Cost-effective policy instruments for greenhouse gas emission reduction and fossil fuel substitution through bioenergy production in Austria

Abstract

Climate change mitigation and security of energy supply are important targets of Austrian energy policy. Bioenergy production based on resources from agriculture and forestry is an important option to attain these targets. In order to increase the share of bioenergy, supporting policy instruments are necessary. The cost-effectiveness of these instruments in attaining policy targets depends on the availability of bioenergy technologies. Advanced technologies such as second generation biofuels, biomass gasification for power * Correspondence to: Johannes Schmidt, Institute for Sustainable Economic Development, University of Natural Ressources and Life Sciences, Feistmantelstraße 4, A-1180 Vienna, Austria. E-Mail: johannes.schmidt@boku.ac.at 2 production and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) will likely change the performance of policy instruments. This article assesses the cost-effectiveness of energy policy instruments with respect to greenhouse gas emission (GHG) reduction and fossil fuel substitution under consideration of new bioenergy technologies for the year 2030. Instruments that directly subsidize bioenergy are compared with instruments that aim at reducing GHG emissions. A spatially explicit modeling approach is used to account for biomass supply and energy distribution costs in Austria. Results indicate that a carbon tax performs cost effective with respect to both policy targets if BECCS is not available. However, the availability of BECCS creates a tradeoff between GHG emission reduction and fossil fuel substitution. Biofuel blending obligations are costly in attaining the policy targets.

Biomethane as transport fuel – A comparison with other biogas utilization pathways in northern Italy

“…The hypothesis is that new biogas to power plants should be coupled with an efficient external heat exploitation infrastructure. Thus, CHP plants have been dimensioned as in [51], by considering the heat demand within a 50 km radius and assuming an average pipeline loss coefficient of 15% based on data from [14]. The total electricity consumption in the area of concern was around 400 PJ in 2011, representing 36% of the national gross electricity consumption.…”

Optimizing ethanol and bioelectricity production in sugarcane biorefineries in Brazil

“…A detailed description of the model can be found in the previous literature [47,48]. The model has been used in several optimization studies for bioenergy production, especially from forest and wood residues in the EU [37,38,49]. Fig.…”

Internalizing the external costs of biogas supply chains in the Italian energy sector

“…As in [28][29][30] the environmental impact, in terms of GHG emissions deriving from the biogas production, has been incorporated in the optimization process by applying a carbon tax.…”