K. Szulczyk, Muhammad A. Cheema, R. Cullen, A. Khan
We investigate the economic feasibility of bioelectricity production from biomass in Malaysia and its impact on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and storage, agricultural prices, agricultural employment and deforestation. For this purpose, we develop a partial equilibrium model that projects agricultural prices, production, imports, exports, domestic consumption and land use in 5‐year increments between 2015 and 2065. Our results show that by 2030 biomass‐generated electricity can supply 36.5 per cent of the electricity generated in Malaysia, 16 times more than the 2016 electricity supply from biomass. Increased bioelectricity production from biomass will significantly reduce GHG emissions and will help Malaysia meet its commitment in the Paris Agreement to mitigate GHG emission by 45 per cent before 2030. Our modelling shows that biomass‐generated electricity creates a derived demand for waste biomass that expands the area of oil palm plantations. The expansion lowers agricultural prices, boosts agricultural employment and leads to some deforestation as landowners clear rainforest to plant oil palm trees. Nonetheless, the deforestation does not increase GHG emissions since GHG gains from bioelectricity significantly exceed GHG losses from deforestation.
{"title":"Bioelectricity in Malaysia: Economic Feasibility, Environmental and Deforestation Implications","authors":"K. Szulczyk, Muhammad A. Cheema, R. Cullen, A. Khan","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3359465","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3359465","url":null,"abstract":"We investigate the economic feasibility of bioelectricity production from biomass in Malaysia and its impact on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and storage, agricultural prices, agricultural employment and deforestation. For this purpose, we develop a partial equilibrium model that projects agricultural prices, production, imports, exports, domestic consumption and land use in 5‐year increments between 2015 and 2065. Our results show that by 2030 biomass‐generated electricity can supply 36.5 per cent of the electricity generated in Malaysia, 16 times more than the 2016 electricity supply from biomass. Increased bioelectricity production from biomass will significantly reduce GHG emissions and will help Malaysia meet its commitment in the Paris Agreement to mitigate GHG emission by 45 per cent before 2030. Our modelling shows that biomass‐generated electricity creates a derived demand for waste biomass that expands the area of oil palm plantations. The expansion lowers agricultural prices, boosts agricultural employment and leads to some deforestation as landowners clear rainforest to plant oil palm trees. Nonetheless, the deforestation does not increase GHG emissions since GHG gains from bioelectricity significantly exceed GHG losses from deforestation.","PeriodicalId":320530,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Biofuels (Topic)","volume":"233 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120990317","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The success of the bioenergy industry will depend, in part, on enough feedstock being grown. To increase the reliability of the supply of bioenergy, a government can offer two types of subsidy program: a farmer subsidy program (FSP) and a bioenergy producer subsidy program (PSP). We develop models to analyze the optimal subsidy program by capturing the strategic interactions between the government, the bioenergy producer, and farmers. The models incorporate the government’s subsidy budget constraint, the environmental benefits from the use of bioenergy, the farmer’s risk aversion and land capacity constraint, as well as the random yield of the feedstock. The findings reveal that both FSP and PSP are effective as long as the farmers’ land capacity exceeds a threshold. If both the government’s subsidy budget and land capacity are sufficiently large, PSP outperforms FSP; if only the subsidy budget is limited, FSP is better; if only land capacity is limited, FSP and PSP are equivalent. Counterintuitively, we find that PSP always benefits farmers more, while FSP can benefit the bioenergy producer more in some scenarios. Also, we find that FSP can better mitigate risk than PSP when the yield uncertainty is high. Lastly, insights for policy makers to promote bioenergy development are highlighted.
