IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v28y2003i14p1405-1425.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

CO2 mitigation costs of large-scale bioenergy technologies in competitive electricity markets

Author

Listed:
  • Gustavsson, Leif
  • Madlener, Reinhard

Abstract

In this study, we compare and contrast the impact of recent technological developments in large biomass-fired and natural-gas-fired cogeneration and condensing plants in terms of CO2 mitigation costs and under the conditions of a competitive electricity market. The CO2 mitigation cost indicates the minimum economic incentive required (e.g. in the form of a carbon tax) to equal the cost of a less carbon extensive system with the cost of a reference system. The results show that CO2 mitigation costs are lower for biomass systems than for natural gas systems with decarbonization. However, in liberalized energy markets and given the socio-political will to implement carbon extensive energy systems, market-based policy measures are still required to make biomass and decarbonization options competitive and thus help them to penetrate the market. This cost of cogeneration plants, however, depends on the evaluation method used. If we account for the limitation of heat sinks by expanding the reference entity to include both heat and power, as is typically recommended in life-cycle analysis, then the biomass-based gasification combined cycle (BIG/CC) technology turns out to be less expensive and to exhibit lower CO2 mitigation costs than biomass-fired steam turbine plants. However, a heat credit granted to cogeneration systems that is based on avoided cost of separate heat production, puts the steam turbine technology despite its lower system efficiency at an advantage. In contrast, when a crediting method based on avoided electricity production in natural-gas-fired condensing plants is employed, the BIG/CC technology turns out to be more cost-competitive than the steam turbine technology for carbon tax levels beyond about $ 150/t C. Furthermore, steam turbine plants are able to compete with natural-gas-fired cogeneration plants at carbon tax levels higher than about $ 90/t C.

Suggested Citation

  • Gustavsson, Leif & Madlener, Reinhard, 2003. "CO2 mitigation costs of large-scale bioenergy technologies in competitive electricity markets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(14), pages 1405-1425.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:28:y:2003:i:14:p:1405-1425
    DOI: 10.1016/S0360-5442(03)00126-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544203001269
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/S0360-5442(03)00126-9?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. Hillring, Bengt, 1999. "The Swedish wood fuel market," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 1031-1036.
    2. Wiser, R. H., 2000. "The role of public policy in emerging green power markets: an analysis of marketer preferences," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 177-212, June.
    3. Hillring, Bengt, 1999. "Regional prices in the Swedish wood-fuel market," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 24(9), pages 811-821.
    4. Gustavsson, Leif & Borjesson, Pal, 1998. "CO2 mitigation cost: Bioenergy systems and natural gas systems with decarbonization," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(9), pages 699-713, August.
    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. Dassanayake, Geekiyanage Disela Malinga & Kumar, Amit, 2012. "Techno-economic assessment of triticale straw for power generation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 236-245.
    2. Kalt, Gerald & Kranzl, Lukas, 2011. "Assessing the economic efficiency of bioenergy technologies in climate mitigation and fossil fuel replacement in Austria using a techno-economic approach," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(11), pages 3665-3684.
    3. Maung, Thein A. & McCarl, Bruce A., 2013. "Economic factors influencing potential use of cellulosic crop residues for electricity generation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 81-91.
    4. Xinhua Shen & Raghava R. Kommalapati & Ziaul Huque, 2015. "The Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Power Generation from Lignocellulosic Biomass," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-14, September.
    5. Foley, A.M. & Ó Gallachóir, B.P. & Hur, J. & Baldick, R. & McKeogh, E.J., 2010. "A strategic review of electricity systems models," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 4522-4530.
    6. Xie, Y.L. & Li, Y.P. & Huang, G.H. & Li, Y.F., 2010. "An interval fixed-mix stochastic programming method for greenhouse gas mitigation in energy systems under uncertainty," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 4627-4644.
    7. Uddin, Sk Noim & Barreto, Leonardo, 2007. "Biomass-fired cogeneration systems with CO2 capture and storage," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1006-1019.
    8. Kumbaroglu, Gürkan & Madlener, Reinhard & Demirel, Mustafa, 2008. "A real options evaluation model for the diffusion prospects of new renewable power generation technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 1882-1908, July.
    9. Evans, Annette & Strezov, Vladimir & Evans, Tim J., 2010. "Sustainability considerations for electricity generation from biomass," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 1419-1427, June.
    10. Zongguo Wen & Xuan Zhang & Xuewei Yu & Jinghan Di, 2015. "Technology options for reducing CO 2 in China's electricity sector in 2010–2030: From the perspective of internal and social costs," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 5(6), pages 772-785, December.
    11. Thornley, Patricia & Upham, Paul & Huang, Ye & Rezvani, Sina & Brammer, John & Rogers, John, 2009. "Integrated assessment of bioelectricity technology options," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 890-903, March.
    12. Sunde, K. & Brekke, A. & Solberg, B., 2011. "Environmental impacts and costs of woody Biomass-to-Liquid (BTL) production and use -- A review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(8), pages 591-602, October.
    13. Joelsson, Anna & Gustavsson, Leif, 2009. "District heating and energy efficiency in detached houses of differing size and construction," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 126-134, February.
    14. Bartoli, Andrea & Hamelin, Lorie & Rozakis, Stelios & Borzęcka, Magdalena & Brandão, Miguel, 2019. "Coupling economic and GHG emission accounting models to evaluate the sustainability of biogas policies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 133-148.
    15. González, Arnau & Riba, Jordi-Roger & Puig, Rita & Navarro, Pere, 2015. "Review of micro- and small-scale technologies to produce electricity and heat from Mediterranean forests׳ wood chips," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 143-155.
    16. Muench, Stefan & Guenther, Edeltraud, 2013. "A systematic review of bioenergy life cycle assessments," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 257-273.
    17. Börjesson, Martin & Ahlgren, Erik O., 2010. "Biomass gasification in cost-optimized district heating systems--A regional modelling analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 168-180, January.

