IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v39y2011i12p7963-7974.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the role of cogeneration for carbon management in Alberta

Author

Listed:
  • Doluweera, G.H.
  • Jordaan, S.M.
  • Moore, M.C.
  • Keith, D.W.
  • Bergerson, J.A.

Abstract

Developing long-term carbon control strategies is important in energy intensive industries such as the oil sands operations in Alberta. We examine the use of cogeneration to satisfy the energy demands of oil sands operations in Alberta in the context of carbon management. This paper evaluates the role of cogeneration in meeting Provincial carbon management goals and discusses the arbitrary characteristics of facility- and product-based carbon emissions control regulations. We model an oil sands operation that operates with and without incorporated cogeneration. We compare CO2 emissions and associated costs under different carbon emissions control regulations, including the present carbon emissions control regulation of Alberta. The results suggest that incorporating cogeneration into the growing oil sands industry could contribute in the near-term to reducing CO2 emissions in Alberta. This analysis also shows that the different accounting methods and calculations of electricity offsets could lead to very different levels of incentives for cogeneration. Regulations that attempt to manage emissions on a product and facility basis may become arbitrary and complex as regulators attempt to approximate the effect of an economy-wide carbon price.

Suggested Citation

  • Doluweera, G.H. & Jordaan, S.M. & Moore, M.C. & Keith, D.W. & Bergerson, J.A., 2011. "Evaluating the role of cogeneration for carbon management in Alberta," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(12), pages 7963-7974.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:12:p:7963-7974
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.09.051
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421511007403
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.09.051?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sangwon Suh & Bo Weidema & Jannick Hoejrup Schmidt & Reinout Heijungs, 2010. "Generalized Make and Use Framework for Allocation in Life Cycle Assessment," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 14(2), pages 335-353, March.
    2. Bo P. Weidema & Jannick H. Schmidt, 2010. "Avoiding Allocation in Life Cycle Assessment Revisited," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 14(2), pages 192-195, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rui Xing & Diego V. Chiappori & Evan J. Arbuckle & Matthew T. Binsted & Evan G. R. Davies, 2021. "Canadian Oil Sands Extraction and Upgrading: A Synthesis of the Data on Energy Consumption, CO 2 Emissions, and Supply Costs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-14, October.
    2. Rahman, Md. Mustafizur & Canter, Christina & Kumar, Amit, 2015. "Well-to-wheel life cycle assessment of transportation fuels derived from different North American conventional crudes," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 159-173.
    3. Ouellette, A. & Rowe, A. & Sopinka, A. & Wild, P., 2014. "Achieving emissions reduction through oil sands cogeneration in Alberta’s deregulated electricity market," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 13-21.
    4. Beretta, Gian Paolo & Iora, Paolo & Ghoniem, Ahmed F., 2012. "Novel approach for fair allocation of primary energy consumption among cogenerated energy-intensive products based on the actual local area production scenario," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 1107-1120.
    5. Nimana, Balwinder & Canter, Christina & Kumar, Amit, 2015. "Energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in the recovery and extraction of crude bitumen from Canada’s oil sands," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 189-199.
    6. Michel Feidt & Monica Costea, 2012. "Energy and Exergy Analysis and Optimization of Combined Heat and Power Systems. Comparison of Various Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 5(9), pages 1-22, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Saade, Marcella Ruschi Mendes & Silva, Maristela Gomes da & Gomes, Vanessa, 2015. "Appropriateness of environmental impact distribution methods to model blast furnace slag recycling in cement making," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 40-47.
    2. Thomas Schaubroeck & Simon Schaubroeck & Reinout Heijungs & Alessandra Zamagni & Miguel Brandão & Enrico Benetto, 2021. "Attributional & Consequential Life Cycle Assessment: Definitions, Conceptual Characteristics and Modelling Restrictions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-47, July.
