IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v61y2013icp78-87.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Should Alberta upgrade oil sands bitumen? An integrated life cycle framework to evaluate energy systems investment tradeoffs

Author

Listed:
  • Choquette-Levy, Nicolas
  • MacLean, Heather L.
  • Bergerson, Joule A.

Abstract

The inclusion of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions costs in energy systems investment decision-making requires the development of a framework that accounts for GHG and economic tradeoffs. This paper develops such a framework by integrating partial cost–benefit analysis with life cycle assessment to explore the question of whether bitumen should be upgraded in the Canadian province of Alberta to produce synthetic crude oil (SCO), or blended with light hydrocarbons to produce lower-quality diluted bitumen (dilbit). The net present value (NPV) of these options is calculated from the stakeholder perspectives of the oil sands industry, the Alberta public, and a climate-concerned Alberta resident. This calculation includes monetized GHG emissions costs stemming from a hypothetical economy-wide GHG price, and a sensitivity analysis explores the effects of variations in technical and economic conditions on stakeholders’ preferences. We find that under most plausible sets of conditions, industry would prefer the dilution option, while the climate-concerned Alberta resident would prefer the upgrading option. In contrast, the preferences of the general Alberta public depend on the values of key variables (e.g., the SCO-dilbit price differential). Key drivers of differences among stakeholders’ preferences include different perceptions of risks and responsibilities for life cycle GHG emissions.

Suggested Citation

  • Choquette-Levy, Nicolas & MacLean, Heather L. & Bergerson, Joule A., 2013. "Should Alberta upgrade oil sands bitumen? An integrated life cycle framework to evaluate energy systems investment tradeoffs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 78-87.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:61:y:2013:i:c:p:78-87
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.04.051
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421513003042
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.04.051?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Pearce, 2003. "The Social Cost of Carbon and its Policy Implications," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 19(3), pages 362-384.
    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. Rahman, Md. Mustafizur & Canter, Christina & Kumar, Amit, 2015. "Well-to-wheel life cycle assessment of transportation fuels derived from different North American conventional crudes," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 159-173.
    2. Nimana, Balwinder & Canter, Christina & Kumar, Amit, 2015. "Energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in upgrading and refining of Canada's oil sands products," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 65-79.
    3. Radpour, Saeidreza & Gemechu, Eskinder & Ahiduzzaman, Md & Kumar, Amit, 2021. "Development of a framework for the assessment of the market penetration of novel in situ bitumen extraction technologies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).

    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. van den Bergh, J.C.J.M. & Botzen, W.J.W., 2015. "Monetary valuation of the social cost of CO2 emissions: A critical survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 33-46.
    2. Jacinto F. Fabiosa & John C. Beghin & Fengxia Dong & JAmani Elobeid & Simla Tokgoz & Tun-Hsiang Yu, 2010. "Land Allocation Effects of the Global Ethanol Surge: Predictions from the International FAPRI Model," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 86(4), pages 687-706.
    3. Rintaro Yamaguchi, 2019. "Intergenerational Discounting with Intragenerational Inequality in Consumption and the Environment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(4), pages 957-972, August.
    4. Jasmina Ćetković & Slobodan Lakić & Angelina Živković & Miloš Žarković & Radoje Vujadinović, 2021. "Economic Analysis of Measures for GHG Emission Reduction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-25, February.
    5. Tol, Richard S.J. & Yohe, Gary W., 2009. "The Stern Review: A deconstruction," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 1032-1040, March.
    6. Ian W.H. Parry, 2005. "Fiscal Interactions and the Costs of Controlling Pollution from Electricity," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(4), pages 849-869, Winter.
    7. Fleurbaey, Marc & Zuber, Stéphane, 2015. "Discounting, risk and inequality: A general approach," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 34-49.
    8. Wen, Wen & Zhou, P. & Zhang, Fuqiang, 2018. "Carbon emissions abatement: Emissions trading vs consumer awareness," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 34-47.
    9. Nordhaus, William, 2013. "Integrated Economic and Climate Modeling," Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, in: Peter B. Dixon & Dale Jorgenson (ed.), Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 1069-1131, Elsevier.
    10. Kazushi Hatase & Shunsuke Managi, 2015. "Increase in carbon prices: analysis of energy-economy modeling," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 17(2), pages 241-262, April.
    11. Jussi Lintunen & Lauri Vilmi, 2021. "Optimal Emission Prices Over the Business Cycles," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 80(1), pages 135-167, September.
    12. Dieckhoener, Caroline & Hecking, Harald, 2012. "Greenhouse Gas Abatement Cost Curves of the Residential Heating Market – a Microeconomic Approach," EWI Working Papers 2012-16, Energiewirtschaftliches Institut an der Universitaet zu Koeln (EWI).
    13. Zhang, Hong & Jin, Gui & Zhang, Zhengyu, 2021. "Coupling system of carbon emission and social economy: A review," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    14. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Ugo Rizzo, 2014. "Moving'diversely'towards'the'green'economy.'CO2'abating'techno organisational'trajectories'and'environmental'policy'in'EU'sectors," SEEDS Working Papers 0914, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised May 2014.
    15. Mark Delucchi & Don McCubbin, 2011. "External Costs of Transport in the United States," Chapters, in: André de Palma & Robin Lindsey & Emile Quinet & Roger Vickerman (ed.), A Handbook of Transport Economics, chapter 15, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Richard S.J. Tol, 2021. "Estimates of the social cost of carbon have not changed over time," Working Paper Series 0821, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    17. Birgit Bednar-Friedl, 2012. "Climate policy targets in emerging and industrialized economies: the influence of technological differences, environmental preferences and propensity to save," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 191-215, May.
    18. baptiste perrissin fabert & Etienne Espagne & Antonin Pottier & Franck Nadaus, 2012. "Disentangling the Stern/Nordhaus controversy. Why and how do beliefs and modelling choices matter?," EcoMod2012 4270, EcoMod.
    19. Wei, Yi-Ming & Mi, Zhi-Fu & Huang, Zhimin, 2015. "Climate policy modeling: An online SCI-E and SSCI based literature review," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 57(PA), pages 70-84.
    20. Valentina Bosetti & Enrica De Cian, 2013. "A Good Opening: The Key to Make the Most of Unilateral Climate Action," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(2), pages 255-276, October.

    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:eee:enepol:v:61:y:2013:i:c:p:78-87. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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.