IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/masfgc/v23y2018i8d10.1007_s11027-018-9784-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Framework for improved confidence in modeled nitrous oxide estimates for biofuel regulatory standards

Author

Listed:
  • Shuang Gao

    (Drexel University)

  • Patrick L. Gurian

    (Drexel University)

  • Paul R. Adler

    (United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS))

  • Sabrina Spatari

    (Drexel University)

  • Ram Gurung

    (Colorado State University)

  • Saurajyoti Kar

    (Drexel University)

  • Stephen M. Ogle

    (Colorado State University)

  • William J. Parton

    (Colorado State University)

  • Stephen J. Grosso

    (USDA-ARS)

Abstract

Biofuels vary greatly in their carbon intensity, depending on the specifics of how they are produced. Policy frameworks are needed to ensure that biofuels actually achieve intended reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Current approaches do not account for important variables during cultivation that influence emissions. Estimating emissions based on biogeochemical models would allow accounting of farm-specific conditions, which in turn provides an incentive for producers to adopt low emissions practices. However, there are substantial uncertainties in the application of biogeochemical models. This paper proposes a policy framework that manages this uncertainty while retaining the ability of the models to account for (and hence incentivize) low emissions practices. The proposed framework is demonstrated on nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions from the cultivation of winter barley. The framework aggregates uncertainties over time, which (1) avoids penalizing producers for uncertainty in weather, (2) allows for a high degree of confidence in the emissions reductions achieved, and (3) attenuates the uncertainty penalties borne by producers within a timescale of several years. Results indicate that with effective management, N2O emissions from feedstock cultivation may be 20% of the carbon intensity of gasoline. If these emissions reductions are monetized, the framework can provide up to $0.002 per liter credits (0.8 cents per gallon) to fuel producers, which could incentivize emissions mitigation practices by biofuel feedstock suppliers, such as avoiding fall N application on silty clay loam soils. The conservatism in the current approach fails to incentivize the adoption of biofuels, while the lack of specificity fails to incentivize site-level mitigation practices. Improved uncertainty accounting and consideration of farm-level practices will incentivize mitigation efforts at landscape to global scales.

