IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Is forest sequestration at the expense of bioenergy and forest products cost-effective in EU climate policy to 2050?

Listed author(s):

Forest management affects the quantity of CO2 emissions in the atmosphere by carbon sequestration in standing biomass, carbon storage in forest products and production of bioenergy that replace fossil fuels. The main question in this paper is whether forest sequestration is worth increasing at the expense of bioenergy and forest products to achieve EU’s emission reduction target to 2050 cost-effectively. The assessment is based on numerical calculations using a dynamic, partial equilibrium model of cost-effective solutions, where three abatement methods in the forest sector are included together with abatement in the fossil fuel sector. The results show that forest sequestration in standing biomass is cost-effective compared to bioenergy. When sequestration is taken into account, net present costs for meeting EU carbon targets can be reduced by 18%. This is achieved through an increase in annual carbon sequestration by 30-158 million ton CO2. The overall cost of reaching the 80 per cent carbon reduction target amounts to 2,002 billion Euros when sequestration is included in the policy, but increases to 2,371 billion Euros without sequestration. Results suggest that forests can serve as a cost-efficient carbon sink over the considered time period.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: https://www.slu.se/Documents/externwebben/nl-fak/ekonomi/Working_papers/Is_forest_sequestrian_at_the_expense_Munnich.M.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Department Economics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences in its series Working Paper Series with number 2013:9.

as
in new window

Length: 64 pages
Date of creation: 22 Nov 2013
Handle: RePEc:hhs:slueko:2013_009
Note: The paper can be downloaded from the following website: http://pub.epsilon.slu.se/10903/
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Department of Economics, Box 7013, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden

Phone: 018-67 1724
Fax: 018-67 3502
Web page: http://www.slu.se/ekonomi

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as
in new window


  1. Gren, Ing-Marie & Carlsson, Mattias & Elofsson, Katarina & Munnich, Miriam, 2012. "Stochastic carbon sinks for combating carbon dioxide emissions in the EU," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1523-1531.
  2. Edwin van der Werf & Sonja Peterson, 2009. "Modeling linkages between climate policy and land use: an overview," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(5), pages 507-517, 09.
  3. Weitzman, Martin L., 2010. "Risk-adjusted gamma discounting," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 1-13, July.
  4. Darius M. Adams & Ralph J. Alig & DBruce A. McCarl & John M. Callaway & Steven M. Winnett, 1999. "Minimum Cost Strategies for Sequestering Carbon in Forests," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(3), pages 360-374.
  5. Uwe Schneider & Bruce McCarl, 2003. "Economic Potential of Biomass Based Fuels for Greenhouse Gas Emission Mitigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 24(4), pages 291-312, April.
  6. Brent Sohngen & Robert Mendelsohn, 2003. "An Optimal Control Model of Forest Carbon Sequestration," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(2), pages 448-457.
  7. Geijer, Erik & Bostedt, Göran & Brännlund, Runar, 2011. "Damned if you do, damned if you do not--Reduced Climate Impact vs. Sustainable Forests in Sweden," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 94-106, January.
  8. G. Cornelis van Kooten & Alison Eagle & James Manley & Tara Smolak, 2004. "How Costly are Carbon Offsets? A Meta-Analysis of Forest Carbon Sinks," Working Papers 2004-01, University of Victoria, Department of Economics, Resource Economics and Policy Analysis Research Group.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhs:slueko:2013_009. 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: (Elizabeth Hillerius)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.