IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fem/femwpa/2015.62.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Combination of Equilibrium Models and Hybrid Life Cycle–Input-Output Analysis to Predict the Environmental Impacts of Energy Policy Scenarios

Author

Listed:
  • Elorri Igos

    (Public Research Centre Henri Tudor, Resource Centre for Environmental Technologies and Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology, Environmental Research and Innovation Department, Luxembourg)

  • Benedetto Rugani

    (Public Research Centre Henri Tudor, Resource Centre for Environmental Technologies and Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology, Environmental Research and Innovation Department, Luxembourg)

  • Sameer Rege

    (Public Research Centre Henri Tudor, Resource Centre for Environmental Technologies and Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology, Environmental Research and Innovation Department, Luxembourg)

  • Enrico Benetto

    (Public Research Centre Henri Tudor, Resource Centre for Environmental Technologies and Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology, Environmental Research and Innovation Department, Luxembourg)

  • Laurent Drouet

    (Public Research Centre Henri Tudor, Resource Centre for Environmental Technologies, Luxembourg Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei and Euro-Mediterranean Center on Climate Change, Italy)

  • Dan Zachary

    (Public Research Centre Henri Tudor, Resource Centre for Environmental Technologies and Whiting School of Engineering, The Johns Hopkins University, USA)

Abstract

Nowadays, many countries adopt an active agenda to mitigate the impact of greenhouse gas emissions by moving towards less polluting energy generation technologies. The environmental costs, directly or indirectly generated to achieve such a challenging objective, remain however largely underexplored. Until now, research has focused either on pure economic approaches such as computable general equilibrium (CGE) and partial equilibrium (PE) models, or on (physical) energy supply scenarios. These latter could be used to evaluate the environmental impacts of various energy saving or cleaner technologies via life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. These modelling efforts have, however, been pursued in isolation, without exploring the possible complementarities and synergies. In this study, we have undertaken a practical combination of these approaches into a common framework: on the one hand, by coupling a CGE with a PE model, and, on the other hand, by linking the outcomes from the coupling with a hybrid input-output-process based life cycle inventory. The methodological framework aimed at assessing the environmental consequences of two energy policy scenarios in Luxembourg between 2010 and 2025. The study highlights the potential of coupling CGE and PE models but also the related methodological difficulties (e.g. small number of available technologies in Luxembourg, intrinsic limitations of the two approaches, etc.). The assessment shows both environmental synergies and trade-offs due to the implementation of energy policies. For example, despite the changes in technologies towards the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, only marginal improvements are observed in the climate change mitigation scenario as compared to the business-as-usual. The energy related production and imports are indeed expected to increase over time and represent a large contribution to the country’s impacts. Interestingly, side effects on other impacts than climate change or fossil resource depletion (e.g. ionising radiation and water depletion) may also occur mainly due to the use of nuclear energy in neighbouring countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Elorri Igos & Benedetto Rugani & Sameer Rege & Enrico Benetto & Laurent Drouet & Dan Zachary, 2015. "Combination of Equilibrium Models and Hybrid Life Cycle–Input-Output Analysis to Predict the Environmental Impacts of Energy Policy Scenarios," Working Papers 2015.62, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  • Handle: RePEc:fem:femwpa:2015.62
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://feem-media.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/NDL2015-062.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tukker, Arnold & Poliakov, Evgueni & Heijungs, Reinout & Hawkins, Troy & Neuwahl, Frederik & Rueda-Cantuche, José M. & Giljum, Stefan & Moll, Stephan & Oosterhaven, Jan & Bouwmeester, Maaike, 2009. "Towards a global multi-regional environmentally extended input-output database," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1928-1937, May.
