Model Based Policy Analysis (Fach) / Climate Policies and the interlink to Agriculture and bioeconomy (2) (Lektion)
In dieser Lektion befinden sich 7 Karteikarten
Biofuel, land use change
Diese Lektion wurde von Moadscha erstellt.
- What are the objectives of biofuel policies? 1. Climate mitigation 2. Support of the agricultural sector 3. Energy security (main objective in EU)
- Give ashort overview on the development of EU biofuel policies. Directive 2003/30/EU: National measures aiming to achieve 2% of biofuels on total fuels by 2005 and 5,75% by 2010 Different national target values, in Germany: tax exemption for biofuels --> Led to a massive increase in biofuel production, mainly biodiesels This promotion of biodiesel was highly supported by the meat lobby, because oil seed meal is a valuable feed In 2008 a study found challenged net reductions in GHG emissions E.g. use of croplands in the USA for biofuels (mainly maize) increases GHG emissions due to land use change If biofuel production is leading to a reduction in GHG emissions, depends on: a) Biomass/crop for biofuel b) Linked land use change E.g. bioethanol of sugarcane significantly reduces GHG emissions, while biodiesel made from rape seed and bioethanol made from wheat have a negative impact (increase GHG emissions) --> This resulted in a reform of the directive! Reform of EU RED 2009 1. Reduction target in the transport sector of at least 20% relative to 1990 2. Share of 20% renewable energies in final energy use in 2020 3. Share of 10% biofuels in transport sector 2020 4. BUT: only certified biofuels accounted for 10% share à sustainability criteria
- What are the sustainability criteria for biofuels? Producers now have to proof that their production does not lead to a land use change affecting total GHG balance of the biofuel 1. Definition of no-go-areas:# a) high bidiversity area b) high carbon stocks 2. For all other areas ´, producers need to proof that at least 35% of GHG emissions are mitigated compared to fossile fuel alternative. There has to be a calculation of the life-cycle GHG emissions, including the land use change.
- What is the diffrence between direct land use change (DLUC) and indirect land use change (ILUC)? DLUC: Occurs, when a previous land use is converted to energy crop production. ILUC: Occurs, when grassland and forest are converted to cropland somewhere on the globe to meet the demand for commodities displaced by the production of biofuels.
- How to calculate emission savings? What problem arises? Calculation of emission savings: dLUC [emissions/ha] + cultivation, harvesting emissions + production process emissions + transport emissions --> comparison with fossile fuels 1.The more productive a biofuel is (high energy content of a crop per hectar), the less is the share of dLUC emissions in overall emission balance 2. Benefit for biofuels from productive crops 3. Emission balance is controlled by certification schemes E.g. in Germany only land use change from degraded grassland to a biofuel rop lead to positive emission savings PROBLEM: How to calculate and include the emissions from ILUC? ILUC is a global market effect caused by biofuel demand There are various market effects a) Identification of displacement of food and field crops by field b) Economic analysis of global market reactions caused by displacement c) Identification of so far unused areas where displacement occurred BUT: all this is NOT implementable
- Is economic modeling able to contribute to identifying land use change due to biofuel policies? Emissions balance of different biofuels depends on model and underlying assumptions used Same for the calculation of rising food prices due to biofuel production Diverging results of the scenario analysis are caused by: 1. Differences in representing the complex production and value chains of agricultural goods 2. Different approaches for modelling land use (level of aggregation) 3. Different choices of some critical parameters (like CES= constant elasticity of substitution)
- Evaluate the biofuel policy. 1. (-) It is hard to use a single instrument to reach three targets (climate mitigation, agriculture support & energy security) --> Every target needs an own instrument 2. (-) The mitigation target is NOT met (ecological effectiveness) 3. (+) The support of the agricultural sector worked out 4. (-) The energy security was NOT reached, because the share of biofuels is too low Combination of command-and-control instruments (certification) and market-based instruments (tax exemption)