{"title":"Subsidize Farmers or the Bioenergy Producer? The Design of a Government Subsidy Program for a Bioenergy Supply Chain","authors":"Fei Ye, Zigong Cai, Ying‐ju Chen, Yina Li, G. Hou","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3344970","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3344970","url":null,"abstract":"The success of the bioenergy industry will depend, in part, on enough feedstock being grown. To increase the reliability of the supply of bioenergy, a government can offer two types of subsidy program: a farmer subsidy program (FSP) and a bioenergy producer subsidy program (PSP). We develop models to analyze the optimal subsidy program by capturing the strategic interactions between the government, the bioenergy producer, and farmers. The models incorporate the government’s subsidy budget constraint, the environmental benefits from the use of bioenergy, the farmer’s risk aversion and land capacity constraint, as well as the random yield of the feedstock. The findings reveal that both FSP and PSP are effective as long as the farmers’ land capacity exceeds a threshold. If both the government’s subsidy budget and land capacity are sufficiently large, PSP outperforms FSP; if only the subsidy budget is limited, FSP is better; if only land capacity is limited, FSP and PSP are equivalent. Counterintuitively, we find that PSP always benefits farmers more, while FSP can benefit the bioenergy producer more in some scenarios. Also, we find that FSP can better mitigate risk than PSP when the yield uncertainty is high. Lastly, insights for policy makers to promote bioenergy development are highlighted.","PeriodicalId":320530,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Biofuels (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115520495","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Biochar is a carbon-rich solid obtained from the heating of biomass in the (near) absence of oxygen in a process called pyrolysis. Its deployment in soils is increasingly discussed as a promising means to sequester carbon in soils and, thus, to help mitigate climate change. For a wide range of feedstocks and scenarios and against the baseline of conventional feedstock management, we calculate the technical greenhouse-gas mitigation potentials of slow-pyrolysis biochar in 2015, 2030 and 2050 when the biochar is incorporated into agricultural soils in Germany and when the by-products from biochar production – pyrolysis oils and gases – are used as renewable sources of energy. Covering the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, our analysis reveals that biochar allows for an annual technical greenhouse-gas mitigation potential in Germany in the range of 2.8-10.2 million tonnes of carbon-dioxide equivalents by 2030 and 2.9-10.6 million tonnes of carbon-dioxide equivalents by 2050. This corresponds to approximately 0.4-1.5% and 0.3-1.1% of the respective German greenhouse-gas reduction targets in 2030 and 2050.
{"title":"Technical Greenhouse-Gas Mitigation Potentials of Biochar Soil Incorporation in Germany","authors":"I. Teichmann","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2487765","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2487765","url":null,"abstract":"Biochar is a carbon-rich solid obtained from the heating of biomass in the (near) absence of oxygen in a process called pyrolysis. Its deployment in soils is increasingly discussed as a promising means to sequester carbon in soils and, thus, to help mitigate climate change. For a wide range of feedstocks and scenarios and against the baseline of conventional feedstock management, we calculate the technical greenhouse-gas mitigation potentials of slow-pyrolysis biochar in 2015, 2030 and 2050 when the biochar is incorporated into agricultural soils in Germany and when the by-products from biochar production – pyrolysis oils and gases – are used as renewable sources of energy. Covering the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, our analysis reveals that biochar allows for an annual technical greenhouse-gas mitigation potential in Germany in the range of 2.8-10.2 million tonnes of carbon-dioxide equivalents by 2030 and 2.9-10.6 million tonnes of carbon-dioxide equivalents by 2050. This corresponds to approximately 0.4-1.5% and 0.3-1.1% of the respective German greenhouse-gas reduction targets in 2030 and 2050.","PeriodicalId":320530,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Biofuels (Topic)","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134142308","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
G. Fiorese, M. Catenacci, V. Bosetti, Elena Verdolini
This paper focuses on technologies which use thermo-chemical or biochemical processes to convert biomass into electricity. We present the results from an expert elicitation exercise involving sixteen leading experts coming from different EU Member States. Aim of the elicitation was to assess the potential cost reduction of RD&D (research, development and demonstration) efforts and to identify barriers to the diffusion of these technologies. The research sheds light on the future potential of bioenergy technologies both in OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) and non-OECD countries. The results we present are an important input both for the integrated assessment modeling community and for policy makers who draft public RD&D strategies.