    3. Krexner, T. & Bauer, A. & Gronauer, A. & Mikovits, C. & Schmidt, J. & Kral, I., 2024. "Environmental life cycle assessment of a stilted and vertical bifacial crop-based agrivoltaic multi land-use system and comparison with a mono land-use of agricultural land," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    4. Golinucci, Nicolò & Tonini, Francesco & Rocco, Matteo Vincenzo & Colombo, Emanuela, 2023. "Towards BitCO2, an individual consumption-based carbon emission reduction mechanism," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    5. Bruckner, Martin & Wood, Richard & Moran, Daniel & Kuschnig, Nikolas & Wieland, Hanspeter & Maus, Victor & Börner, Jan, 2019. "FABIO - The Construction of the Food and Agriculture Biomass Input-Output Model," Ecological Economic Papers 27, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    6. Iost, Susanne & Geng, Natalia & Schweinle, Jörg & Banse, Martin & Brüning, Simone & Jochem, Dominik & Machmüller, Andrea & Weimar, Holger, 2020. "Setting up a bioeconomy monitoring: Resource base and sustainability," Thünen Working Papers 149, Johann Heinrich von Thünen Institute, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    7. Marc Jourdaine & Philippe Loubet & Guido Sonnemann & Stéphane Trébucq, 2021. "The ABC‐LCA method for the integration of activity‐based costing and life cycle assessment," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 1735-1750, May.
    8. Heun, Matthew Kuperus & Owen, Anne & Brockway, Paul E., 2018. "A physical supply-use table framework for energy analysis on the energy conversion chain," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 226(C), pages 1134-1162.
    9. Edgar Towa & Vanessa Zeller & Stefano Merciai & Jannick Schmidt & Wouter M. J. Achten, 2022. "Toward the development of subnational hybrid input–output tables in a multiregional framework," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(1), pages 88-106, February.
    10. Merciai, Stefano & Heijungs, Reinout, 2014. "Balance issues in monetary input–output tables," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 69-74.
    11. Wenjing Wei & Peter B. Samuelsson & Anders Tilliander & Rutger Gyllenram & Pär G. Jönsson, 2020. "Energy Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Nickel Products," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-22, October.
    12. Christian Dierks & Tabea Hagedorn & Alessio Campitelli & Winfried Bulach & Vanessa Zeller, 2021. "Are LCA Studies on Bulk Mineral Waste Management Suitable for Decision Support? A Critical Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-27, April.
    13. Pauliuk, Stefan & Hertwich, Edgar G., 2015. "Socioeconomic metabolism as paradigm for studying the biophysical basis of human societies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 83-93.
    14. Reinout Heijungs & Arjan Koning, 2019. "Analyzing the effects of the choice of model in the context of marginal changes in final demand," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 8(1), pages 1-22, December.
    15. Rodrigues, João F.D. & Rueda-Cantuche, José M., 2013. "A two-stage econometric method for the estimation of carbon multipliers with rectangular supply and use tables," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 206-212.
    16. Ling-Chin, J. & Heidrich, O. & Roskilly, A.P., 2016. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) – from analysing methodology development to introducing an LCA framework for marine photovoltaic (PV) systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 352-378.
    17. Reinout Heijungs & Yi Yang & Hung‐Suck Park, 2022. "A or I‐A? Unifying the computational structures of process‐ and IO‐based LCA for clarity and consistency," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(5), pages 1824-1836, October.
    18. Iost, Susanne & Geng, Natalia & Schweinle, Jörg & Banse, Martin & Brüning, Simone & Jochem, Dominik & Machmüller, Andrea & Weimar, Holger, 2020. "Setting up a bioeconomy monitoring: Resource base and sustainability," Thünen Working Paper 305677, Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut (vTI), Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    19. Max Rehberger & Michael Hiete, 2020. "Allocation of Environmental Impacts in Circular and Cascade Use of Resources—Incentive-Driven Allocation as a Prerequisite for Cascade Persistence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-28, May.
    20. Bernhard Steubing & Arjan de Koning & Stefano Merciai & Arnold Tukker, 2022. "How do carbon footprints from LCA and EEIOA databases compare? A comparison of ecoinvent and EXIOBASE," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(4), pages 1406-1422, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:12:p:7963-7974. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.