IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/gewi17/261991.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Modellbasierte Standortoptimierung von Konversionsanlagen für landwirtschaftliche Biomasse in Baden-Württemberg am Beispiel der Strohverbrennung

Author

Listed:
  • Petig, Eckart
  • Rudi, Andreas
  • Angenendt, Elisabeth
  • Schultmann, Frank
  • Bahrs, Enno

Abstract

Die Transformation einer erdölbasierten zu einer biobasierten Wirtschaft ist auf Rohstoffe aus der Landwirtschaft angewiesen. Dies kann die Konkurrenzsituation zwischen den verschiedenen Nutzungspfaden für landwirtschaftliche Biomassen (food, feed, fuel, fibre) verschärfen. Da viele Technologien und mögliche Absatzwege einer sich entwickelnden Bioökonomie derzeit noch nicht bekannt sind, können Simulationsmodelle Entwicklungspfade, Potenziale, Chancen und Risiken aufzeigen. Im vorliegenden Beitrag wird ein Modellverbund aus einem landwirtschaftlichen Angebotsmodell und einem techno-ökonomischen Standortoptimierungsmodell vorgestellt und die Vorgehensweise am Beispiel der optimalen räumlichen Verteilung von Strohverbrennungsanlagen in Baden-Württemberg aufgezeigt. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die Strohverbrennung ca. 2,3 % des Bruttostromverbrauchs Baden-Württembergs decken könnte. Insgesamt führen die untersuchten Szenarien zu einer Erhöhung der landwirtschaftlichen Deckungsbeiträge. Darüber hinaus zeigt sich, dass der Ausbau der Strohverbrennung sowohl einen Rückgang der Biogassubstratproduktion zur Folge hätte, als auch die Futtermittelzukäufe der landwirtschaftlichen Betriebe in Baden-Württemberg erhöhen würde. Der hier vorgestellte Modellverbund kann für die Analyse weiterer land- und forstwirtschaftlicher Biomassearten für die energetische Verwertung und mögliche Technologien der stofflichen Nutzung, wie z.B. die Produktion von biobasierten Grundstoffen angewendet werden. Darüber hinaus lassen sich weitere Modelle, wie z.B. partielle und allgemeine Gleichgewichtsmodelle, aber auch Modelle zur Bewertung von ökologischen Wirkungen, wie Ökobilanzierungsmodelle, integrieren.