{"title":"The Power of Biomass: Experts Disclose the Potential for Success of Bioenergy Technologies","authors":"G. Fiorese, M. Catenacci, V. Bosetti, Elena Verdolini","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2233964","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2233964","url":null,"abstract":"This paper focuses on technologies which use thermo-chemical or biochemical processes to convert biomass into electricity. We present the results from an expert elicitation exercise involving sixteen leading experts coming from different EU Member States. Aim of the elicitation was to assess the potential cost reduction of RD&D (research, development and demonstration) efforts and to identify barriers to the diffusion of these technologies. The research sheds light on the future potential of bioenergy technologies both in OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) and non-OECD countries. The results we present are an important input both for the integrated assessment modeling community and for policy makers who draft public RD&D strategies.","PeriodicalId":320530,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Biofuels (Topic)","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126594763","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Up to 2008/2009, biofuels were considered one of the best alternatives to oil consumption in a captive market like transports, being one of the pillars of the 20-20-20 initiative in Europe. Improvement of security of supply through partial substitution of imported oil; reduction of GHGs emissions; improvement of income and employment in the agricultural and rural sectors were the main drivers of the promotion of biofuels in Europe, as well as in the United States and in Brazil. In the European Union biofuels policy was supported through Directive 2003/30. However its effects proved to be disappointing: the consumption of biofuels was expected by the Directive to account for 5.75% share of road fuels in 2010 in the European MSs, but it came early clear that such a target could not be met. Above all, consensus about biofuels decreased sharply when their ability to strongly decrease overall GHGs emissions was questioned, and when they were blamed of being the main responsible of the 2007-2008 food price increase. Finally, a new Directive was approved on April 23rd, 2009, including the request of various certifications to prove the sustainability of biofuels. The paper deals deeply with the biofuel experience in Europe, providing a general analysis of the 2003/30 Directive. It includes an evaluation of the difficulties met in satisfying the requested targets, an assessment of the MSs policies to support biofuels, and a discussion about the main features of the (failed) birth of a new industry.
{"title":"Biofuels Policy in Europe Under the Directive 2003/30: An Analysis of Goals, Hindrances, Instruments and Effects","authors":"A. Ninni, Pietro Lanzini","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1618317","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1618317","url":null,"abstract":"Up to 2008/2009, biofuels were considered one of the best alternatives to oil consumption in a captive market like transports, being one of the pillars of the 20-20-20 initiative in Europe. Improvement of security of supply through partial substitution of imported oil; reduction of GHGs emissions; improvement of income and employment in the agricultural and rural sectors were the main drivers of the promotion of biofuels in Europe, as well as in the United States and in Brazil. In the European Union biofuels policy was supported through Directive 2003/30. However its effects proved to be disappointing: the consumption of biofuels was expected by the Directive to account for 5.75% share of road fuels in 2010 in the European MSs, but it came early clear that such a target could not be met. Above all, consensus about biofuels decreased sharply when their ability to strongly decrease overall GHGs emissions was questioned, and when they were blamed of being the main responsible of the 2007-2008 food price increase. Finally, a new Directive was approved on April 23rd, 2009, including the request of various certifications to prove the sustainability of biofuels. The paper deals deeply with the biofuel experience in Europe, providing a general analysis of the 2003/30 Directive. It includes an evaluation of the difficulties met in satisfying the requested targets, an assessment of the MSs policies to support biofuels, and a discussion about the main features of the (failed) birth of a new industry.","PeriodicalId":320530,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Biofuels (Topic)","volume":"26 3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123639068","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We present a new framework to identify demand and supply elasticities of agricultural commodities using yield shocks - deviations from a time trend of output per area, which are predominantly caused by weather fluctuations. Demand is identified using current-period shocks that give rise to exogenous shifts in supply. Supply is identified using past shocks, which affect expected future prices through inventory accretion or depletion. We use our estimated elasticities to evaluate the impact of ethanol subsidies and mandates on world food commodity prices, quantities, and food consumers' surplus. The current US ethanol mandate requires that about 5 percent of world caloric production from corn, wheat, rice, and soybeans be used for ethanol generation. As a result, world food prices are predicted to increase by about 30 percent and global consumer surplus from food consumption is predicted to decrease by 155 billion dollars annually. If a third of the biofuel calories are recycled as feed stock for livestock, the predicted price increase scales back to 20 percent. While commodity demand is extremely inelastic, price response is muted by a significant supply response that is obscured if futures prices are not instrumented. The resulting expansion of agricultural growing area potentially offsets the CO2 emission benefits from biofuels.
