IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v68y2014icp550-555.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

US biofuels subsidies and CO2 emissions: An empirical test for a weak and a strong green paradox

Author

Listed:
  • Grafton, R. Quentin
  • Kompas, Tom
  • Long, Ngo Van
  • To, Hang

Abstract

Using energy data over the period 1981–2011 we find that US biofuels subsidies and production have provided a perverse incentive for US fossil fuel producers to increase their rate of extraction that has generated a weak green paradox. Further, in the short-run if the reduction in the CO2 emissions from a one-to-one substitution between biofuels and fossil fuels is less than 26 percent, or less than 57 percent if long run effect is taken into account, then US biofuels production is likely to have resulted in a strong green paradox. These results indicate that subsidies for first generation biofuels, which yield a low level of per unit CO2 emission reduction compared to fossil fuels, might have contributed to additional net CO2 emissions over the study period.

Suggested Citation

  • Grafton, R. Quentin & Kompas, Tom & Long, Ngo Van & To, Hang, 2014. "US biofuels subsidies and CO2 emissions: An empirical test for a weak and a strong green paradox," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 550-555.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:68:y:2014:i:c:p:550-555
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421513011129
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.006?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. Reyer Gerlagh, 2011. "Too Much Oil," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 57(1), pages 79-102, March.
    2. Hans-Werner Sinn, 2008. "Public policies against global warming: a supply side approach," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 15(4), pages 360-394, August.
    3. Thomas Eichner & Rüdiger Pethig, 2011. "Carbon Leakage, The Green Paradox, And Perfect Future Markets," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 52(3), pages 767-805, August.
    4. van der Ploeg, Frederick & Withagen, Cees, 2012. "Is there really a green paradox?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 342-363.
    5. Quentin Grafton, R. & Kompas, Tom & Van Long, Ngo, 2012. "Substitution between biofuels and fossil fuels: Is there a green paradox?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 328-341.
    6. van der Werf, Edwin & Di Maria, Corrado, 2012. "Imperfect Environmental Policy and Polluting Emissions: The Green Paradox and Beyond," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 6(2), pages 153-194, March.
    7. Chien, Taichen & Hu, Jin-Li, 2008. "Renewable energy: An efficient mechanism to improve GDP," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 3035-3042, August.
    8. Jon Strand, 2007. "Technology Treaties and Fossil-Fuels Extraction," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 129-142.
    9. Sinn, Hans-Werner, 2012. "The Green Paradox: A Supply-Side Approach to Global Warming," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262016680, December.
    10. Hahn, Robert W. & Ulph, Alistair (ed.), 2012. "Climate Change and Common Sense: Essays in Honour of Tom Schelling," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199692873.
    11. Hoel, Michael, 2011. "The Green Paradox and Greenhouse Gas Reducing Investments," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 5(4), pages 353-379, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Di Maria, Corrado & Lange, Ian & van der Werf, Edwin, 2014. "Should we be worried about the green paradox? Announcement effects of the Acid Rain Program," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 143-162.
    2. Frederick van der Ploeg, 2013. "Cumulative Carbon Emissions and the Green Paradox," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 5(1), pages 281-300, June.
    3. Hendrik Ritter & Mark Schopf, 2014. "Unilateral Climate Policy: Harmful or Even Disastrous?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(1), pages 155-178, May.
    4. Quentin Grafton, R. & Kompas, Tom & Van Long, Ngo, 2012. "Substitution between biofuels and fossil fuels: Is there a green paradox?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 328-341.
    5. Michael Hoel, 2011. "The Supply Side of CO 2 with Country Heterogeneity," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 113(4), pages 846-865, December.
    6. Nachtigall, Daniel & Rübbelke, Dirk, 2016. "The green paradox and learning-by-doing in the renewable energy sector," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 74-92.
    7. Thomas Michielsen, 2013. "Brown Backstops Versus the Green Paradox," OxCarre Working Papers 108, Oxford Centre for the Analysis of Resource Rich Economies, University of Oxford.
    8. Okullo, Samuel J. & Reynès, Frédéric & Hofkes, Marjan W., 2021. "(Bio-)Fuel mandating and the green paradox," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    9. Christian Beermann, 2015. "Climate Policy and the Intertemporal Supply of Fossil Resources," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 62, March.
    10. Michielsen, Thomas O., 2014. "Brown backstops versus the green paradox," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 87-110.
    11. Najm, Sarah, 2019. "The green paradox and budgetary institutions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    12. Fischer, Carolyn & Salant, Stephen W., 2017. "Balancing the carbon budget for oil: The distributive effects of alternative policies," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 191-215.
    13. Najm, Sarah & Matsumoto, Ken'ichi, 2020. "Does renewable energy substitute LNG international trade in the energy transition?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    14. Johannes Pfeiffer, 2017. "Fossil Resources and Climate Change – The Green Paradox and Resource Market Power Revisited in General Equilibrium," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 77, March.
    15. Hoel, Michael, 2013. "Supply Side Climate Policy and the Green Paradox," Memorandum 03/2013, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    16. van der Werf, Edwin & Di Maria, Corrado, 2012. "Imperfect Environmental Policy and Polluting Emissions: The Green Paradox and Beyond," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 6(2), pages 153-194, March.
    17. Marc Gronwald & Ngo Van Long & Luise Röpke, 2013. "Simultaneous Supplies of Dirty and Green Fuels with Capacity Constraint: Is there a Green Paradox?," CESifo Working Paper Series 4360, CESifo.
    18. Ngo Van Long, 2014. "The Green Paradox in Open Economies," CESifo Working Paper Series 4639, CESifo.
    19. Fischer, Carolyn & Salant, Stephen, 2012. "Alternative Climate Policies and Intertemporal Emissions Leakage: Quantifying the Green Paradox," RFF Working Paper Series dp-12-16, Resources for the Future.
    20. Gerard Meijden & Frederick Ploeg & Cees Withagen, 2017. "Frontiers of Climate Change Economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(1), pages 1-14, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Biofuels; Fossil fuels; CO2 emissions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:68:y:2014:i:c:p:550-555. 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.