IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i12p4618-d188224.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparative Study on the RFS Program of Korea with the US and UK

Author

Listed:
  • Jung-Yull Shin

    (Department of Renewable Energy Engineering, Graduate School, Dongguk University-Seoul, 30 Pildong-ro 1-gil, Jung-gu, Seoul 04620, Korea
    Korea Energy Agency, 388 Poeundae-ro, Suji-gu, Yongin 16842, Korea)

  • Gun-Woo Kim

    (Department of Renewable Energy Engineering, Graduate School, Dongguk University-Seoul, 30 Pildong-ro 1-gil, Jung-gu, Seoul 04620, Korea
    Korea Energy Agency, 388 Poeundae-ro, Suji-gu, Yongin 16842, Korea)

  • Janet S. Zepernick

    (Department of English & Modern Languages, College of Arts and Sciences, Pittsburg State University, 1701 South Broadway Street, Pittsburg, KS 66762, USA)

  • Kyu-Young Kang

    (Department of Renewable Energy Engineering, Graduate School, Dongguk University-Seoul, 30 Pildong-ro 1-gil, Jung-gu, Seoul 04620, Korea
    Department of Biological and Environmental Science, College of Life Science and Biotechnology, Dongguk University-Seoul, 32 Dongguk-ro, Ilsandong-gu, Goyang 10326, Korea)