{"title":"Identifying Supply and Demand Elasticities of Agricultural Commodities: Implications for the Us Ethanol Mandate","authors":"M. Roberts, W. Schlenker","doi":"10.1257/AER.103.6.2265","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1257/AER.103.6.2265","url":null,"abstract":"We present a new framework to identify demand and supply elasticities of agricultural commodities using yield shocks - deviations from a time trend of output per area, which are predominantly caused by weather fluctuations. Demand is identified using current-period shocks that give rise to exogenous shifts in supply. Supply is identified using past shocks, which affect expected future prices through inventory accretion or depletion. We use our estimated elasticities to evaluate the impact of ethanol subsidies and mandates on world food commodity prices, quantities, and food consumers' surplus. The current US ethanol mandate requires that about 5 percent of world caloric production from corn, wheat, rice, and soybeans be used for ethanol generation. As a result, world food prices are predicted to increase by about 30 percent and global consumer surplus from food consumption is predicted to decrease by 155 billion dollars annually. If a third of the biofuel calories are recycled as feed stock for livestock, the predicted price increase scales back to 20 percent. While commodity demand is extremely inelastic, price response is muted by a significant supply response that is obscured if futures prices are not instrumented. The resulting expansion of agricultural growing area potentially offsets the CO2 emission benefits from biofuels.","PeriodicalId":320530,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Biofuels (Topic)","volume":"155 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116054678","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The authors aim to provide here an opinion on the state‐of‐the‐art of integrated ecological‐economic assessments of bioenergy under climate change, as well as the challenges along with their implications faced in planning adaptation at local scale.
{"title":"Review of Integrated Ecological-Economic Analyses for Bioenergy Plants Under Climate Change at Local Scale","authors":"Trung-Thanh Nguyen, J. Tenhunen","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2777987","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2777987","url":null,"abstract":"The authors aim to provide here an opinion on the state‐of‐the‐art of integrated ecological‐economic assessments of bioenergy under climate change, as well as the challenges along with their implications faced in planning adaptation at local scale.","PeriodicalId":320530,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Biofuels (Topic)","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121693742","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.38177/ajast.2020.4318
Farné Stefano
It is strongly felt the need to replace fossil fuels with other renewable and more compatible with the environment. The spinneret of algal crops is producing different solutions ("open ponds", tubular, bioreactors in greenhouses, etc.). The aim is to obtain concentrations of dry substance such as to justify the high costs of extraction. Another limitation suffered by the actual plants, derives from the choice to move the algal mass (process characterized by a high energy consumption), with actions necessary to keep it in suspension as well as to move it, to exchange its positioning in order to bring it to be conditioned by the light (exhausting its effectiveness after the first 0.2-0.3 m of algal mass depth, or even less if thicker and when it would need more light for its exponential growth). In particular, it is not possible to bring a specific radiation spectrum, in a pervasive and deep way, with a drastic cost reduction for the mechanical movement of the culture medium. A limitation derives also from the possibility of biological and chemical contamination from the environment, because the algal mass is in a large contact with the environment itself (e.g. the "open ponds" situations) and it is heavily exposed to the prevalent thermal cycles (often not suitable to the processes of growth) inside it. Some problems are often encountered even in the phase of collection and selection of the algal mass to be forwarded to the following processes, that proceeds through the massive processing of large volumes (by filtration and concentration) that, due to previous limitations (contamination and uncertain conditions of growth), remain at low concentrations. The purpose of this article is to present the PBRC (Photo Bio Reactor Continuous) plant, subject of an Italian patent, for the cultivation of microalgae, from which to extract an oleic fraction, which can be destined for production of biofuels, and a protein fraction, which can be destined for use in the chemical, agri-food, pharmaceutical and cosmetic sectors.