    2. Thepkhun, Panida & Limmeechokchai, Bundit & Fujimori, Shinichiro & Masui, Toshihiko & Shrestha, Ram M., 2013. "Thailand's Low-Carbon Scenario 2050: The AIM/CGE analyses of CO2 mitigation measures," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 561-572.
    3. Alexander T. Dale & André Frossard Pereira de Lucena & Joe Marriott & Bruno Soares Moreira Cesar Borba & Roberto Schaeffer & Melissa M. Bilec, 2013. "Modeling Future Life-Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Environmental Impacts of Electricity Supplies in Brazil," Energies, MDPI, vol. 6(7), pages 1-27, July.
    4. Strachan, Neil & Kannan, Ramachandran, 2008. "Hybrid modelling of long-term carbon reduction scenarios for the UK," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2947-2963, November.
    5. Dandres, Thomas & Gaudreault, Caroline & Tirado-Seco, Pablo & Samson, Réjean, 2012. "Macroanalysis of the economic and environmental impacts of a 2005–2025 European Union bioenergy policy using the GTAP model and life cycle assessment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 1180-1192.
    6. Dandres, Thomas & Gaudreault, Caroline & Tirado-Seco, Pablo & Samson, Réjean, 2011. "Assessing non-marginal variations with consequential LCA: Application to European energy sector," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 3121-3132, August.
    7. J. C. Minx & T. Wiedmann & R. Wood & G. P. Peters & M. Lenzen & A. Owen & K. Scott & J. Barrett & K. Hubacek & G. Baiocchi & A. Paul & E. Dawkins & J. Briggs & D. Guan & S. Suh & F. Ackerman, 2009. "Input-Output Analysis And Carbon Footprinting: An Overview Of Applications," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 187-216.
    8. J. Mason Earles & Anthony Halog & Peter Ince & Kenneth Skog, 2013. "Integrated Economic Equilibrium and Life Cycle Assessment Modeling for Policy‐based Consequential LCA," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 17(3), pages 375-384, June.
    9. Koskela, Sirkka & Seppala, Jyri & Lipp, Ando & Hiltunen, Marja-Riitta & Pold, Evelin & Talve, Siret, 2007. "Estonian electricity supply scenarios for 2020 and their environmental performance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 3571-3582, July.
    10. Marvuglia, Antonino & Benetto, Enrico & Rege, Sameer & Jury, Colin, 2013. "Modelling approaches for consequential life-cycle assessment (C-LCA) of bioenergy: Critical review and proposed framework for biogas production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 768-781.
    11. Patricia Fortes & Sofia Simões & Júlia Seixas & Denise Van Regemorter & Francisco Ferreira, 2013. "Top-down and bottom-up modelling to support low-carbon scenarios: climate policy implications," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 285-304, May.
    12. Zhou, Nan & Fridley, David & Khanna, Nina Zheng & Ke, Jing & McNeil, Michael & Levine, Mark, 2013. "China's energy and emissions outlook to 2050: Perspectives from bottom-up energy end-use model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 51-62.
    13. Mischke, Peggy & Karlsson, Kenneth B., 2014. "Modelling tools to evaluate China's future energy system – A review of the Chinese perspective," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 132-143.
    14. Dai, Hancheng & Masui, Toshihiko & Matsuoka, Yuzuru & Fujimori, Shinichiro, 2011. "Assessment of China's climate commitment and non-fossil energy plan towards 2020 using hybrid AIM/CGE model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2875-2887, May.
    15. Chen, Wenying & Wu, Zongxin & He, Jiankun & Gao, Pengfei & Xu, Shaofeng, 2007. "Carbon emission control strategies for China: A comparative study with partial and general equilibrium versions of the China MARKAL model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 59-72.
    16. Bae, Jeong Hwan & Cho, Gyeong-Lyeob, 2010. "A dynamic general equilibrium analysis on fostering a hydrogen economy in Korea," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(Supplemen), pages 57-66, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Quyen Le Luu & Sonia Longo & Maurizio Cellura & Eleonora Riva Sanseverino & Maria Anna Cusenza & Vincenzo Franzitta, 2020. "A Conceptual Review on Using Consequential Life Cycle Assessment Methodology for the Energy Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-19, June.
    2. Dai, Hancheng & Mischke, Peggy & Xie, Xuxuan & Xie, Yang & Masui, Toshihiko, 2016. "Closing the gap? Top-down versus bottom-up projections of China’s regional energy use and CO2 emissions," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 1355-1373.
    3. Cheng, Beibei & Dai, Hancheng & Wang, Peng & Xie, Yang & Chen, Li & Zhao, Daiqing & Masui, Toshihiko, 2016. "Impacts of low-carbon power policy on carbon mitigation in Guangdong Province, China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 515-527.
