Potentials, subsidies and tradeoffs of cellulosic ethanol in the European Union

被引:7
作者
Schuenemann, Franziska [1 ,2 ]
Delzeit, Ruth [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hohenheim, Inst Econ, Dept Bioecon, Wollgrasweg 49, D-70599 Stuttgart, Germany
[2] Univ Hohenheim, Inst Econ, Computat Sci Lab, Wollgrasweg 49, D-70599 Stuttgart, Germany
[3] Univ Basel, Dept Environm Sci, Klingelbergstr 27, CH-4056 Basel, Switzerland
[4] Kiel Inst World Econ, Kiellinie 66, D-24105 Kiel, Germany
关键词
Agricultural residues; Advanced biofuels; Cellulosic ethanol; Bioeconomy; CGE model; LAND-USE; BIOENERGY; BIOFUELS; BIOMASS; IMPACT; EMISSIONS; COST; OIL;
D O I
10.1016/j.ecolecon.2022.107384
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
The EU's revised Renewable Energy Directive (RED2) sets high mandates for advanced biofuels like cellulosic bioethanol from agricultural residues. However, many residues are used for ecological and economic purposes such as soil organic carbon regulation and livestock bedding and fodder. We use the global CGE model DART-BIO with a detailed representation of the bioeconomy to simulate the RED2 cellulosic bioethanol mandates and run sensitivity analyses regarding processing technology, straw and oil prices. We implement a latent cellulosic ethanol technology and develop new sectors for agricultural residues. We find that the RED2 cellulosic ethanol mandates will require enormous amounts of residues that could exceed the sustainable available potential in the EU. Agricultural residue utilization changes substantially and the cellulosic ethanol industry becomes the main residue consumer. Results show that output and price impacts of advanced biofuel targets are small, but there is reallocation of land towards cereals that enter the agricultural residue sector away from other crops in the EU. Moreover, the size of necessary cellulosic ethanol subsidies and the abatement costs per tonCO2eq are very sensitive to actual straw and oil prices.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 63 条
[1]   An Overview of the GTAP 9 Data Base [J].
Aguiar, Angel ;
Narayanan, Badri ;
McDougall, Robert .
JOURNAL OF GLOBAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS, 2016, 1 (01) :181-208
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2018, ORG EC COOPERATION D, DOI DOI 10.1787/D927BC18-EN
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2020, Sustainable Recovery, International Energy Agency
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2018, Directive (EU) 2018/2001 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, V2018
[5]  
APEC, 2010, BIOF COSTS TECHN EC
[6]   Statistical confirmation of indirect land use change in the Brazilian Amazon [J].
Arima, Eugenio Y. ;
Richards, Peter ;
Walker, Robert ;
Caldas, Marcellus M. .
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2011, 6 (02)
[7]   Forty Years of Oil Price Fluctuations: Why the Price of Oil May Still Surprise Us [J].
Baumeister, Christiane ;
Kilian, Lutz .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, 2016, 30 (01) :139-160
[8]  
Biofuelwatch, 2018, DEAD END ROAD FALS P
[9]   A review of variability in indirect land use change assessment and modeling in biofuel policy [J].
Broth, Amber ;
Hoekman, S. Kent ;
Unnasch, Stefan .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY, 2013, 29 :147-157
[10]   Bioethanol Production from Renewable Raw Materials and Its Separation and Purification: A Review [J].
Busic, Arijana ;
Mardetko, Nenad ;
Kundas, Semjon ;
Morzak, Galina ;
Belskaya, Halina ;
Santek, Mirela Ivancic ;
Komes, Drazenka ;
Novak, Srdan ;
Santek, Bozidar .
FOOD TECHNOLOGY AND BIOTECHNOLOGY, 2018, 56 (03) :289-311