Baltpool conducted a biomass quality study in five laboratories

Late last year, after biomass market participants raised concerns about the accuracy of biomass testing results, Baltpool approached the Lithuanian National Accreditation Bureau about inspecting laboratories and commissioned its own biomass sample testing via a “mystery buyer.” Tests were carried out in five accredited laboratories.

What has been done so far?

In December, Baltpool contacted the Lithuanian National Accreditation Bureau due to market participants’ doubts about the accuracy of biomass testing—specifically, biomass ash content. Baltpool requested inspections of several accredited laboratories to ensure their testing procedures and results comply with the LST EN ISO 18122 standard.

“This kind of inspection is standard practice established by law. As soon as we have the results, we will share them publicly. We initiated this investigation because biofuel market participants raised doubts about the accuracy of testing, and our goal is to ensure efficient and transparent bioenergy exchanges. We also want to emphasise that, at this time, there is no legal basis for questioning the laboratories’ test results,” says Vaidotas Jonutis, Head of Trading at Baltpool.

Results of the Operator’s Tests

For this study, samples of SM3 wood chips (from five different shipments) were taken. Each sample was then subdivided into five subsamples and sent to five different accredited laboratories, resulting in 25 subsamples tested.

The results revealed significant differences in measurements between the laboratories, which produced the lowest and highest figures. (The anonymised data from Baltpool’s initial study are shown in the graph below.)

It was also noted that one laboratory consistently generated the highest measurement value while another consistently showed the lowest. The measurements from the remaining laboratories were similar. Due to these significant disparities, the Operator provided all collected information to the Lithuanian National Accreditation Bureau so that it could be considered in the ongoing investigation requested by the Operator. Once we have the findings, we will inform all market participants.

In addition, the Operator conducted another test, during which two different samples were taken from the same shipment at two different times (i.e., not just one sample split into two, but two entirely separate samples). These were then sent to one laboratory for analysis. This test aimed to determine what differences exist between two samples taken from the same shipment and verify the hypothesis that SM3-quality fuel is highly heterogeneous. Thus, there can be naturally occurring differences between the qualities of two samples, even when potential measurement discrepancies between different laboratories are eliminated. The results are shown below.

The results of this study indicate that, excluding laboratory-related factors, the variability in SM3 fuel—even within the same shipment—can lead to up to a 100% difference in ash content between different samples. The Operator has commissioned a repeat test to confirm whether this hypothesis holds.

Accordingly, it can be reasonably assumed that if two samples differ by up to 100%, both measurements are valid and must be considered when resolving disputes between the parties.

Proposed Temporary Solution for Determining Biomass Quality in Dispute Cases

Considering the Operator’s preliminary test results—and without waiting for the conclusions of the Lithuanian National Accreditation Bureau—we propose improving the rules for resolving participant disputes over biomass quality:

1. Suppose the ash content test results from two accredited laboratories show that the difference between the initial and reserve samples exceeds 100% of the reserve sample’s value. In that case, the result of the reserve sample’s test prevails.

2. If the buyer has two reserve samples, they have the right to analyze the second reserve sample at the same laboratory as the first. The average of the two reserve sample results would be used in such cases.

“Wood chips testing is a crucial part of the process because these test results ultimately determine the final biomass price on the exchange. Therefore, it is paramount that all exchange participants can conduct their activities fairly,” says Andrius Smaliukas, head of the Baltpool company.

Baltpool invites all biomass market participants to submit their views on the temporary biomass price determination solution by Monday, January 13, before the end of the business day, via email at [email protected].

EPS System Changes to Ensure Even Greater Transparency

Baltpool also plans to implement new changes in the EPS quality system. These updates will make it visible which laboratories are conducting the biomass quality tests, allowing for earlier detection of potential issues if specific laboratory measurements systematically diverge from the results of other laboratories.

“Our goal is not only to respond to market participants’ concerns and ensure transparency but also to prevent similar or identical situations in the future. Therefore, we are initiating changes to the supply conditions that will require market participants to indicate the laboratory’s name where the test was carried out in the EPS system. This requirement will come into effect once this feature is live in the EPS system. Most importantly, this EPS quality system change will enable us to spot and capture potential deviations in laboratory test results more quickly,” says A. Smaliukas.