate | Net uptake of GHG through LULUCF. No carbon debt issues | Emissions are ~20 kg CO2/GJ . these are moderate |
| Social issues are not negatively affected | Feedstock production does not affect negatively local social conditions | No issues with food security. Labor laws exist | none | No issues with food security. Labor laws exist | none |
| Governance | Existence of policies and regulations to regulate feedstock production. Implementation/Enforcement of national, local regulations as well as relevant international convention | Overall high governance scores, which makes the US a stable trade partner. State of the forest is intensively monitored. The basis for forest management in the US are Federal and State legislation Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, and Best Management Practices (BMPs). BMPs are either required or voluntary depending on the State, but in practice there is over 90% implementation rate. There is a lot of focus on sector education, including loggers and procurement foresters. | No overall forest law, although several other Acts are in place. Certification level is low. | Adhere more to internatioal demands of certification. | Not adhering to certification demands and biodiversity issues. |