IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/fflc08/49090.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Environmental Lifecycle Assessment for Policy Decision-Making and Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Rajagopal, Deepak
  • Zilberman, David

Abstract

A key argument in the societal debate against polices to support biofuels is that production of these alternative fuels may in fact consume more energy than they generate and emit more greenhouse gases than they sequester (Fargione et al., 2008; Searchinger et al., 2008; Rajagopal and Zilberman, 2007; Farrell et al., 2006; Pimentel and Patzek, 2005). Metrics like net energy value, net carbon value and net petroleum offset are the basis for comparing the various fuels and are the source of these debates. The technique that underlies the calculation of these metrics is called lifecycle assessment or lifecycle analysis (LCA). A central aspect of LCA (described in detail in the next section) is it assumes linear technologies and produces outcomes that are numbers – how many units of energy are needed to produce a liter of ethanol fuel from a ton of corn. But as basic economics suggests, under reasonable conditions of some substitution between inputs and processes in production, this ratio is not a number but a function of prices. For instance, with energy being a ubiquitous input to production, a change in the relative price of different energy sources or with respect to other inputs will induce adjustments in the form of fuel switching, substitution between capital, energy and labor etc. This switching can occur at several levels in the production chain of a commodity. This will obviously alter the net carbon indicator for a fuel in the future. Also current LCA outcomes change only if the physical quantities of various inputs such as quantity of coal or electricity used in calculating LCA change. In other words, today LCA is capable of answering, how does a 10% decrease in the share of natural gas in the average electricity mix decrease the net carbon value of ethanol? But it is not capable of answering, if natural gas prices increase by 10% what is the impact on the net carbon value of ethanol? Obviously the latter is more intuitive and useful way of framing the question than the former from a policy standpoint. In this paper, we introduce a framework which can be used to derive LCA indicators directly as a function of underlying economic parameters and make it easier to simulate the impact of policies like pollution taxes and fuel mandates which in one way or another ultimately alter the relative price of commodities. Next we provide some background on current LCA literature. We then introduce a micro-economics based LCA that integrates prices directly into the lifecycle framework. We point out some implications of our model with simple illustrations. We finally describe directions for future work.

Suggested Citation

  • Rajagopal, Deepak & Zilberman, David, 2008. "Environmental Lifecycle Assessment for Policy Decision-Making and Analysis," Lifecycle Carbon Footprint of Biofuels Workshop, January 29, 2008, Miami Beach, Florida 49090, Farm Foundation.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:fflc08:49090
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/49090
    Download Restriction: no

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Piroli, Giuseppe & Rajcaniova, Miroslava & Ciaian, Pavel & Kancs, d׳Artis, 2015. "From a rise in B to a fall in C? SVAR analysis of environmental impact of biofuels," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 921-930.
    2. Liu, Boying & Richard Shumway, C., 2016. "Substitution elasticities between GHG-polluting and nonpolluting inputs in agricultural production: A meta-regression," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 123-132.
    3. Thompson, Wyatt & Whistance, Jarrett & Meyer, Seth, 2011. "Effects of US biofuel policies on US and world petroleum product markets with consequences for greenhouse gas emissions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 5509-5518, September.
    4. repec:eee:eneeco:v:67:y:2017:i:c:p:146-158 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental 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:fflc08:49090. 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: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/farmfus.html .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.