IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/resene/v53y2018icp198-219.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cumulative global forest carbon implications of regional bioenergy expansion policies

Author

Listed:
  • Kim, Sei Jin
  • Baker, Justin S.
  • Sohngen, Brent L.
  • Shell, Michael

Abstract

Several previous studies have evaluated the potential greenhouse gas (GHG) benefits of forest biomass energy relative to fossil fuel equivalents over different spatial scales and time frames and applying a variety of methodologies. This paper contributes to this literature through an analysis of multiple projected sources of biomass demand growth in different regions of the world using a detailed intertemporal optimization model of the global forest sector. Given the range of current policies incentivizing bioenergy expansion globally, evaluating the combined global implications of regional bioenergy expansion efforts is critical for understanding the extent to which renewable energy supplied from forest biomass can contribute to various policy goals (including GHG emissions mitigation). Unlike previous studies that have been more regionally focused, this study provides a global perspective, illustrating how large potential demand increases for forest biomass in one or multiple regions can alter future forest management trends, markets, and forest carbon sequestration in key timber supply regions. Results show that potential near term (2015–2030) biomass demand growth in the U.S., Europe, and elsewhere can drive forest resource investment at the intensive and extensive margins, resulting in a net increase in forest carbon stocks for most regions of the world. When the reallocation of biomass away from traditional pulp and sawtimber markets is accounted for, net forest carbon sequestration increases (that stored on the land and in wood products) by 9.4 billion tons CO2 over the near term and 15.4 billion tons CO2 by 2095. Even if most of the increased forest biomass demand arises from one region (e.g., Europe) due to a particularly strong promotion of forest bioenergy expansion, changes in forest management globally in anticipation of this demand increase could result in carbon beneficial outcomes that can be shared by most regions.

