IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-01117737.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Politiques pro-biocarburants et climatique américaines : impact sur les choix énergétiques du Brésil et des Etats-Unis et bilan carbone

Author

Listed:
  • Ujjayant Chakravorty

    (TSE-R - Toulouse School of Economics - UT Capitole - Université Toulouse Capitole - UT - Université de Toulouse - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, University of Alberta)

  • Marie-Hélène Hubert

    (CREM - Centre de recherche en économie et management - UNICAEN - Université de Caen Normandie - NU - Normandie Université - UR - Université de Rennes - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Michel Moreaux

    (TSE-R - Toulouse School of Economics - UT Capitole - Université Toulouse Capitole - UT - Université de Toulouse - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

Nous analysons l'impact de deux politiques américaines sur la production et les échanges d'éthanol (biocarburants de première génération) et d'éthanol ligno-cellulosique (biocarburant de seconde génération) aux Etats-Unis et au Brésil ainsi que sur les émissions directes et indirectes de carbone. La première politique est une politique dite «pro-biocarburants» qui impose un usage minimal de biocarburants. La deuxième est la politique climatique de réduction des émissions de gaz à effet de serre. Notre étude montre que la première politique encourage la production massive d'éthanol ligno-cellulosique, la diminution des émissions directes de carbone étant marginale. La deuxième politique accroît le prix des carburants et en décourage la demande. Elle a un effet significatif sur le taux de déforestation au Brésil et augmente de ce fait les émissions indirectes de carbone. La subvention nécessaire à l'implémentation de la politique «pro-biocarburants» devrait être de l'ordre 1.1 US $ par gallon. Enfin, la taxe sur le carbone dans le secteur des transports aux Etats-Unis devrait être égale à 120 US $ par tonne équivalent carbone.

Suggested Citation

  • Ujjayant Chakravorty & Marie-Hélène Hubert & Michel Moreaux, 2010. "Politiques pro-biocarburants et climatique américaines : impact sur les choix énergétiques du Brésil et des Etats-Unis et bilan carbone," Post-Print halshs-01117737, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-01117737
    DOI: 10.3917/reco.611.0213
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chakravorty, Ujjayant & Magné, Bertrand & Moreaux, Michel, 2008. "A dynamic model of food and clean energy," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 1181-1203, April.
    2. Lubowski, Ruben N. & Plantinga, Andrew J. & Stavins, Robert N., 2006. "Land-use change and carbon sinks: Econometric estimation of the carbon sequestration supply function," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 135-152, March.
    3. Richard E. Howitt, 1995. "Positive Mathematical Programming," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(2), pages 329-342.
    4. G. C. van Kooten & Henk Folmer, 2004. "Land and Forest Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3466.
    5. Khanna, Madhu, 2008. "Cellulosic Biofuels: Are They Economically Viable and Environmentally Sustainable?," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 23(3), pages 1-6.
    6. Searchinger, Timothy & Heimlich, Ralph & Houghton, R. A. & Dong, Fengxia & Elobeid, Amani & Fabiosa, Jacinto F. & Tokgoz, Simla & Hayes, Dermot J. & Yu, Hun-Hsiang, 2008. "Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12881, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Chakravorty, Ujjayant & Roumasset, James & Tse, Kinping, 1997. "Endogenous Substitution among Energy Resources and Global Warming," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(6), pages 1201-1234, December.
    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. Ujjayant Chakravorty & Marie‐Hélène Hubert & Michel Moreaux & Linda Nøstbakken, 2017. "Long‐Run Impact of Biofuels on Food Prices," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 119(3), pages 733-767, July.
    2. CHAKRAVORTY Ujjayant & HUBERT Marie-Helene & MOREAUX Michel, 2009. "Politique pro-biocarburants et climatique américaines : impact sur les choix énergétiques et bilan carbone," LERNA Working Papers 09.22.298, LERNA, University of Toulouse.
    3. Ujjayant Chakravorty & Marie-Helene Hubert & Michel Moreaux, 2014. "Land Allocation between Food and Energy," Frontiers of Economics in China-Selected Publications from Chinese Universities, Higher Education Press, vol. 9(1), pages 52-69, March.
    4. Chakravorty, Ujjayant & Hubert, Marie-Hélène & Moreaux, Michel & Nøstbakken, Linda, 2010. "Will Biofuel Mandates Raise Food Prices?," TSE Working Papers 10-212, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    5. Affuso, Ermanno & Hite, Diane, 2013. "A model for sustainable land use in biofuel production: An application to the state of Alabama," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 29-39.
    6. Kooten, G. Cornelis van, 2013. "Modeling Forest Trade in Logs and Lumber: Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis," Working Papers 149182, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    7. CARPENTIER, Alain & GOHIN, Alexandre & SCKOKAI, Paolo & THOMAS, Alban, 2015. "Economic modelling of agricultural production: past advances and new challenges," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 96(1), March.
    8. Carpentier, Alain & Letort, Elodie, 2009. "Modeling acreage decisions within the multinomial Logit framework," Working Papers 211011, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    9. Hertel, Thomas W. & Tyner, Wallace E. & Birur, Dileep K., 2008. "Biofuels for all? Understanding the Global Impacts of Multinational Mandates," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6526, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. Marion Dupoux, 2016. "The land use change time-accounting failure," EconomiX Working Papers 2016-28, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    11. Michael Hoel & Thea Marcelia Sletten, 2014. "Wood-Based Bioenergy," CESifo Working Paper Series 4686, CESifo.
    12. Ji, Yongjie & Rabotyagov, Sergey & Kling, Catherine L., 2014. "Crop Choice and Rotational Effects: A Dynamic Model of Land Use in Iowa in Recent Years," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170366, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. Stephen Polasky & Erik Nelson & Derric Pennington & Kris Johnson, 2011. "The Impact of Land-Use Change on Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity and Returns to Landowners: A Case Study in the State of Minnesota," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 219-242, February.
    14. Ujjayant Chakravorty & Marie‐Hélène Hubert & Beyza Ural Marchand, 2019. "Food for fuel: The effect of the US biofuel mandate on poverty in India," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(3), pages 1153-1193, July.
    15. Chen, Xiaoguang & Huang, Haixiao & Khanna, Madhu & Önal, Hayri, 2014. "Alternative transportation fuel standards: Welfare effects and climate benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 241-257.
    16. Dupoux, Marion, 2019. "The land use change time-accounting failure," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    17. Kamel Louhichi & Hugo Valin, 2012. "Impact of EU biofuel policies on the French arable sector: A micro-level analysis using global market and farm-based supply models," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 93(3), pages 233-272.
    18. Saraly Andrade de Sá & Charles Palmer & Stefanie Engel, 2012. "Ethanol Production, Food and Forests," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 1-21, January.
    19. Lungarska, Anna & Chakir, Raja, 2018. "Climate-induced Land Use Change in France: Impacts of Agricultural Adaptation and Climate Change Mitigation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 134-154.
    20. Vorotnikova, Ekaterina & Seale, James L, 2014. "U.S. Ethanol Mandate Is a Hidden Subsidy to Corn Producers," 2014 Annual Meeting, February 1-4, 2014, Dallas, Texas 162551, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Politique pro-biocarburants; politique climatique; subvention aux Biocarburants; usages du sol; taxe sur le carbone;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q24 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Land
    • Q41 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Demand and Supply; Prices
    • Q42 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Alternative Energy Sources
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy

    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:hal:journl:halshs-01117737. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.