甲烷产生对奶牛场的经济影响。微观分析模型

Stephen L. Feldman, John Breese
{"title":"甲烷产生对奶牛场的经济影响。微观分析模型","authors":"Stephen L. Feldman,&nbsp;John Breese","doi":"10.1016/0304-3967(78)90010-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The object of this paper is to perform an analysis of the economic efficiency of methane generation on a typical 65-cow dairy farm, juxtaposed against prices and costs of auxiliary energy supplied by rural electrification. The most efficiently sized methane generation option examined is the use of methane to fuel a 30 kW generator with sales of surplus energy fed back to the utility. Whereas this option is still more expensive than present prices for electricity, this would not be the case under assumptions of escalations in relative fuel prices. On an individual farm basis, the economy is made better off by methane generation under this option by $195 per year, assuming electricity is priced at its marginal opportunity costs. The utility would incur $734 in revenue losses, but this figure represents the commensurate decrease in utility capacity and fuel. The merits of setting electricity tariffs equal to marginal costs are evidently part of the incentive for farmers to install this option. Given several scenarios of differently sized methane generators, the utility would promote the smallest facility for the farm, which in turn may be the least efficacious for the economy as a whole. This may conflict with national efficiency criteria so, therefore, regulation at the interface between the farmer and utility would have to be exercised.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101078,"journal":{"name":"Resource Recovery and Conservation","volume":"3 3","pages":"Pages 261-273"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1978-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0304-3967(78)90010-0","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The economic impact of methane generation on dairy farms. A micro-analytic model\",\"authors\":\"Stephen L. Feldman,&nbsp;John Breese\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/0304-3967(78)90010-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The object of this paper is to perform an analysis of the economic efficiency of methane generation on a typical 65-cow dairy farm, juxtaposed against prices and costs of auxiliary energy supplied by rural electrification. The most efficiently sized methane generation option examined is the use of methane to fuel a 30 kW generator with sales of surplus energy fed back to the utility. Whereas this option is still more expensive than present prices for electricity, this would not be the case under assumptions of escalations in relative fuel prices. On an individual farm basis, the economy is made better off by methane generation under this option by $195 per year, assuming electricity is priced at its marginal opportunity costs. The utility would incur $734 in revenue losses, but this figure represents the commensurate decrease in utility capacity and fuel. The merits of setting electricity tariffs equal to marginal costs are evidently part of the incentive for farmers to install this option. Given several scenarios of differently sized methane generators, the utility would promote the smallest facility for the farm, which in turn may be the least efficacious for the economy as a whole. This may conflict with national efficiency criteria so, therefore, regulation at the interface between the farmer and utility would have to be exercised.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101078,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Resource Recovery and Conservation\",\"volume\":\"3 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 261-273\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1978-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0304-3967(78)90010-0\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Resource Recovery and Conservation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0304396778900100\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Resource Recovery and Conservation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0304396778900100","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本文的目的是对一个典型的65头奶牛养殖场的甲烷生产的经济效益进行分析,并将其与农村电气化提供的辅助能源的价格和成本进行对比。最有效的甲烷发电方案是使用甲烷为30千瓦的发电机提供燃料,并将剩余的能量反馈给公用事业公司。尽管这一选择仍然比目前的电价昂贵,但在相对燃料价格上升的假设下,情况就不是这样了。在个体农场的基础上,假设电力定价为边际机会成本,在这种选择下,甲烷生产每年使经济受益195美元。公用事业将造成734美元的收入损失,但这个数字表示公用事业能力和燃料的相应减少。电价与边际成本相等的优点显然是促使农民采用这一方案的部分原因。考虑到不同规模的甲烷发生器的几种情况,公用事业公司将为农场推广最小的设备,而这反过来对整个经济来说可能是最无效的。这可能与国家效率标准相冲突,因此,必须对农民和公用事业公司之间的接口进行监管。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The economic impact of methane generation on dairy farms. A micro-analytic model

The object of this paper is to perform an analysis of the economic efficiency of methane generation on a typical 65-cow dairy farm, juxtaposed against prices and costs of auxiliary energy supplied by rural electrification. The most efficiently sized methane generation option examined is the use of methane to fuel a 30 kW generator with sales of surplus energy fed back to the utility. Whereas this option is still more expensive than present prices for electricity, this would not be the case under assumptions of escalations in relative fuel prices. On an individual farm basis, the economy is made better off by methane generation under this option by $195 per year, assuming electricity is priced at its marginal opportunity costs. The utility would incur $734 in revenue losses, but this figure represents the commensurate decrease in utility capacity and fuel. The merits of setting electricity tariffs equal to marginal costs are evidently part of the incentive for farmers to install this option. Given several scenarios of differently sized methane generators, the utility would promote the smallest facility for the farm, which in turn may be the least efficacious for the economy as a whole. This may conflict with national efficiency criteria so, therefore, regulation at the interface between the farmer and utility would have to be exercised.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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