{"title":"Innovative Plant for the Production of Microalgaes","authors":"Farné Stefano","doi":"10.38177/ajast.2020.4318","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.38177/ajast.2020.4318","url":null,"abstract":"It is strongly felt the need to replace fossil fuels with other renewable and more compatible with the environment. The spinneret of algal crops is producing different solutions (\"open ponds\", tubular, bioreactors in greenhouses, etc.). The aim is to obtain concentrations of dry substance such as to justify the high costs of extraction. Another limitation suffered by the actual plants, derives from the choice to move the algal mass (process characterized by a high energy consumption), with actions necessary to keep it in suspension as well as to move it, to exchange its positioning in order to bring it to be conditioned by the light (exhausting its effectiveness after the first 0.2-0.3 m of algal mass depth, or even less if thicker and when it would need more light for its exponential growth). In particular, it is not possible to bring a specific radiation spectrum, in a pervasive and deep way, with a drastic cost reduction for the mechanical movement of the culture medium. A limitation derives also from the possibility of biological and chemical contamination from the environment, because the algal mass is in a large contact with the environment itself (e.g. the \"open ponds\" situations) and it is heavily exposed to the prevalent thermal cycles (often not suitable to the processes of growth) inside it. Some problems are often encountered even in the phase of collection and selection of the algal mass to be forwarded to the following processes, that proceeds through the massive processing of large volumes (by filtration and concentration) that, due to previous limitations (contamination and uncertain conditions of growth), remain at low concentrations. The purpose of this article is to present the PBRC (Photo Bio Reactor Continuous) plant, subject of an Italian patent, for the cultivation of microalgae, from which to extract an oleic fraction, which can be destined for production of biofuels, and a protein fraction, which can be destined for use in the chemical, agri-food, pharmaceutical and cosmetic sectors.","PeriodicalId":320530,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Biofuels (Topic)","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132538408","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Gerald Kalt, L. Kaufmann, Kastner Thomas, F. Krausmann
Global biomass trade for energy has risen sharply in recent decades, especially with regard to refined biofuels. This development was accompanied by increasing concerns about adverse environmental impacts in exporting countries. Criticism of the EU’s bioenergy policies is often connected to international trade, for example controversies surrounding direct and indirect land-use change, or regarding the carbon balance of wood pellets being imported as substitute for coal. In Austria, there is strong public support for bioenergy from domestic sources, while biomass imports are met with scepticism. Such preference for regional supply is also prevalent for food and biomass for material, where consumers tend to consider high degrees of national self-sufficiency as an indication that domestic supply predominates. We here investigate where biomass products and biofuels consumed in Austria actually originate from, and whether the import share of Austria’s bioenergy sector significantly differs from that of nutrition and material applications. We determine the source countries of primary biomass utilized for energy, food and material based on material flow analyses, process chain modelling and algorithms tracing imported biomass to original source regions. We find that globalized supply chains undermine efforts for regional supply regardless of the type of use. Still, biomass consumed for energy as well as food and material primarily originates from Austria and its neighbouring countries. Certain bioenergy carriers have relatively large primary biomass footprints in more distant countries and overseas (mainly oil crop-based biofuels) but overall, biomass for energy is more regional than food and material products.
{"title":"Torn between Regional Supply and Globalisation: Austria's Primary Biomass Footprint for Energy in Comparison to Food and Material","authors":"Gerald Kalt, L. Kaufmann, Kastner Thomas, F. Krausmann","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3706649","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3706649","url":null,"abstract":"Global biomass trade for energy has risen sharply in recent decades, especially with regard to refined biofuels. This development was accompanied by increasing concerns about adverse environmental impacts in exporting countries. Criticism of the EU’s bioenergy policies is often connected to international trade, for example controversies surrounding direct and indirect land-use change, or regarding the carbon balance of wood pellets being imported as substitute for coal. In Austria, there is strong public support for bioenergy from domestic sources, while biomass imports are met with scepticism. Such preference for regional supply is also prevalent for food and biomass for material, where consumers tend to consider high degrees of national self-sufficiency as an indication that domestic supply predominates. We here investigate where biomass products and biofuels consumed in Austria actually originate from, and whether the import share of Austria’s bioenergy sector significantly differs from that of nutrition and material applications. We determine the source countries of primary biomass utilized for energy, food and material based on material flow analyses, process chain modelling and algorithms tracing imported biomass to original source regions. We find that globalized supply chains undermine efforts for regional supply regardless of the type of use. Still, biomass consumed for energy as well as food and material primarily originates from Austria and its neighbouring countries. Certain bioenergy carriers have relatively large primary biomass footprints in more distant countries and overseas (mainly oil crop-based biofuels) but overall, biomass for energy is more regional than food and material products.","PeriodicalId":320530,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Biofuels (Topic)","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132015652","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：