Suggested Citation

  • Shuang Gao & Patrick L. Gurian & Paul R. Adler & Sabrina Spatari & Ram Gurung & Saurajyoti Kar & Stephen M. Ogle & William J. Parton & Stephen J. Grosso, 2018. "Framework for improved confidence in modeled nitrous oxide estimates for biofuel regulatory standards," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(8), pages 1281-1301, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:masfgc:v:23:y:2018:i:8:d:10.1007_s11027-018-9784-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11027-018-9784-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11027-018-9784-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11027-018-9784-1?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. Springborn, Michael & Yeo, Boon-Ling & Lee, Juhwan & Six, Johan, 2013. "Crediting uncertain ecosystem services in a market," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 554-572.
    2. Peter, Christiane & Helming, Katharina & Nendel, Claas, 2017. "Do greenhouse gas emission calculations from energy crop cultivation reflect actual agricultural management practices? – A review of carbon footprint calculators," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 461-476.
    3. Malça, João & Freire, Fausto, 2012. "Addressing land use change and uncertainty in the life-cycle assessment of wheat-based bioethanol," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 519-527.
    4. Richard Plevin & Mark Delucchi & Felix Creutzig, 2014. "Response to Comments on “Using Attributional Life Cycle Assessment to Estimate Climate-Change Mitigation …”," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(3), pages 468-470, May.
    5. John Sheehan & Andy Aden & Keith Paustian & Kendrick Killian & John Brenner & Marie Walsh & Richard Nelson, 2003. "Energy and Environmental Aspects of Using Corn Stover for Fuel Ethanol," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 7(3‐4), pages 117-146, July.
    6. Ogle, Stephen M. & Breidt, F. Jay & Easter, Mark & Williams, Steve & Paustian, Keith, 2007. "An empirically based approach for estimating uncertainty associated with modelling carbon sequestration in soils," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 205(3), pages 453-463.
    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. Sabrina Spatari & Alexander Stadel & Paul R. Adler & Saurajyoti Kar & William J. Parton & Kevin B. Hicks & Andrew J. McAloon & Patrick L. Gurian, 2020. "The Role of Biorefinery Co-Products, Market Proximity and Feedstock Environmental Footprint in Meeting Biofuel Policy Goals for Winter Barley-to-Ethanol," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-15, May.
    2. Alizadeh, Reza & Lund, Peter D. & Soltanisehat, Leili, 2020. "Outlook on biofuels in future studies: A systematic literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(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. Sabrina Spatari & Alexander Stadel & Paul R. Adler & Saurajyoti Kar & William J. Parton & Kevin B. Hicks & Andrew J. McAloon & Patrick L. Gurian, 2020. "The Role of Biorefinery Co-Products, Market Proximity and Feedstock Environmental Footprint in Meeting Biofuel Policy Goals for Winter Barley-to-Ethanol," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-15, May.
    2. Koponen, Kati & Soimakallio, Sampo & Kline, Keith L. & Cowie, Annette & Brandão, Miguel, 2018. "Quantifying the climate effects of bioenergy – Choice of reference system," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 2271-2280.
    3. Danilo Arcentales-Bastidas & Carla Silva & Angel D. Ramirez, 2022. "The Environmental Profile of Ethanol Derived from Sugarcane in Ecuador: A Life Cycle Assessment Including the Effect of Cogeneration of Electricity in a Sugar Industrial Complex," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-24, July.
    4. Khoo, Hsien H., 2015. "Review of bio-conversion pathways of lignocellulose-to-ethanol: Sustainability assessment based on land footprint projections," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 100-119.
    5. Lilianna Głąb & Józef Sowiński, 2019. "Sustainable Production of Sweet Sorghum as a Bioenergy Crop Using Biosolids Taking into Account Greenhouse Gas Emissions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, May.
    6. Daina Paulikas & Steven Katona & Erika Ilves & Saleem H. Ali, 2022. "Deep‐sea nodules versus land ores: A comparative systems analysis of mining and processing wastes for battery‐metal supply chains," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(6), pages 2154-2177, December.
    7. Schmitz Gonçalves, Daniel Neves & Goes, George Vasconcelos & de Almeida D'Agosto, Márcio & Albergaria de Mello Bandeira, Renata, 2019. "Energy use and emissions scenarios for transport to gauge progress toward national commitments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    8. Arianne Provost‐Savard & Guillaume Majeau‐Bettez, 2024. "Substitution modeling can coherently be used in attributional life cycle assessments," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 28(3), pages 410-425, June.
    9. Muth, D.J. & Bryden, K.M. & Nelson, R.G., 2013. "Sustainable agricultural residue removal for bioenergy: A spatially comprehensive US national assessment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 403-417.
    10. Naseri, Hakim & Parashkoohi, Mohammad Gholami & Ranjbar, Iraj & Zamani, Davood Mohammad, 2021. "Energy-economic and life cycle assessment of sugarcane production in different tillage systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    11. Milazzo, M.F. & Spina, F. & Primerano, P. & Bart, J.C.J., 2013. "Soy biodiesel pathways: Global prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 579-624.
    12. Chen, Xiaoguang, 2016. "Economic potential of biomass supply from crop residues in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 141-149.
    13. Kusiima, Jamil M. & Powers, Susan E., 2010. "Monetary value of the environmental and health externalities associated with production of ethanol from biomass feedstocks," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 2785-2796, June.
    14. Chen, Xiaoguang & Huang, Haixiao & Khanna, Madhu & Önal, Hayri, 2014. "Alternative transportation fuel standards: Welfare effects and climate benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 241-257.
    15. Wang, Changbo & Chang, Yuan & Zhang, Lixiao & Chen, Yongsheng & Pang, Mingyue, 2018. "Quantifying uncertainties in greenhouse gas accounting of biomass power generation in China: System boundary and parameters," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 121-127.
    16. John M. DeCicco, 2017. "Author’s response to commentary on “Carbon balance effects of U.S. biofuel production and use”," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 123-129, September.
    17. Liu, Zhen & Tian, Jiali & Wang, Kexin & Lan, Jing, 2023. "The impact of farmland circulation on the carbon footprint of agricultural cultivation in China," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 792-801.
    18. Huang, Haixiao & Khanna, Madhu & Önal, Hayri & Chen, Xiaoguang, 2013. "Stacking low carbon policies on the renewable fuels standard: Economic and greenhouse gas implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 5-15.
    19. Collotta, M. & Champagne, P. & Tomasoni, G. & Alberti, M. & Busi, L. & Mabee, W., 2019. "Critical indicators of sustainability for biofuels: An analysis through a life cycle sustainabilty assessment perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    20. Khanna, Madhu & Paulson, Nick, 2016. "To Harvest Stover or Not: Is it Worth it?," farmdoc daily, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, vol. 6, February.

    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:spr:masfgc:v:23:y:2018:i:8:d:10.1007_s11027-018-9784-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.