IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v121y2020ics1364032119308822.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Supply, operational, and market risk reduction opportunities: Managing risk at a cellulosic biorefinery

Author

Listed:
  • Mamun, Saleh
  • Hansen, Jason K.
  • Roni, Mohammad S.

Abstract

This paper evaluates supply, operational- and market-risk reduction opportunities for the case where management at a cellulosic biorefinery adopts a supply chain design based on a distributed depot concept. In contrast to the conventional feedstock-supply system, a supply chain based on a network of depots providing feedstock to a biorefinery employs geographically distributed depots where feedstock undergoes preprocessing into densified pellets, thus allowing feedstock to be transported a greater distance. This study used simulation methods to show that distributed depots may work as a risk absorber for a cellulosic biorefinery. Compared to a base case, a distributed depot supply system reduced the operational and market risk by 17.5% and 5%, respectively. Moreover, when contract management and alternatives markets were considered, a reduction of supply, operational, and market risk, by approximately 48%, 69%, and 35%, respectively, were observed. The expected return on investment (ROI) increased from −4% to 33%. However, this positive ROI largely depends on assuming commoditization and the creation of intermediate markets for alternative, merchandisable products.

Suggested Citation

  • Mamun, Saleh & Hansen, Jason K. & Roni, Mohammad S., 2020. "Supply, operational, and market risk reduction opportunities: Managing risk at a cellulosic biorefinery," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:121:y:2020:i:c:s1364032119308822
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2019.109677
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032119308822
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109677?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. Teresa Serra & David Zilberman & José Gil, 2011. "Price volatility in ethanol markets," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 38(2), pages 259-280, June.
    2. Zhao, Xin & Yao, Guolin & Tyner, Wallace E., 2016. "Quantifying breakeven price distributions in stochastic techno-economic analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 318-326.
    3. Altman, Ira & Bergtold, Jason & Sanders, Dwight & Johnson, Tom, 2015. "Willingness to supply biomass for bioenergy production: A random parameter truncated analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 1-10.
    4. Golecha, Rajdeep & Gan, Jianbang, 2016. "Effects of corn stover year-to-year supply variability and market structure on biomass utilization and cost," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 34-44.
    5. Hansen, Jason & Lipow, Jonathan, 2013. "Accounting for systematic risk in benefit-cost analysis: a practical approach," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(3), pages 361-373, December.
    6. Deepak K. Ray & James S. Gerber & Graham K. MacDonald & Paul C. West, 2015. "Climate variation explains a third of global crop yield variability," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 6(1), pages 1-9, May.
    7. Stanley Kaplan & B. John Garrick, 1981. "On The Quantitative Definition of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 11-27, March.
    8. Fewell, Jason E. & Bergtold, Jason S. & Williams, Jeffery R., 2016. "Farmers' willingness to contract switchgrass as a cellulosic bioenergy crop in Kansas," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 292-302.
    9. López-Díaz, Dulce Celeste & Lira-Barragán, Luis Fernando & Rubio-Castro, Eusiel & Ponce-Ortega, José María & El-Halwagi, Mahmoud M., 2017. "Optimal location of biorefineries considering sustainable integration with the environment," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 65-77.
    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. Sajid, Zaman, 2021. "A dynamic risk assessment model to assess the impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) on the sustainability of the biomass supply chain: A case study of a U.S. biofuel industry," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    2. Khoshnevisan, Benyamin & Duan, Na & Tsapekos, Panagiotis & Awasthi, Mukesh Kumar & Liu, Zhidan & Mohammadi, Ali & Angelidaki, Irini & Tsang, Daniel CW. & Zhang, Zengqiang & Pan, Junting & Ma, Lin & Ag, 2021. "A critical review on livestock manure biorefinery technologies: Sustainability, challenges, and future perspectives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    3. Kucuksayacigil, Fikri & Roni, Mohammad & Eksioglu, Sandra D. & Bhuiyan, Tanveer H. & Chen, Qiushi, 2022. "Optimal control to handle variations in moisture content and reactor in-feed rate," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 248(C).