Abstract

In 2016, the global environmental impact of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions was 49.3 gigatons CO 2 equivalent. Worldwide, the transportation sector is responsible for 14% of GHG. Electric vehicles (EV) powered by less-polluting energy sources are one way to reduce the environmental impact of the transportation sector, but immediate transportation demands cannot be met by existing EV technology. Use of less polluting biofuel in place of petroleum-based gasoline or diesel fuel to power the existing transportation fleet is a widely accepted transitional solution, including in the Republic of Korea. The purpose of this research is to investigate approaches to biofuels in the US and the UK in order to evaluate Korea’s current energy policies related to use of biofuels and to make recommendations for strengthening Korea’s energy policy. This article addresses only policies for use of biodiesel rather than ethanol (widely used in the US) because ethanol is not used in Korea. This research shows that Korea calculates GHG using the principle that biofuel is carbon neutral, but energy policies in the US and the UK treat biofuel as not entirely carbon neutral. Korea should examine how to calculate GHG from biodiesel according to the standard set by the UK in order to work toward a more environmentally sustainable energy policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Jung-Yull Shin & Gun-Woo Kim & Janet S. Zepernick & Kyu-Young Kang, 2018. "A Comparative Study on the RFS Program of Korea with the US and UK," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-20, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4618-:d:188224
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/12/4618/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/12/4618/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Searchinger, Timothy & Heimlich, Ralph & Houghton, R. A. & Dong, Fengxia & Elobeid, Amani & Fabiosa, Jacinto F. & Tokgoz, Simla & Hayes, Dermot J. & Yu, Hun-Hsiang, 2008. "Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12881, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Thomas Guillaume & Martyna M. Kotowska & Dietrich Hertel & Alexander Knohl & Valentyna Krashevska & Kukuh Murtilaksono & Stefan Scheu & Yakov Kuzyakov, 2018. "Carbon costs and benefits of Indonesian rainforest conversion to plantations," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 9(1), pages 1-11, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gal Hochman & Chrysostomos Tabakis, 2020. "Biofuels and Their Potential in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-17, September.
    2. Vaclovas Miskinis & Arvydas Galinis & Inga Konstantinaviciute & Vidas Lekavicius & Eimantas Neniskis, 2019. "Comparative Analysis of the Energy Sector Development Trends and Forecast of Final Energy Demand in the Baltic States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-27, January.
    3. Xu, H. & Lee, U. & Wang, M., 2020. "Life-cycle energy use and greenhouse gas emissions of palm fatty acid distillate derived renewable diesel," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    4. Olga V. Panina & Stanislav E. Prokofiev & Natalia A. Barmenkova & Natalia L. Krasyukova & Nikolay P. Kushchev, 2020. "Prospects of Nuclear Energy Development in Asia: Comparison with Green Energy," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 10(6), pages 123-131.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Suopajärvi, Hannu & Umeki, Kentaro & Mousa, Elsayed & Hedayati, Ali & Romar, Henrik & Kemppainen, Antti & Wang, Chuan & Phounglamcheik, Aekjuthon & Tuomikoski, Sari & Norberg, Nicklas & Andefors, Alf , 2018. "Use of biomass in integrated steelmaking – Status quo, future needs and comparison to other low-CO2 steel production technologies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 384-407.
    2. Tonini, Davide & Vadenbo, Carl & Astrup, Thomas Fruergaard, 2017. "Priority of domestic biomass resources for energy: Importance of national environmental targets in a climate perspective," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 295-309.
    3. Lotze-Campen, Hermann & von Witzke, Harald & Noleppa, Steffen & Schwarz, Gerald, 2015. "Science for food, climate protection and welfare: An economic analysis of plant breeding research in Germany," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 79-84.
    4. Iriarte, Alfredo & Rieradevall, Joan & Gabarrell, Xavier, 2012. "Transition towards a more environmentally sustainable biodiesel in South America: The case of Chile," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 263-273.
    5. Kriegler, Elmar, 2011. "Comment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 594-596, July.
    6. Proost, Stef & Van Dender, Kurt, 2012. "Energy and environment challenges in the transport sector," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 77-87.
    7. repec:fpr:ifprib:2012ghienglish is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Canabarro, N.I. & Silva-Ortiz, P. & Nogueira, L.A.H. & Cantarella, H. & Maciel-Filho, R. & Souza, G.M., 2023. "Sustainability assessment of ethanol and biodiesel production in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Guatemala," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    9. Baral, Nabin & Rabotyagov, Sergey, 2017. "How much are wood-based cellulosic biofuels worth in the Pacific Northwest? Ex-ante and ex-post analysis of local people's willingness to pay," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 99-106.
    10. Baka, Jennifer & Roland-Holst, David, 2009. "Food or fuel? What European farmers can contribute to Europe's transport energy requirements and the Doha Round," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2505-2513, July.
    11. Nguyen, Thu Lan T. & Hermansen, John E. & Mogensen, Lisbeth, 2010. "Fossil energy and GHG saving potentials of pig farming in the EU," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 2561-2571, May.
    12. Sarah Jansen & William Foster & Gustavo Anríquez & Jorge Ortega, 2021. "Understanding Farm-Level Incentives within the Bioeconomy Framework: Prices, Product Quality, Losses, and Bio-Based Alternatives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-21, January.
    13. Shortall, O.K., 2013. "“Marginal land” for energy crops: Exploring definitions and embedded assumptions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 19-27.
    14. Argueyrolles, Robin & Delzeit, Ruth, 2022. "The interconnections between Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reforms and biofuels," Conference papers 333492, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    15. Aruga, Kentaka, 2011. "非遺伝子組換え大豆とエネルギーの価格関係について [Relationships among the Non-Genetically Modified Soybean and Energy Prices]," MPRA Paper 38186, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 20 Aug 2011.
    16. Oskar Englund & Ioannis Dimitriou & Virginia H. Dale & Keith L. Kline & Blas Mola‐Yudego & Fionnuala Murphy & Burton English & John McGrath & Gerald Busch & Maria Cristina Negri & Mark Brown & Kevin G, 2020. "Multifunctional perennial production systems for bioenergy: performance and progress," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(5), September.
    17. Chao Xu & Teng-Chiu Lin & Jr-Chuan Huang & Zhijie Yang & Xiaofei Liu & Decheng Xiong & Shidong Chen & Minhuang Wang & Liuming Yang & Yusheng Yang, 2022. "Microbial Biomass Is More Important than Runoff Export in Predicting Soil Inorganic Nitrogen Concentrations Following Forest Conversion in Subtropical China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-15, February.
    18. Forslund, Agneta & Gohin, Alexandre & Le Mouël, Chantal & Levert, Fabrice, 2014. "Biodiesel vs. ethanol, UE vs. US biofuels: So different in terms of LUC impact?," Working Papers 207810, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    19. Ribeiro, Lauro André & Silva, Patrícia Pereira da, 2013. "Surveying techno-economic indicators of microalgae biofuel technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 89-96.
    20. Gal Hochman & Chrysostomos Tabakis, 2020. "Biofuels and Their Potential in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-17, September.
    21. Mohlin, Kristina & Camuzeaux, Jonathan R. & Muller, Adrian & Schneider, Marius & Wagner, Gernot, 2018. "Factoring in the forgotten role of renewables in CO2 emission trends using decomposition analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 290-296.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4618-:d:188224. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.