Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 55, Issue 1, pp 1–19 | Cite as

Biofuels and Climate Change Mitigation: A CGE Analysis Incorporating Land-Use Change

Article

Abstract

The question of whether or not biofuels help mitigate climate change has attracted much debate in the literature. Using a global computable general equilibrium model that explicitly represents land-use change impacts due to the expansion of biofuels, our study attempts to shed some light on this question. Our study shows that if biofuel mandates and targets currently announced by more than 40 countries around the world are implemented by 2020 using crop feedstocks and if both forests and pasture lands are used to meet the new land demands for biofuel expansion, this would cause net release of GHG emissions to the atmosphere until 2043 as the GHG emissions released through land-use change exceeds the reduction of emissions due to replacement of gasoline and diesel. On the other hand, if the use of forest lands is avoided by channeling only pasture lands to meet the demand for new lands, the net release of GHG emissions would cease by 2021, a year after the full implementation of the mandates and targets.

Keywords

Biofuels Climate change mitigation Computable general equilibrium analysis Deforestation Land-use change 

Abbreviations

AEEI

Autonomous energy efficiency improvement

AEZ

Agro-ecological zone

AT

Announced targets

CDE

Constant difference of elasticities

CES

Constant elasticity of substitution

CET

Constant elasticity of transformation

CGE

Computable general equilibrium

CO2

Carbon dioxide

ECA

Eastern Europe and Central Asia

EAP

East Asia and Pacific

EFTA

European Free Trade Association

ET

Enhanced targets

EU

European Union

GDP

Gross domestic product

GHG

Greenhouse gases

GTAP

Global trade analysis project

IPCC

Intergovernmental panel on climate change

LAC

Latin America and Caribbean

MENA

Middle East and North Africa

ND

Non-energy intermediate demand

SA

South Asia

SAM

Social accounting matrix

SSA

Sub-Saharan Africa

UK

United Kingdom

US

United States

VAE

Value added and energy

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Al-Riffai P, Dimaranan B, Laborde D (2010) Global Trade and Environmental Impact Study of the EU Biofuels Mandate. Report for the European Commission, DG TRADE, ATLASS ConsortiumGoogle Scholar
  2. Banse M, van Meijl H, Tabeau A, Woltjer G (2008) Will EU biofuel policies affect global agricultural markets? Eur Rev Agric Econ 35(2):117–141Google Scholar
  3. Birur DK, Hertel TW, Tyner WE (2008) Impact of biofuel production on world agricultural markets: a computable general equilibrium analysis. GTAP working paper 53. Purdue University, Indiana, USGoogle Scholar
  4. Danielsen F, Beukema H, Burgess ND, Parish F, Bruhl CA, Donald PF, Murdiyarso D, Phelan B, Reijnders L, Struebig M, Fitzherbert EB (2009) Biofuel plantations on forested lands: double jeopardy for biodiversity and climate. Conserv Biol 23(2): 348–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fargione F, Hill J, Tilman D, Polasky S, Hawthorne P (2008) Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Science 319: 1235–1238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fischer G, Hizsnyik E, Prieler S, Shah M, van Velthuizen H (2009) Biofuels and food security. OPEC Fund for International Development, Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  7. Fischer G, van Velthuizen H, Medow S, Nachtergaele F (2002) Global agro-ecological assessment for agriculture in the 21st century, Food and Agricultural Organization/International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (FAO/IIASA), (Available at http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/LUC/GAEZ/index.htm)
  8. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2010) electronic database http://faostat.fao.org/DesktopDefault.aspx?PageID=567, downloaded April 2010
  9. Goldemberg J et al (2008) The sustainability of ethanol production from sugarcane. Energy Policy 36(4)Google Scholar
  10. Hertel T, Rose S, Tol R (eds) (2009) Economic analysis of land use in global climate change policy. RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  11. Horridge M (2005) Splitcom—Programs to Disaggregate a GTAP Sector. Centre of Policy Studies, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. http://www.monash.edu.au/policy/SplitCom.htm
  12. Huang J, can Tongeren F, Dewbre J, van Meijl H (2004) A new representation of agricultural production technology in GTAP. 7th Annual conference on global economic analysis, Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  13. IPCC (2006) 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. In: Eggleston HS, Buendia L, Miwa K, Ngara T, Tanabe K (eds) Volume 4: agricultural, forestry and other land use, National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Program. IGES, JapanGoogle Scholar
  14. Lee H-L, Hertel TW, Rose S, Avetisyan M (2008) An integrated global land use data base for CGE analysis of climate policy options. GTAP working paper 42. Purdue University, Indiana, USGoogle Scholar
  15. Macedo IC et al (2008) Greenhouse gases emissions in the production and use of ethanol from sugarcane in Brazil: the 2005/2006 averages and a prediction for 2020. Biomass Bioenerg 32(4):582–595Google Scholar
  16. Menichetti E, Otto M (2009) Energy balance and greenhouse gas emissions of biofuels from a life-cycle perspective. In: Howarth RW, Bringezu S (eds) Biofuels: environmental consequences and interactions with changing land use, Proceedings of the Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE) International Biofuels Project Rapid Assessment, 22–25 September 2008, Gummersbach Germany, pp 81–109Google Scholar
  17. OECD (2008) Biofuels support policies: an economic assessment. ParisGoogle Scholar
  18. Ogg CW (2008) Environmental challenges associated with corn ethanol production. Geopolit Energy 30(1): 13–18Google Scholar
  19. RFA (2008) The gallagher review of the indirect effects of biofuels production. East Sussex, UKGoogle Scholar
  20. Searchinger T, Heimlich R, Houghton RA, Dong F, Elobeid A, Fabiosa J, Tokgoz S, Hayes D, Yu T (2008) Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increased greenhouse gases through land-use change. Science ExpressGoogle Scholar
  21. Surry Y (1993) Constant difference of elasticities’ function with applications to the EC animal feed sector. J Agric Econ 44(1): 110–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Timilsina G, Shrestha A (2010) Biofuels: markets, targets and impacts. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 5364, The World Bank, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  23. Timilsina G, Beghin J, van der Mensbrugghe D, Mevel S (2010) The impacts of biofuel targets on land-use change and food supply: a global CGE assessment. Policy Research Working Paper 5513, The World Bank, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  24. Timilsina G, Beghin J, van der Mensbrugghe D, Mevel S (2012) The impacts of biofuel targets on land-use change and food supply: a global CGE assessment. Agric Econ 43: 313–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. World Bank (2009) Global economic prospects 2009: commodities at the crossroads. The World Bank, WashingtonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Environment and Energy UnitDevelopment Research Group, The World BankWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.Economic Affairs Officer, Trade and International Negotiations Section, Regional Integration, Infrastructure & Trade DivisionUnited Nations Economic Commission for AfricaAddis AbabaEthiopia

Personalised recommendations