Modelling the costs of energy crops: A case study of US corn and Brazilian sugar cane
High crude oil prices, uncertainties about the consequences of climate change and the eventual decline of conventional oil production raise the prospects of alternative fuels, such as biofuels. This paper describes a simple probabilistic model of the costs of energy crops, drawing on the user's degree of belief about a series of parameters as an input. This forward-looking analysis quantifies the effects of production constraints and experience on the costs of corn and sugar cane, which can then be converted to bioethanol. Land is a limited and heterogeneous resource: the crop cost model builds on the marginal land suitability, which is assumed to decrease as more land is taken into production, driving down the marginal crop yield. Also, the maximum achievable yield is increased over time by technological change, while the yield gap between the actual yield and the maximum yield decreases through improved management practices. The results show large uncertainties in the future costs of producing corn and sugar cane, with a 90% confidence interval of 2.9-7.2$/GJ in 2030 for marginal corn costs, and 1.5-2.5$/GJ in 2030 for marginal sugar cane costs. The influence of each parameter on these supply costs is examined.
If 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- McDonald, Alan & Schrattenholzer, Leo, 2001. "Learning rates for energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 255-261, March.
- Warwick McKibbin & David Pearce & Alison Stegman, 2004.
"Long Run Projections For Climate Change Scenarios,"
CAMA Working Papers
2004-01, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
- Grubler, Arnulf & Nakicenovic, Nebojsa & Victor, David G., 1999. "Dynamics of energy technologies and global change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 247-280, May.
- Tooraj Jamasb, 2007. "Technical Change Theory and Learning Curves: Patterns of Progress in Electricity Generation Technologies," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 51-72.
- Hettinga, W.G. & Junginger, H.M. & Dekker, S.C. & Hoogwijk, M. & McAloon, A.J. & Hicks, K.B., 2009. "Understanding the reductions in US corn ethanol production costs: An experience curve approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 190-203, January.
- Eickhout, Bas & van Meijl, Hans & Tabeau, Andrzej & Stehfest, Elke, 2008. "The Impact of Environmental and Climate Constraints on Global Food Supply," GTAP Working Papers 2608, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
- Harty D. Saunders, 1992. "The Khazzoom-Brookes Postulate and Neoclassical Growth," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 131-148.
- Grubb, Michael, 2001. "Who's afraid of atmospheric stabilisation? Making the link between energy resources and climate change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(11), pages 837-845, September.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:1:p:547-561. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.