    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. Gustavsson, Leif & Karlsson, Asa, 2002. "A system perspective on the heating of detached houses," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 553-574, June.
    2. Schipfer, Fabian & Kranzl, Lukas & Olsson, Olle & Lamers, Patrick, 2020. "The European wood pellets for heating market - Price developments, trade and market efficiency," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    3. Brännlund, Runar & Marklund, Per-Olov & Sjöström, Magnus, 2001. "Evaluating market efficiency without price data. The Swedish market for wood fuel," Umeå Economic Studies 576, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    4. Leonel J. R. Nunes & Margarida Casau & Marta Ferreira Dias, 2021. "Portuguese Wood Pellets Market: Organization, Production and Consumption Analysis," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-24, December.
    5. Puppim de Oliveira, J. A., 2002. "The policymaking process for creating competitive assets for the use of biomass energy: the Brazilian alcohol programme," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 6(1-2), pages 129-140.
    6. Mah, Daphne Ngar-yin & van der Vleuten, Johannes Marinus & Hills, Peter & Tao, Julia, 2012. "Consumer perceptions of smart grid development: Results of a Hong Kong survey and policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 204-216.
    7. Joelsson, Anna & Gustavsson, Leif, 2009. "District heating and energy efficiency in detached houses of differing size and construction," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 126-134, February.
    8. Karlsson, Asa & Gustavsson, Leif, 2003. "External costs and taxes in heat supply systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(14), pages 1541-1560, November.
    9. Hillring, B, 2003. "Incentives for co-firing in bio-fuelled industrial steam, heat and power production—Swedish experiences," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 843-848.
    10. Uddin, Sk Noim & Barreto, Leonardo, 2007. "Biomass-fired cogeneration systems with CO2 capture and storage," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1006-1019.
    11. Hillring, Bengt, 1999. "Regional prices in the Swedish wood-fuel market," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 24(9), pages 811-821.
    12. Zou, Xiaoxia & Li, Yu’e & Cremades, Roger & Gao, Qingzhu & Wan, Yunfan & Qin, Xiaobo, 2013. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of water-saving irrigation technologies based on climate change response: A case study of China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 9-20.
    13. Shakeel, Shah Rukh & Takala, Josu & Zhu, Lian-Dong, 2017. "Commercialization of renewable energy technologies: A ladder building approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 855-867.
    14. Xiangsheng Dou, 2017. "Low Carbon Technology Innovation, Carbon Emissions Trading and Relevant Policy Support for China s Low Carbon Economy Development," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 7(2), pages 172-184.
    15. Zhou, Shan & Solomon, Barry D., 2021. "The interplay between renewable portfolio standards and voluntary green power markets in the United States," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 720-729.

    More about this item

    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:eee:energy:v:28:y:2003:i:14:p:1405-1425. 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.journals.elsevier.com/energy .

    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.