Factors driving refinery CO₂ intensity, with allocation into products: comment

Abstract

Purpose

Recently, using a long-run refinery simulation model, Bredeson et al. conclude that the light transportation fuels have roughly the same CO₂ footprint. And, any allocation scheme which shows substantial difference between gasoline and diesel CO₂ intensities must be seen with caution. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the inappropriate modeling assumptions which lead to these inapplicable conclusions into the current oil refining context.

Methods

From an economic point of view, optimization models are more suitable than simulation tools for providing decision policies. Therefore, we used a calibrated refinery linear programming model to evaluate the impact of varying the gasoline-to-diesel production ratio on the refinery's CO₂ emissions and the marginal CO₂ intensity of the automotive fuels.

Results and discussion

Contrary to Bredeson et al.'s conclusions, our results reveal that, within a calibrated optimization framework, total and per-product CO₂ emissions could be affected by the gasoline-to-diesel production ratio. More precisely, in a gasoline-oriented market, the marginal CO₂ footprint of gasoline is significantly higher than diesel, while the opposite result is observed within a diesel-oriented market. These two scenarios could reflect to some extent the American and the European oil refining industry for which policy makers should adopt a different per-product taxation policy.

Conclusions

Any relevant and economic ground CO₂ policies for automotive fuels should be sensitive to the environmental consequences associated with their marginal productions. This is especially true in disequilibrium markets where the average and marginal reactions could significantly differ. Optimization models, whose optimal solution is fully driven by marginal signals, show that the refinery's global and/or per-product CO₂ emissions could be affected by the gasoline-to-diesel production ratio.