Suggested Citation

  • Kim, Sei Jin & Baker, Justin S. & Sohngen, Brent L. & Shell, Michael, 2018. "Cumulative global forest carbon implications of regional bioenergy expansion policies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 198-219.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:resene:v:53:y:2018:i:c:p:198-219
    DOI: 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2018.04.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928765517302968
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2018.04.003?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. Roman Keeney & Thomas W. Hertel, 2009. "The Indirect Land Use Impacts of United States Biofuel Policies: The Importance of Acreage, Yield, and Bilateral Trade Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(4), pages 895-909.
    2. Katherine Calvin & Marshall Wise & Page Kyle & Pralit Patel & Leon Clarke & Jae Edmonds, 2014. "Trade-offs of different land and bioenergy policies on the path to achieving climate targets," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 691-704, April.
    3. Gurgel Angelo & Reilly John M & Paltsev Sergey, 2007. "Potential Land Use Implications of a Global Biofuels Industry," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-36, December.
    4. Xiaohui Tian & Brent Sohngen & Justin Baker & Sara Ohrel & Allen A. Fawcett, 2018. "Will U.S. Forests Continue to Be a Carbon Sink?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 94(1), pages 97-113.
    5. Mosnier, A. & Havlík, P. & Valin, H. & Baker, J. & Murray, B. & Feng, S. & Obersteiner, M. & McCarl, B.A. & Rose, S.K. & Schneider, U.A., 2013. "Alternative U.S. biofuel mandates and global GHG emissions: The role of land use change, crop management and yield growth," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 602-614.
    6. Brent Sohngen & Robert Mendelsohn & Roger Sedjo, 1999. "Forest Management, Conservation, and Global Timber Markets," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(1), pages 1-13.
    7. Latta, Gregory S. & Baker, Justin S. & Beach, Robert H. & Rose, Steven K. & McCarl, Bruce A., 2013. "A multi-sector intertemporal optimization approach to assess the GHG implications of U.S. forest and agricultural biomass electricity expansion," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 361-383.
    8. Alice Favero & Robert Mendelsohn & Brent Sohngen, 2017. "Using forests for climate mitigation: sequester carbon or produce woody biomass?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 195-206, September.
    9. Stefan Frank & Hannes Böttcher & Mykola Gusti & Petr Havlík & Ger Klaassen & Georg Kindermann & Michael Obersteiner, 2016. "Dynamics of the land use, land use change, and forestry sink in the European Union: the impacts of energy and climate targets for 2030," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 138(1), pages 253-266, September.
    10. Rose, Steven K. & Ahammad, Helal & Eickhout, Bas & Fisher, Brian & Kurosawa, Atsushi & Rao, Shilpa & Riahi, Keywan & van Vuuren, Detlef P., 2012. "Land-based mitigation in climate stabilization," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 365-380.
    11. Alice Favero & Robert Mendelsohn, 2014. "Using Markets for Woody Biomass Energy to Sequester Carbon in Forests," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 75-95.
    12. Buongiorno, Joseph & Raunikar, Ronald & Zhu, Shushuai, 2011. "Consequences of increasing bioenergy demand on wood and forests: An application of the Global Forest Products Model," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 214-229, April.
    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. Baker, J.S. & Wade, C.M. & Sohngen, B.L. & Ohrel, S. & Fawcett, A.A., 2019. "Potential complementarity between forest carbon sequestration incentives and biomass energy expansion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 391-401.
    2. Jennifer Buss & Nicolas Mansuy & Sebnem Madrali, 2021. "De-Risking Wood-Based Bioenergy Development in Remote and Indigenous Communities in Canada," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-16, May.
    3. Daigneault, Adam & Baker, Justin S. & Guo, Jinggang & Lauri, Pekka & Favero, Alice & Forsell, Nicklas & Johnston, Craig & Ohrel, Sara & Sohngen, Brent, 2021. "How the Future of the Global Forest Sink Depends on Timber Demand, Forest Management, and Carbon Prices," CEnREP Working Papers 340059, North Carolina State University, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    4. Daigneault, Adam & Favero, Alice, 2021. "Global forest management, carbon sequestration and bioenergy supply under alternative shared socioeconomic pathways," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    5. Lotte Visser & Ric Hoefnagels & Martin Junginger, 2020. "The Potential Contribution of Imported Biomass to Renewable Energy Targets in the EU–the Trade-off between Ambitious Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Targets and Cost Thresholds," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-30, April.
    6. Lin, Boqiang & Ge, Jiamin, 2021. "Does institutional freedom matter for global forest carbon sinks in the face of economic development disparity?," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    7. Henderson, Jesse D. & Parajuli, Rajan & Abt, Robert C., 2020. "Biological and market responses of pine forests in the US Southeast to carbon fertilization," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(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. Baker, J.S. & Wade, C.M. & Sohngen, B.L. & Ohrel, S. & Fawcett, A.A., 2019. "Potential complementarity between forest carbon sequestration incentives and biomass energy expansion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 391-401.
    2. Eriksson, Mathilda & Brännlund, Runar & Lundgren, Tommy, 2018. "Pricing forest carbon: Implications of asymmetry in climate policy," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 84-93.
    3. Alice Favero & Robert Mendelsohn, 2013. "Evaluating the Global Role of Woody Biomass as a Mitigation Strategy," Working Papers 2013.37, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    4. Favero, Alice & Mendelsohn, Robert & Sohngen, Brent, 2016. "Carbon Storage and Bioenergy: Using Forests for Climate Mitigation," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 232215, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    5. Sajedinia, Ehsanreza & Tyner, Wally, 2017. "Use of General Equilibrium Models in Evaluating Biofuels Policies," Conference papers 332885, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    6. Daigneault, Adam J. & Sohngen, Brent L. & Sedjo, Roger, 2020. "Carbon and market effects of U.S. forest taxation policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    7. Johnston, Craig M.T. & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2016. "Global trade impacts of increasing Europe's bioenergy demand," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 27-44.
    8. Eriksson, Mathilda, 2020. "Afforestation and avoided deforestation in a multi-regional integrated assessment model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    9. Daigneault, Adam & Favero, Alice, 2021. "Global forest management, carbon sequestration and bioenergy supply under alternative shared socioeconomic pathways," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    10. Alice Favero & Robert Mendelsohn & Brent Sohngen, 2017. "Using forests for climate mitigation: sequester carbon or produce woody biomass?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 195-206, September.
    11. Ehsanreza Sajedinia & Wallace E. Tyner, 2021. "Use of General Equilibrium Models in Evaluating Biofuels Policies," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Peter Dixon & Joseph Francois & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe (ed.), POLICY ANALYSIS AND MODELING OF THE GLOBAL ECONOMY A Festschrift Celebrating Thomas Hertel, chapter 14, pages 437-465, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    12. Li, Liang & Taheripour, Farzad & Preckel, Paul V. & Tyner, Wallace E., 2012. "Improvement of GTAP Cropland Constant Elasticity of Transformation Nesting Structure," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124704, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. Miguel RIVIERE & Sylvain CAURLA, 2018. "Integrating non-timber objectives into bio-economic models of the forest sector: a review of recent innovations and current shortcomings," Working Papers of BETA 2018-26, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    14. Monge, Juan J. & Bryant, Henry L. & Gan, Jianbang & Richardson, James W., 2016. "Land use and general equilibrium implications of a forest-based carbon sequestration policy in the United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 102-120.
    15. Rong Li & Brent Sohngen & Xiaohui Tian, 2022. "Efficiency of forest carbon policies at intensive and extensive margins," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(4), pages 1243-1267, August.
    16. Xin Zhao & Bryan K. Mignone & Marshall A. Wise & Haewon C. McJeon, 2024. "Trade-offs in land-based carbon removal measures under 1.5 °C and 2 °C futures," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    17. Sohngen, Brent & Favero, Alice & Jin, Yufang & Huang, Yuhan, 2018. "Global cost estimates of forest climate mitigation with albedo: A new policy approach," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274307, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Olivia Cintas & Göran Berndes & Annette L. Cowie & Gustaf Egnell & Hampus Holmström & Göran I. Ågren, 2016. "The climate effect of increased forest bioenergy use in Sweden: evaluation at different spatial and temporal scales," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(3), pages 351-369, May.
    19. Austin, K.G. & Jones, J.P.H. & Clark, C.M., 2022. "A review of domestic land use change attributable to U.S. biofuel policy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    20. Winchester, Niven & Reilly, John M., 2015. "The feasibility, costs, and environmental implications of large-scale biomass energy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 188-203.

    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:resene:v:53:y:2018:i:c:p:198-219. 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/inca/505569 .

    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.