IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/331933.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Energy from Waste: Generation Potential, Mitigation Opportunity and Option Value

Author

Listed:
  • Bosello, F.
  • Campagnolo, L.
  • Eboli, F.
  • Parrado, R.

Abstract

Climate change and waste management represent two challenges for sustainable development. As known, global warming will affect welfare worldwide through many categories of impact. Landfilling, especially if uncontrolled, often a preferred option as apparently cheap, can deteriorate the environment, originate dangerous pollution sources and arise social tension through the well known NIMBY syndrome. To reduce antropogenic impact on climate change one main instrument is carbon efficiency improvement implying to increase the share of non-GHGs intensive energy sources in energy production and consumption processes. When referring to non fossil fuels, the main focus is usually on nuclear and Renewable Energy Sources (RES): wind, solar, hydro and biofuels. However, there are other important sources that may have a role to tackle climate change and limit other negative environmental problems while exploiting useful resources. This is the case of wastes. After the reduction in waste generation, the so-called integrated waste management may create important benefits from the social, the economic and the environmental viewpoints allowing to recovering either material or energy. The present research proposes a macroeconomic assessment of impacts of Waste to Energy (WtE) (i.e. waste incineration with energy recovery) and of controlled landfill biogas to electricity generation and their potential contribution to a CO2 emission reduction policy, within a computable general equilibrium framework. To our knowledge, this is the first time that this has been done. We focus our analysis on Italy as a signatory of the GHG reduction commitment of 20% proposed by the European Community to be achieved by 2020 and confirmed once again at the Copenhagen summit organised by UNFCCC in December 2009. However, the rest of the world is also represented with a detail of 21 geo-political countries/regions. To introduce WtE and landfill biogas for electricity generation, the GTAP 7 database and its production tree have been extended appropriately. It is shown that albeit in the near future WtE and landfill biogas will continue to represent a limited share of energy inputs in electricity sector (in Italy, around 2% for WtE and 0.6% for biogas in 2020) they could play a role in a mitigation policy context. The GDP cost of the European emission reduction target for the Italian economy can indeed be reduced by the 1% when the two energy generating options are available. In absolute terms this translates into an annuitized option value of 87-122 million €.

Suggested Citation

  • Bosello, F. & Campagnolo, L. & Eboli, F. & Parrado, R., 2010. "Energy from Waste: Generation Potential, Mitigation Opportunity and Option Value," Conference papers 331933, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331933
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/331933/files/4662.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gielen, Dolf & Moriguchi, Yuichi, 2002. "CO2 in the iron and steel industry: an analysis of Japanese emission reduction potentials," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(10), pages 849-863, August.
    2. Demailly, Damien & Quirion, Philippe, 2008. "European Emission Trading Scheme and competitiveness: A case study on the iron and steel industry," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 2009-2027, July.
    3. Jean Pierre Ponssard & Neil Walker, 2008. "EU emissions trading and the cement sector: a spatial competition analysis," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(5), pages 467-493, September.
    4. