Biomass and CCS: The influence of technical change

被引:13
|
作者
Laude, Audrey [1 ]
Jonen, Christian [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Reims, Lab REGARDS, F-51096 Reims, France
[2] Univ Cologne, Math Inst, D-50931 Cologne, Germany
关键词
Technical change; Bioenergy; Carbon capture and storage; CARBON CAPTURE; CO2; CAPTURE; POWER-GENERATION; STORAGE; OPTIONS; ENERGY; INVESTMENT; FUELS;
D O I
10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.044
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The combination of bioenergy production and carbon capture and storage technologies (BECCS) provides an opportunity to create negative emissions of CO2 in biofuel production. However, high capture costs reduce profitability. This paper investigates carbon price uncertainty and technological uncertainty through a real option approach. We compare the cases of early and delayed CCS deployments. An early technological progress may arise from aggressive R&D and pilot project programs, but the expected cost reduction remains uncertain. We show that this approach results in lower emissions and more rapid investment returns although these returns will not fully materialise until after 2030. In a second set of simulations, we apply an incentive that prioritises sequestered emissions rather than avoided emissions. In other words, this economic instrument does not account for CO2 emissions from the CCS implementation itself, but rewards all the sequestered emissions. In contrast with technological innovations, this subsidy is certain for the investor. The resulting investment level is higher, and the project may become profitable before 2030. Negative emission in bioethanol production does not seem to be a short-term solution in our framework, whatever the carbon price drift. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:916 / 924
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Emissions accounting for biomass energy with CCS
    Alexander Gilbert
    Benjamin K. Sovacool
    Nature Climate Change, 2015, 5 : 495 - 496
  • [2] SEPARATION OF INFLUENCE OF TECHNICAL CHANGE IN PRODUCTION FUNCTIONS
    SUJAN, I
    EKONOMICKO-MATEMATICKY OBZOR, 1977, 13 (04): : 361 - 376
  • [3] Reply to 'Emissions accounting for biomass energy with CCS'
    Sanchez, Daniel L.
    Nelson, James H.
    Johnston, Josiah
    Mileva, Ana
    Kammen, Daniel M.
    NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE, 2015, 5 (06) : 496 - 496
  • [4] CORRESPONDENCE: Emissions accounting for biomass energy with CCS
    Gilbert, Alexander
    Sovacool, Benjamin K.
    NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE, 2015, 5 (06) : 495 - 496
  • [5] ITC in a global growth-climate model with CCS: The value of induced technical change for climate stabilization
    Gerlagh, Reyer
    ENERGY JOURNAL, 2006, : 223 - 240
  • [6] Reply to 'Emissions accounting for biomass energy with CCS'
    Daniel L. Sanchez
    James H. Nelson
    Josiah Johnston
    Ana Mileva
    Daniel M. Kammen
    Nature Climate Change, 2015, 5 : 496 - 496
  • [7] Technical Practice and Theoretical Research Development of CCS
    Chi, Kunpeng
    Tang, Fangcheng
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2012 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT INNOVATION AND PUBLIC POLICY (ICMIPP 2012), VOLS 1-6, 2012, : 3617 - 3621
  • [8] Technical and economic prospects of coal- and biomass-fired integrated gasification facilities equipped with CCS over time
    Meerman, J. C.
    Knoope, M. M. J.
    Ramirez, A.
    Turkenburg, W. C.
    Faaij, A. P. C.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL, 2013, 16 : 311 - 323
  • [9] Trillions for CCS to fight climate change
    Stafford, Ned
    CHEMISTRY WORLD, 2009, 6 (12): : 6 - 6
  • [10] Assessing CCS viability - A socio- technical framework
    Markusson, Nils
    Kern, Florian
    Watson, Jim
    10TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES, 2011, 4 : 5744 - 5751