IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iafepa/319782.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Conditions of Development of The Agricultural Biogas Industry in Poland in The Context of Historical Experiences and Challenges of The European Green Deal

Author

Listed:
  • Ignaciuk, Wiktor
  • Sulewski, Piotr

Abstract

The aim of the study was to assess the current development of the agricultural biogas industry in Poland and to indicate the key factors determining the possibility of popularizing this category of renewable energy in the coming years. The article is based on secondary data. The study uses statistical data on agricultural biogas production from the statistics of Eurostat, the Energy Regulatory Office, and the National Center for Agricultural Support. The S-C-P (Structure-Conduct-Performance) analysis was used to synthetically present the collected material and assess the situation of the Polish agricultural biogas industry. The agricultural biogas plants operating in Poland produced only about 325 million3 biogas in 2020, from which 689 GWh of electricity was generated. This constitutes a small part of the biogas potential of Polish agriculture (various studies indicate the potential in the range of 1.6-4.2 billion m3 of agricultural biogas from organic fertilizers produced on farms). Electricity obtained from agricultural biogas covers less than 0.4% of the domestic demand. Despite the ambitious plans created several years ago, the development of the agricultural biogas industry has been practically halted. The main reason for this is great dependence on the system of support with public funds. Further development of the biogas industry requires stable financial support. Despite negative historical experiences, it can be expected that the development of the industry will accelerate in the coming years. This is because agricultural biogas has many advantages relevant to the challenges of the European Green Deal. However, there is a need for raising the awareness among policymakers of the environmental and economic benefits resulting from the dissemination of agricultural biogas production.

Suggested Citation

  • Ignaciuk, Wiktor & Sulewski, Piotr, 2021. "Conditions of Development of The Agricultural Biogas Industry in Poland in The Context of Historical Experiences and Challenges of The European Green Deal," Problems of Agricultural Economics / Zagadnienia Ekonomiki Rolnej 319782, Institute of Agricultural and Food Economics - National Research Institute (IAFE-NRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:iafepa:319782
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.319782
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/319782/files/CONDITIONS%20OF%20DEVELOPMENT.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.319782?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johan Rockström & Will Steffen & Kevin Noone & Åsa Persson & F. Stuart Chapin & Eric F. Lambin & Timothy M. Lenton & Marten Scheffer & Carl Folke & Hans Joachim Schellnhuber & Björn Nykvist & Cynthia , 2009. "A safe operating space for humanity," Nature, Nature, vol. 461(7263), pages 472-475, September.
    2. Hakawati, Rawan & Smyth, Beatrice M. & McCullough, Geoffrey & De Rosa, Fabio & Rooney, David, 2017. "What is the most energy efficient route for biogas utilization: Heat, electricity or transport?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 1076-1087.
    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. Sören Mohrmann & Verena Otter, 2022. "Categorisation of Biogas Plant Operators in Germany with Regards to Their Intention to Use Straw Pellets as Innovative and Sustainable Substrate Alternative," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-26, December.

    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. Nelson, Ewan & Warren, Peter, 2020. "UK transport decoupling: On track for clean growth in transport?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 39-51.
    2. Richter, Andries & Dakos, Vasilis, 2015. "Profit fluctuations signal eroding resilience of natural resources," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 12-21.
    3. Rostami-Tabar, Bahman & Ali, Mohammad M. & Hong, Tao & Hyndman, Rob J. & Porter, Michael D. & Syntetos, Aris, 2022. "Forecasting for social good," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 1245-1257.
    4. Huiyuan Guan & Yongping Bai & Chunyue Zhang, 2022. "Research on Ecosystem Security and Restoration Pattern of Urban Agglomeration in the Yellow River Basin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-19, September.
    5. Filipa Correia & Philipp Erfruth & Julie Bryhn, 2018. "The 2030 Agenda: The roadmap to GlobALLizaton," Working Papers 156, United Nations, Department of Economics and Social Affairs.
    6. Birgit Kopainsky & Anita Frehner & Adrian Müller, 2020. "Sustainable and healthy diets: Synergies and trade‐offs in Switzerland," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 908-927, November.
    7. Hervé Corvellec & Johan Hultman & Anne Jerneck & Susanne Arvidsson & Johan Ekroos & Niklas Wahlberg & Timothy W. Luke, 2021. "Resourcification: A non‐essentialist theory of resources for sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(6), pages 1249-1256, November.
    8. Pérez-Sánchez, Laura & Velasco-Fernández, Raúl & Giampietro, Mario, 2021. "The international division of labor and embodied working time in trade for the US, the EU and China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    9. Islam, Moinul & Kotani, Koji & Managi, Shunsuke, 2016. "Climate perception and flood mitigation cooperation: A Bangladesh case study," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 117-133.
    10. Yutong Zhang & Wei Zhou & Danxue Luo, 2023. "The Relationship Research between Biodiversity Conservation and Economic Growth: From Multi-Level Attempts to Key Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-19, February.
    11. Carina Mueller & Christopher West & Mairon G. Bastos Lima & Bob Doherty, 2023. "Demand-Side Actors in Agricultural Supply Chain Sustainability: An Assessment of Motivations for Action, Implementation Challenges, and Research Frontiers," World, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-20, September.
    12. Janet Judy McIntyre‐Mills, 2013. "Anthropocentrism and Well‐being: A Way Out of the Lobster Pot?," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 136-155, March.
    13. Hametner, Markus, 2022. "Economics without ecology: How the SDGs fail to align socioeconomic development with environmental sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    14. Ronja Teschner & Jessica Ruppen & Basil Bornemann & Rony Emmenegger & Lucía Aguirre Sánchez, 2021. "Mapping Sustainable Diets: A Comparison of Sustainability References in Dietary Guidelines of Swiss Food Governance Actors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, November.
    15. Kim, Yeon-Su & Rodrigues, Marcos & Robinne, François-Nicolas, 2021. "Economic drivers of global fire activity: A critical review using the DPSIR framework," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    16. Barbara Predan & Petra Černe Oven, 2023. "Developing a Pedagogical Approach with the Aim of Empowering Educators and Students to Address Emerging Global Issues such as Climate Change and Social Justice: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-22, December.
    17. Kaltenegger, Oliver & Löschel, Andreas & Pothen, Frank, 2017. "The effect of globalisation on energy footprints: Disentangling the links of global value chains," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(S1), pages 148-168.
    18. Hörisch, Jacob & Ortas, Eduardo & Schaltegger, Stefan & Álvarez, Igor, 2015. "Environmental effects of sustainability management tools: An empirical analysis of large companies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 241-249.
    19. Zhang, Yanjie & Pan, Ying & Li, Meng & Wang, Zhipeng & Wu, Junxi & Zhang, Xianzhou & Cao, Yanan, 2021. "Impacts of human appropriation of net primary production on ecosystem regulating services in Tibet," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    20. Gampe, Anja & Hubmann, Georg & Kapeller, Jakob, 2024. "Sozialer Fortschritt in offenen Gesellschaften des 21. Jahrhunderts: Unrealistische Utopie oder notwendige Möglichkeit?," ifso working paper series 31, University of Duisburg-Essen, Institute for Socioeconomics (ifso).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy; 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:iafepa:319782. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ierigpl.html .

    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.