燃煤发电厂木质生物质共烧的环境和社会经济影响

IF 2.6 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Paul Picciano , Francisco X. Aguilar , Dallas Burtraw , Ashkan Mirzaee
{"title":"燃煤发电厂木质生物质共烧的环境和社会经济影响","authors":"Paul Picciano ,&nbsp;Francisco X. Aguilar ,&nbsp;Dallas Burtraw ,&nbsp;Ashkan Mirzaee","doi":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2022.101296","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We apply a detailed power sector model to explore the near-term role of woody biomass co-firing at existing coal facilities in the Eastern US in the decarbonization of US electricity generation. We evaluate five public policy interventions: a biomass co-firing subsidy, two carbon emissions fees, and two clean energy standards. Treating woody biomass as a carbon neutral feedstock, we find co-firing weakly supports decarbonization. However, policies subsidizing co-firing can delay retirement of coal facilities and reduce generation from nuclear, natural gas, wind and solar. Consequently, corresponding sector-wide emissions of CO<sub>2</sub> and SO<sub>2</sub> may increase (slightly) due to greater utilization of coal plants including relatively inefficient facilities. We assume NO<sub>X</sub> emissions increase due to generation efficiency losses, but this remains uncertain. Due to higher emissions, a biomass subsidy for co-firing yields small (near zero) economic welfare losses, while in contrast other policies advance decarbonization and yield significant welfare gains. We find justification for biomass use from a local perspective based on first-order impacts on employment and economy activity, but less so air quality.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47952,"journal":{"name":"Resource and Energy Economics","volume":"68 ","pages":"Article 101296"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Environmental and socio-economic implications of woody biomass co-firing at coal-fired power plants\",\"authors\":\"Paul Picciano ,&nbsp;Francisco X. Aguilar ,&nbsp;Dallas Burtraw ,&nbsp;Ashkan Mirzaee\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2022.101296\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>We apply a detailed power sector model to explore the near-term role of woody biomass co-firing at existing coal facilities in the Eastern US in the decarbonization of US electricity generation. We evaluate five public policy interventions: a biomass co-firing subsidy, two carbon emissions fees, and two clean energy standards. Treating woody biomass as a carbon neutral feedstock, we find co-firing weakly supports decarbonization. However, policies subsidizing co-firing can delay retirement of coal facilities and reduce generation from nuclear, natural gas, wind and solar. Consequently, corresponding sector-wide emissions of CO<sub>2</sub> and SO<sub>2</sub> may increase (slightly) due to greater utilization of coal plants including relatively inefficient facilities. We assume NO<sub>X</sub> emissions increase due to generation efficiency losses, but this remains uncertain. Due to higher emissions, a biomass subsidy for co-firing yields small (near zero) economic welfare losses, while in contrast other policies advance decarbonization and yield significant welfare gains. We find justification for biomass use from a local perspective based on first-order impacts on employment and economy activity, but less so air quality.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47952,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Resource and Energy Economics\",\"volume\":\"68 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101296\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Resource and Energy Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928765522000136\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Resource and Energy Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928765522000136","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们应用一个详细的电力部门模型来探索美国东部现有煤炭设施的木质生物质联合燃烧在美国发电脱碳中的近期作用。我们评估了五项公共政策干预措施:一项生物质联产补贴、两项碳排放费和两项清洁能源标准。将木质生物质作为碳中和的原料处理,我们发现共烧对脱碳的支持较弱。然而,补贴共烧的政策可能会推迟煤炭设施的退役,并减少核能、天然气、风能和太阳能的发电量。因此,由于燃煤电厂(包括相对低效的设施)的更多利用,相应的部门范围内的二氧化碳和二氧化硫排放量可能会(略有)增加。我们假设NOX排放量由于发电效率损失而增加,但这仍然不确定。由于排放量更高,对共烧的生物质补贴产生的经济福利损失很小(接近零),而相比之下,其他政策促进了脱碳,并产生了显著的福利收益。我们从当地的角度出发,根据对就业和经济活动的一阶影响,找到了使用生物质的理由,但对空气质量的影响较小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Environmental and socio-economic implications of woody biomass co-firing at coal-fired power plants

We apply a detailed power sector model to explore the near-term role of woody biomass co-firing at existing coal facilities in the Eastern US in the decarbonization of US electricity generation. We evaluate five public policy interventions: a biomass co-firing subsidy, two carbon emissions fees, and two clean energy standards. Treating woody biomass as a carbon neutral feedstock, we find co-firing weakly supports decarbonization. However, policies subsidizing co-firing can delay retirement of coal facilities and reduce generation from nuclear, natural gas, wind and solar. Consequently, corresponding sector-wide emissions of CO2 and SO2 may increase (slightly) due to greater utilization of coal plants including relatively inefficient facilities. We assume NOX emissions increase due to generation efficiency losses, but this remains uncertain. Due to higher emissions, a biomass subsidy for co-firing yields small (near zero) economic welfare losses, while in contrast other policies advance decarbonization and yield significant welfare gains. We find justification for biomass use from a local perspective based on first-order impacts on employment and economy activity, but less so air quality.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Resource and Energy Economics provides a forum for high level economic analysis of utilization and development of the earth natural resources. The subject matter encompasses questions of optimal production and consumption affecting energy, minerals, land, air and water, and includes analysis of firm and industry behavior, environmental issues and public policies. Implications for both developed and developing countries are of concern. The journal publishes high quality papers for an international audience. Innovative energy, resource and environmental analyses, including theoretical models and empirical studies are appropriate for publication in Resource and Energy Economics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信