    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. Takuto Sakamoto, 2016. "Mobility and Sustainability: A Computational Model of African Pastoralists," Journal of Management and Sustainability, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 6(1), pages 59-75, March.
    2. Van Deynze, B., 2018. "The Effects of Experience on Landowner Preferences over Bioenergy Feedstocks," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277001, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Zemo, Kahsay Haile & Termansen, Mette, 2018. "Farmers’ willingness to participate in collective biogas investment: A discrete choice experiment study," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 87-101.
    4. Rosburg, Alicia & Miranowski, John & McFadden, Jonathan, 2016. "Mitigating Feedstock Supply Risk in Corn Stover Biofuel Production," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235875, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Jeetendra Prakash Aryal & Tek B. Sapkota & Ritika Khurana & Arun Khatri-Chhetri & Dil Bahadur Rahut & M. L. Jat, 2020. "Climate change and agriculture in South Asia: adaptation options in smallholder production systems," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 5045-5075, August.
    6. Chia-Lin Chang & Yiying Li & Michael McAleer, 2018. "Volatility Spillovers between Energy and Agricultural Markets: A Critical Appraisal of Theory and Practice," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-19, June.
    7. S. Cucurachi & E. Borgonovo & R. Heijungs, 2016. "A Protocol for the Global Sensitivity Analysis of Impact Assessment Models in Life Cycle Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 357-377, February.
    8. Xian, Hui & Colson, Gregory & Karali, Berna & Wetzstein, Michael, 2017. "Do nonrenewable-energy prices affect renewable-energy volatility? The case of wood pellets," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 42-48.
    9. Deborah Bentivoglio & Adele Finco & Mirian Rumenos Piedade Bacchi, 2016. "Interdependencies between Biofuel, Fuel and Food Prices: The Case of the Brazilian Ethanol Market," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-16, June.
    10. Chen, Fuzhong & Hsu, Chien-Lung & Lin, Arthur J. & Li, Haifeng, 2020. "Holding risky financial assets and subjective wellbeing: Empirical evidence from China," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    11. Niël Almero Krüger & Natanya Meyer, 2021. "The Development of a Small and Medium-Sized Business Risk Management Intervention Tool," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-14, July.
    12. Ladislav Kristoufek & Karel Janda & David Zilberman, 2013. "Regime-dependent topological properties of biofuels networks," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 86(2), pages 1-12, February.
    13. Zuo, Alec & Hou, Lingling & Huang, Zeying, 2020. "How does farmers' current usage of crop straws influence the willingness-to-accept price to sell?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    14. Johnson, Caroline A. & Flage, Roger & Guikema, Seth D., 2021. "Feasibility study of PRA for critical infrastructure risk analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    15. Kasai, Naoya & Matsuhashi, Shigemi & Sekine, Kazuyoshi, 2013. "Accident occurrence model for the risk analysis of industrialfacilities," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 71-74.
    16. Nicola, Francesca de & De Pace, Pierangelo & Hernandez, Manuel A., 2016. "Co-movement of major energy, agricultural, and food commodity price returns: A time-series assessment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 28-41.
    17. Qiang Wang & Yuanfan Li & Rongrong Li, 2024. "Rethinking the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis across 214 countries: the impacts of 12 economic, institutional, technological, resource, and social factors," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19, December.
    18. Linnenluecke, Martina K. & Smith, Tom & McKnight, Brent, 2016. "Environmental finance: A research agenda for interdisciplinary finance research," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 124-130.
    19. J. C. Helton & F. J. Davis, 2002. "Illustration of Sampling‐Based Methods for Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 591-622, June.
    20. Michael Greenberg & Paul Lioy & Birnur Ozbas & Nancy Mantell & Sastry Isukapalli & Michael Lahr & Tayfur Altiok & Joseph Bober & Clifton Lacy & Karen Lowrie & Henry Mayer & Jennifer Rovito, 2013. "Passenger Rail Security, Planning, and Resilience: Application of Network, Plume, and Economic Simulation Models as Decision Support Tools," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(11), pages 1969-1986, November.

    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:rensus:v:121:y:2020:i:c:s1364032119308822. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    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.