    4. Fortes, Patrícia & Pereira, Rui & Pereira, Alfredo & Seixas, Júlia, 2014. "Integrated technological-economic modeling platform for energy and climate policy analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 716-730.
    5. Jiang, Jingjing & Ye, Bin & Liu, Junguo, 2019. "Research on the peak of CO2 emissions in the developing world: Current progress and future prospect," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C), pages 186-203.
    6. Zhang, Shaohui & Worrell, Ernst & Crijns-Graus, Wina, 2015. "Synergy of air pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions of Chinese industries: A critical assessment of energy models," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 93(P2), pages 2436-2450.
    7. Ürge-Vorsatz, Diana & Kelemen, Agnes & Tirado-Herrero, Sergio & Thomas, Stefan & Thema, Johannes & Mzavanadze, Nora & Hauptstock, Dorothea & Suerkemper, Felix & Teubler, Jens & Gupta, Mukesh & Chatter, 2016. "Measuring multiple impacts of low-carbon energy options in a green economy context," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 1409-1426.
    8. Xin Su & Frédéric Ghersi & Fei Teng & Gaëlle Le Treut & Meicong Liang, 2022. "The economic impact of a deep decarbonisation pathway for China: a hybrid model analysis through bottom-up and top-down linking," Post-Print hal-03897206, HAL.
    9. Chen, Han & Yang, Lei & Chen, Wenying, 2020. "Modelling national, provincial and city-level low-carbon energy transformation pathways," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    10. Lekavičius, Vidas & Galinis, Arvydas & Miškinis, Vaclovas, 2019. "Long-term economic impacts of energy development scenarios: The role of domestic electricity generation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 253(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Wu, X.F. & Chen, G.Q., 2018. "Coal use embodied in globalized world economy: From source to sink through supply chain," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 978-993.
    12. Kemal Sarıca & Wallace E. Tyner, 2016. "Economic Impacts of Increased U.S. Exports of Natural Gas: An Energy System Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-16, May.
    13. Font Vivanco, David & Nechifor, Victor & Freire-González, Jaume & Calzadilla, Alvaro, 2021. "Economy-wide rebound makes UK’s electric car subsidy fall short of expectations," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 297(C).
    14. Oppon, Eunice & Acquaye, Adolf & Ibn-Mohammed, Taofeeq & Koh, Lenny, 2018. "Modelling Multi-regional Ecological Exchanges: The Case of UK and Africa," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 422-435.
    15. Menten, Fabio & Tchung-Ming, Stéphane & Lorne, Daphné & Bouvart, Frédérique, 2015. "Lessons from the use of a long-term energy model for consequential life cycle assessment: The BTL case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 942-960.
    16. Vega-Coloma, Mabel & Zaror, Claudio A., 2018. "Environmental impact profile of electricity generation in Chile: A baseline study over two decades," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 154-167.
    17. Yin, Xiang & Chen, Wenying & Eom, Jiyong & Clarke, Leon E. & Kim, Son H. & Patel, Pralit L. & Yu, Sha & Kyle, G. Page, 2015. "China's transportation energy consumption and CO2 emissions from a global perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 233-248.
    18. Callesen, Ingeborg, 2016. "Biodiversity and ecosystem services in life cycle impact assessment – Inventory objects or impact categories?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 94-103.
    19. Chunark, Puttipong & Limmeechokchai, Bundit & Fujimori, Shinichiro & Masui, Toshihiko, 2017. "Renewable energy achievements in CO2 mitigation in Thailand's NDCs," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(PB), pages 1294-1305.
    20. Nogueira, Luiz Augusto Horta & Antonio de Souza, Luiz Gustavo & Cortez, Luís Augusto Barbosa & Leal, Manoel Regis Lima Verde, 2017. "Sustainable and Integrated Bioenergy Assessment for Latin America, Caribbean and Africa (SIByl-LACAf): The path from feasibility to acceptability," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 292-308.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Computable General Equilibrium Model; Partial Equilibrium Model; Energy Policy Life Cycle Assessment; Consequential; Input-Output;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q40 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - General
    • C67 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Input-Output Models
    • C68 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computable General Equilibrium Models

    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:fem:femwpa:2015.62. 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: Alberto Prina Cerai (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.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.