Trade of Woody Biomass for Electricity Generation under Climate Mitigation Policy
AbstractBio-energy has the potential to be a key mitigation option if combined with carbon capture and sequestration (BECCS) because it generates electricity and absorbs emissions at the same time. However, biomass is not distributed evenly across the globe, and regions with a potentially high demand might be constrained by limited domestic supply. Therefore, climate mitigation policies might create the incentive to trade biomass internationally. This paper uses scenarios generated by the integrated assessment model WITCH to study trade of woody biomass from multiple perspectives: the volume of biomass traded, its value, the impact on other power generation technologies and on marginal abatement costs. The policy scenarios consist of three representative carbon tax policies (4.8 W/m2, 3.8 W/m2 and 3.2 W/m2 radiative forcing in 2100) and a cap-and-trade scheme (3.8 W/m2 in 2100). Results show that the incentive to trade biomass is high: at least 50% of biomass consumed globally is from the international market. Regions trade 13-69 EJ/yr of woody biomass in 2050 and 55-81 EJ/yr in 2100. In 2100 the value of biomass traded is equal to US$ 0.7-7.2 Trillion. Trade of woody biomass sensibly reduces marginal abatement costs. In the tax scenarios, abatement increases by 120-323 Gt CO2 over the century. In the cap-and-trade scenario biomass trade reduces the price of emission allowances by 34% in 2100 and cumulative discounted policy costs by 14%.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei in its series Working Papers with number 2013.13.
Date of creation: Feb 2013
Date of revision:
BECCS; Woody Biomass Trade; IAM; Negative Emissions; Carbon Market;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry
- Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
- F18 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade and Environment
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-AGR-2013-03-16 (Agricultural Economics)
- NEP-ALL-2013-03-16 (All new papers)
- NEP-ENE-2013-03-16 (Energy Economics)
- NEP-ENV-2013-03-16 (Environmental Economics)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Enrica De Cian & Valentina Bosetti & Alessandra Sgobbi & Massimo Tavoni, 2009. "The 2008 WITCH Model: New Model Features and Baseline," Working Papers 2009.85, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
- Nordhaus, William D & Yang, Zili, 1996. "A Regional Dynamic General-Equilibrium Model of Alternative Climate-Change Strategies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(4), pages 741-65, September.
- Allison Thomson & Katherine Calvin & Steven Smith & G. Kyle & April Volke & Pralit Patel & Sabrina Delgado-Arias & Ben Bond-Lamberty & Marshall Wise & Leon Clarke & James Edmonds, 2011. "RCP4.5: a pathway for stabilization of radiative forcing by 2100," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 77-94, November.
- Brent Sohngen & Robert Mendelsohn, 2003. "An Optimal Control Model of Forest Carbon Sequestration," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(2), pages 448-457.
- van Vuuren, Detlef P. & Stehfest, Elke & den Elzen, Michel G.J. & van Vliet, Jasper & Isaac, Morna, 2010. "Exploring IMAGE model scenarios that keep greenhouse gas radiative forcing below 3 W/m2 in 2100," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 1105-1120, September.
- Robert J. Barro & Xavier Sala-i-Martin, 2003. "Economic Growth, 2nd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262025531, January.
- Kenneth Gillingham & Steven Smith & Ronald Sands, 2008. "Impact of bioenergy crops in a carbon dioxide constrained world: an application of the MiniCAM energy-agriculture and land use model," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 13(7), pages 675-701, August.
- Detlef Vuuren & Elke Stehfest & Michel Elzen & Tom Kram & Jasper Vliet & Sebastiaan Deetman & Morna Isaac & Kees Klein Goldewijk & Andries Hof & Angelica Mendoza Beltran & Rineke Oostenrijk & Bas Ruij, 2011. "RCP2.6: exploring the possibility to keep global mean temperature increase below 2°C," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 95-116, November.
- Havlík, Petr & Schneider, Uwe A. & Schmid, Erwin & Böttcher, Hannes & Fritz, Steffen & Skalský, Rastislav & Aoki, Kentaro & Cara, Stéphane De & Kindermann, Georg & Kraxner, Florian & Leduc, Sylvai, 2011. "Global land-use implications of first and second generation biofuel targets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 5690-5702, October.
- Rose, Steven K. & Ahammad, Helal & Eickhout, Bas & Fisher, Brian & Kurosawa, Atsushi & Rao, Shilpa & Riahi, Keywan & van Vuuren, Detlef P., 2012. "Land-based mitigation in climate stabilization," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 365-380.
- Valentina Bosetti & Emanuele Massetti & Massimo Tavoni, 2007. "The WITCH Model. Structure, Baseline, Solutions," Working Papers 2007.10, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (barbara racah).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.