technical problems and are increasingly widespread in some developing countries, especially in China. Similar technolo­gies are also employed in industrialized countries, mostly to   capture  environmentally  problematic  methane  emis­sions (e.g., at landfills and livestock holdings) and produce energy.
     Some forms of bioelectricity and bioheat can be eco­nomically competitive with other off-grid energy options such as diesel generators, even without taking into consider­ation potential non-market benefits such as GHG emissions reductions, and therefore are viable options for expanding energy access in certain settings. The largest potential lies with the production of bioelectricity and heat when techni­cally mature and reliable generators have access to secure supply of cheap feedstocks and capital costs can be spread out over high average electricity demand. This is sometimes the case on site or near industries that produce biomass wastes and residues and have their own steady demand for electricity, e.g., sugar, rice and paper mills. Environmen­tally and socially, bioelectricity and heat are most often less problematic than liquid biofuels for transport because they are predominantly produced from wastes, residues and sus­tainable forestry. In these cases significant GHG emission reductions can be achieved, even when biomass is co-fired with coal, and food prices are unlikely to be affected. The economics as well as environmental effects are particularly favorable when operated in combined heat and electric­ity mode, which is increasingly being employed in various countries, e.g., during harvesting season Mauritius meets 70% of electricity needs from sugarcane bagasse cogenera-tion. However, particulate emissions from smoke stacks are of considerable concern. Biomass digesters and gasifiers are more prone to technical failures than direct combustion fa­cilities, especially when operated in small-scale applications without proper maintenance and experiences with their ap­plication vary considerably [ESAP Chapter 4; Global Chap­ters 3, 5, 6; SSA Chapter 2].
     Small-scale applications for local use of first genera­tion biofuels can sometimes offer interesting alternatives for electricity generation that do not necessarily produce the negative effects of large-scale production due to more contained demands on land, water and other resources. Biodiesel has special potential in small-scale applications, as it is less technology and capital intensive to produce than ethanol, although methanol requirements for its production can pose a challenge. Unrefined bio-oils for stationary uses are even less technology intensive to produce and do not require methanol. However, engines for power generation and water pumping have to be adapted for their use. Local stationary biofuel schemes may offer particular potential for local communities when they are integrated in high intensity small-scale farming systems that allow an integrated pro­duction of food and energy crops. These options are being analyzed in several countries, e.g., focusing on Jatropha and Pongamia as a feedstock, but evidence on their potential is not yet conclusive [CWANA Chapter 2; Global Chapter 6; NAE Chapter 5].
     Several actions can be undertaken to promote a better exploitation of bioelectricity and bioheat potential [Global Chapter 7].

•   Promoting R&D: Improving operational stability and reducing capital costs promises to improve the attrac­tiveness of bioenergy, especially of small and medium-scale biogas digesters, thermo-chemical gasifiers and stationary uses of unrefined vegetable oils. More re­search is also needed on assessing the costs and benefits to society of these options, taking into consideration also other energy alternatives [Global Chapter 6].
•   Development of product standards and dissemination of knowledge: A long history of policy failures and a wide variety of locally produced generators with large differences in performance have led to considerable skepticism about bioenergy in many countries. The de­velopment of product standards, as well as demonstra­tion projects and better knowledge dissemination, can contribute to increase market transparency and improve consumer confidence.
•   Local capacity building: Experience of various bioen­ergy promotion programs has shown that proper op­eration and maintenance are key to success and sustain-ability of low-cost and small-scale applications. There­fore, local consumers and producers need to be closely engaged in the development as well as the monitoring and maintenance of facilities.
•   Access to finance: Compared to other off-grid energy solutions, bioenergy often exhibits higher initial capi­tal costs but lower long-term feedstock costs. This cost structure often forces poor households and communi­ties to forego investments in modern bioenergy—even in cases when levelized costs are competitive and pay­back periods short. Improved access to finance can help to reduce these problems.

Cross-cutting Issues

Food prices. The diversion of agricultural crops to fuel can negatively affect hunger alleviation throughout the world in the short to medium term, even though price increases may be mitigated in the long term. This risk is particularly high for first generation biofuels for trans­port due to their very large demands for agricultural crops. Price increases can be caused directly, through the increase in demand for feedstocks, or indirectly, through the increase in demand for the factors of production (e.g., land, water), so the use of non-food crops is unlikely to alleviate these concerns. More research is needed to assess these risks and their effects but it is evident that poor net buyers of food and food-importing developing countries are particu­larly affected.

Environment. The large demands for additional agricultural and forestry products for bioenergy can also cause impor­tant environmental effects. Again, because of the large ad­ditional demands for agricultural feedstocks, first genera­tion biofuels create the largest potential problems includ­ing pushing more ecologically fragile and valuable lands into production and depleting and contaminating water resources. Moreover, some of the fast growing crops pro­moted for bioenergy production raise environmental (e.g.,