Future bioenergy trade in the EU: modelling trading options from a cost-effectiveness perspective |
| |
| Authors: | Julia Hansson Göran Berndes |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, Iowa State University, 568F Heady Hall, Ames, IA 50011-1070, USA;2. International Food Policy Research Institute, 2033 K Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20006-1002, USA;3. National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA;4. Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, 203 Old Chem. Building, Durham, NC 27708-0227, USA;5. Department of Economics, North Carolina A&T State University, 114 Merrick Hall, 1601 E. Market Street, Greensboro, NC 27411, USA;6. Department of Energy and Environmental Systems, North Carolina A&T State University, 114 Merrick Hall, 1601 E. Market Street, Greensboro, NC 27411, USA;7. Department of Agribusiness Economics, Southern Illinois University, 1205 Lincoln Drive, Carbondale, IL 62901, USA;1. Department of Forest and Wildlife Ecology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706, United States;2. Department of Economics, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada V8P 5C2;1. André Cournand Pulmonary Physiology Laboratory, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY;2. World Trade Center Environmental Health Center, Bellevue Hospital, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY;3. Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY;4. New York University World Trade Center Health Program Clinical Center of Excellence, New York, NY;5. Department of Radiology, St. George''s Healthcare National Health Service Trust, London, England;1. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Ecosystems Services and Management Program (ESM), Schlossplatz 1, A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria;2. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Department of Forest Resource Management, Umeå, Sweden;3. International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi, Kenya;4. Lviv Polytechnic National University, Lviv, Ukraine;5. University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna (BOKU), Institute for Sustainable Economic Development, Vienna, Austria;6. Rural and Renewable Energy Unit, Energy and Climate Change Branch, United Nations Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO), Vienna, Austria;7. WWF International, Gland, Switzerland;8. Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC), Working Group on Resources and International Trade, Torgauer Str. 12--15, 10829 Berlin, Germany;1. Northwestern University, 2145 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60208, USA;2. Robert Frederick Smith School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | The purpose of this paper is to analyse under what conditions, with respect to CO2 emission-reduction and biofuels-for-transport targets, the trading in the EU of CO2 credits and solid and/or liquid biofuels is cost-effective from the perspective of an optimisation energy systems model. We use the PEEP model covering the EU27 (except Bulgaria, Malta, and Cyprus) to generate insights about the cost-effectiveness of different options under different policy scenarios. Trade in CO2 credits is a cost-effective option, in all relevant policy scenarios. Trade in some biofuels (mainly from central and eastern European countries to the EU15) is cost-effective in all assessed scenarios. In the case of CO2 targets (whether national or at the EU level) there is trade in solid biofuels. When biofuels-for-transport targets are also implemented, trading both solid and liquid biofuels is cost-effective. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