Suggested Citation

  • Petig, Eckart & Rudi, Andreas & Angenendt, Elisabeth & Schultmann, Frank & Bahrs, Enno, 2017. "Modellbasierte Standortoptimierung von Konversionsanlagen für landwirtschaftliche Biomasse in Baden-Württemberg am Beispiel der Strohverbrennung," 57th Annual Conference, Weihenstephan, Germany, September 13-15, 2017 261991, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:gewi17:261991
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.261991
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/261991/files/Petig_139.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/261991/files/Petig_139.pdf?subformat=pdfa
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.261991?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krimly, Tatjana & Angenendt, Elisabeth & Bahrs, Enno & Dabbert, Stephan, 2016. "Global warming potential and abatement costs of different peatland management options: A case study for the Pre-alpine Hill and Moorland in Germany," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 1-12.
    2. Schmid, Otto & Padel, Susanne & Levidow, Les, 2012. "The Bio-Economy Concept and Knowledge Base in a Public Goods and Farmer Perspective," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 1(1), pages 1-18, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Daniela Pasnicu & Mihaela Ghenta & Aniela Matei, 2019. "Transition to Bioeconomy: Perceptions and Behaviors in Central and Eastern Europe," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 21(50), pages 1-9, February.
    2. Zvirgzdiņš Jānis & Plotka Kaspars & Geipele Sanda, 2018. "Eco-Economics in Cities and Rural Areas," Baltic Journal of Real Estate Economics and Construction Management, Sciendo, vol. 6(1), pages 88-99, July.
    3. Santeramo, Fabio Gaetano & Carlucci, Domenico & De Devitiis, Biagia & Nardone, Gianluca & Viscecchia, Rosaria, 2017. "On consumption patterns in oyster markets: the role of attitudes," MPRA Paper 76789, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Neagu Olimpia & Dumiter Florin & Braica Alexandra & Jimon Ștefania & David Gabriela, 2019. "The Correlation Between Human Capital and Gross Added Value in the Bioeconomy Sectors at the European Union (EU) Country Level," Studia Universitatis „Vasile Goldis” Arad – Economics Series, Sciendo, vol. 29(1), pages 1-20, March.
    5. Sophie Urmetzer & Michael P. Schlaile & Kristina B. Bogner & Matthias Mueller & Andreas Pyka, 2018. "Exploring the Dedicated Knowledge Base of a Transformation towards a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-22, May.
    6. Cardillo, Concetta & Cimino, Orlando & Henke, Roberto & Vanni, Francesco, 2012. "Delivering public goods in agriculture: the cost of green payments for Italian farms," 126th Seminar, June 27-29, 2012, Capri, Italy 126139, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Befort, N., 2020. "Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: The contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    8. Benoit Mougenot & Jean-Pierre Doussoulin, 2022. "Conceptual evolution of the bioeconomy: a bibliometric analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 1031-1047, January.
    9. Joshua Henkel, 2022. "Economics & Biology: The whole is something besides the parts – a complementary approach to a bioeconomy," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2210, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.
    10. repec:aud:audfin:v:20:y:2018:i:49:p:717 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Sophie Urmetzer & Andreas Pyka, 2017. "Varieties of Knowledge-Based Bioeconomies," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Stephan Dabbert & Iris Lewandowski & Jochen Weiss & Andreas Pyka (ed.), Knowledge-Driven Developments in the Bioeconomy, pages 57-82, Springer.
    12. Iuliana Raluca Gheorghe & Victor Lorin Purcarea & Consuela Madalina Gheorghe, 2018. "Consumer eWOM Communication: The Missing Link between Relational Capital and Sustainable Bioeconomy Ii Health Care Services," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 20(49), pages 684-684, August.
    13. van Boxmeer, Emma & Modernel, Pablo & Viets, Theo, 2021. "Environmental and economic performance of Dutch dairy farms on peat soil," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    14. Kean Birch, 2016. "Emergent Imaginaries and Fragmented Policy Frameworks in the Canadian Bio-Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-16, October.
    15. Geier, Cecilia Roxanne & Sponagel, Christian & Angenendt, Elisabeth & Bahrs, Enno, 2022. "Bewertung der Zertifizierungsfähigkeit ausgewählter Carbon Farming Massnahmen hinsichtlich ihres Klimaschutzeffektes mit ökonomischer Analyse am Beispiel von drei Landkreisen Baden-Württembergs," 62nd Annual Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, September 7-9, 2022 329612, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    16. Marius PASCULEA, 2015. "Strategic options of public policy for developing the bioeconomy sector in Romania," Romanian Journal of Economics, Institute of National Economy, vol. 41(2(50)), pages 190-200, december.
    17. Martin Henseler & Ruth Delzeit & Marcel Adenäuer & Sarah Baum & Peter Kreins, 2020. "Nitrogen Tax and Set-Aside as Greenhouse Gas Abatement Policies Under Global Change Scenarios: A Case Study for Germany," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(2), pages 299-329, July.
    18. Asada, Raphael & Stern, Tobias, 2018. "Competitive Bioeconomy? Comparing Bio-based and Non-bio-based Primary Sectors of the World," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 120-128.
    19. Farhad Mukhtarov & Andrea Gerlak & Robin Pierce, 2017. "Away from fossil-fuels and toward a bioeconomy: Knowledge versatility for public policy?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(6), pages 1010-1028, September.
    20. Alan Renwick & Robyn Dynes & Paul Johnstone & Warren King & Lania Holt & Jemma Penelope, 2019. "Challenges and Opportunities for Land Use Transformation: Insights from the Central Plains Water Scheme in New Zealand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-18, September.
    21. Marco Rebhann & Yusuf Nadi Karatay & Günther Filler & Annette Prochnow, 2016. "Profitability of Management Systems on German Fenlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-21, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Farm Management; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:gewi17:261991. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gewisea.html .

    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.