Advertisement

Environmental Economics and Policy Studies

, Volume 14, Issue 4, pp 403–420 | Cite as

Energy from waste: generation potential and mitigation opportunity

  • Francesco BoselloEmail author
  • Lorenza Campagnolo
  • Fabio Eboli
  • Ramiro Parrado
Research Article Economics of Waste Management and Disposal: Decoupling, Policy Enforcement and Spatial Factors

Abstract

The present research proposes a macroeconomic assessment of the role of waste incineration with energy recovery (WtE) and controlled landfill biogas to electricity generation and their potential contribution to a CO2 emission reduction policy, within a recursive-dynamic computable general equilibrium model. From the modeling viewpoint, introducing these energy sectors in such a framework required both the extension of the GTAP7 database and the improvement of the ICES production nested function. We focus our analysis on Italy as a signatory of the GHG reduction commitment of 20 % by 2020 with respect to 1990 levels proposed by the European Community; the rest of the world is represented by 21 geo-political countries/regions. It is shown that albeit in the near future WtE and landfill biogas will continue to represent a limited share of energy inputs in electricity sector (in Italy, around 2 % for WtE and 0.6 % for biogas in 2020), and they could play a role in a mitigation policy context. The GDP cost of the EU emission reduction target for the Italian economy can indeed be reduced by 1 % when the two energy generating options are available. In absolute terms, this translates into an annuitized value of 87–122 million €.

Keywords

Climate change Mitigation Energy from waste 

JEL Classification

C68 E27 Q42 Q43 Q54 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Authors gratefully acknowledge Ecocerved and Unioncamere for the financial support of the present research, developed within the “E = mc2 − energy from waste: an assessment of the contribution to climate change mitigation policies in Italy” project (http://www.cmcc.it/research/research-projects/concluded-projects/e-mc2?set_language=en).

References

  1. Bianchi D (2008) Il Riciclo Ecoefficiente—Performance e Scenari Economici, Ambientali ed Energetici. Edizioni Ambiente, MilanoGoogle Scholar
  2. Bohringer C, Rutherford T, Tol R (2009) The EU 20/20/20 targets: an overview of the EMF22 assessment. Energy Econ 31:268–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bosello F, Botteri M, Campagnolo L, Carraro C, Eboli F, Medoro M, Parrado R (2010) Energia da Rifiuti in Italia: Potenzialità di Generazione e Contributo alle Politiche di Mitigazione dei Cambiamenti Climatici. http://www.ecocerved.it/Download/2010-E=mc2_Relazione.pdf
  4. Burniaux J-M, Truong TP (2002) GTAP-E: an energy environmental version of the GTAP model. GTAP technical paper no. 16Google Scholar
  5. Burniaux JM, Nicoletti G, Oliveira-Martins J (1992) GREEN: a global model for quantifying the costs of policies to curb CO2 emissions. OECD Econ Stud 19Google Scholar
  6. Consonni S, Giugliano M, Grosso M (2005) Alternative strategies for energy recovery from municipal solid waste. Part B: emission and cost estimates. Waste Manage (Oxf) 25:137–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Delhotal C, de la Chesnaye F, Gardiner A, Bates J, Sankovski A (2006) Estimating potential reductions of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from waste, energy and industry. In: de la Chesnaye FC, Weyant J (eds) Energy J Spec Issue Multi Greenhouse Gas Mitig Clim PolicyGoogle Scholar
  8. Eboli F, Parrado R, Roson R (2010) Climate change feedback on economic growth: explorations with a dynamic general equilibrium model. Environ Dev Econ 15(5):515–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. EC-European Commission (2007) Limiting global climate change to 2 degrees Celsius. The way ahead for 2020 and beyond, COM/2007/2Google Scholar
  10. ENEA (2006) Rapporto sul Recupero Energetico da Rifiuti Urbani in Italia, RomaGoogle Scholar
  11. EP-European Parliament (2008) Directive 2008/98/ECGoogle Scholar
  12. EUROBSERVER (2009) Interactive EUROBSERV database. http://www.eurobserv-er.org/
  13. European IPPC Bureau (2006a) Waste management, best avalable techniques reference documentsGoogle Scholar
  14. European IPPC Bureau (2006b) Waste incineration, best available techniques reference documentsGoogle Scholar
  15. Gottinger HW (1998) Greenhouse gas economics and computable general equilibrium. J Policy Model 20(5):537–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. IEA-International Energy Agency (2009a) Energy balances of OECD countries—extended balancesGoogle Scholar
  17. IEA-International Energy Agency (2009b) Energy balances of non-OECD countries—extended balancesGoogle Scholar
  18. IPCC (2007) Waste management, chapter 10 of contribution of working group III to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. http://www.ipcc.ch
  19. ISPRA (2009) Italian Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1990–-National Inventory Report 2009. http://unfccc.int/national_reports/annex_i_ghg_inventories/national_inventories_submissions/items/4771.php
  20. Leimback M, Bauer N, Baumstark L, Lüken M, Edenhofer O (2010) Technological change and international trade—insights from REMIND-R. Energy J 31(2):109–136Google Scholar
  21. Monni S, Pipatti R, Lehtilä A, Savolainen I Syri S (2006) Global climate change mitigation scenarios for solid waste management. Technical Research Centre of Finland, vol 603. VTT Publications, Espoo, pp 51Google Scholar
  22. Narayanan BG, Walmsley TL (2008) Global trade, assistance, and production: the GTAP 7 data base. Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue UniversityGoogle Scholar
  23. Sue Wing I (2008) The synthesis of bottom-up and top-down approaches to climate policy modeling: electric power technology detail in a social accounting framework. Energy Econ 30:547–573Google Scholar
  24. UN (2002) International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities-ISIC Rev. 3.1. http://unstats.un.org/unsd/statcom/doc02/isic.pdf
  25. UNFCCC (1997) Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpeng.pdf
  26. US Energy Information Administration (2007) Annual energy outlook 2007—with projections to 2030, Office of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting, US Department of Energy, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  27. Wajsman N (1995) The use of computable general equilibrium models in evaluating environmental policy. J Environ Manage 44:127–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francesco Bosello
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Lorenza Campagnolo
    • 1
    • 4
  • Fabio Eboli
    • 1
    • 2
    • 4
  • Ramiro Parrado
    • 1
    • 2
    • 4
  1. 1.FEEM (Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei)VeniceItaly
  2. 2.CMCC (Euro-Mediterranean Center on Climate Change)LecceItaly
  3. 3.University of MilanMilanItaly
  4. 4.University of Venice Ca’ FoscariVeniceItaly

Personalised recommendations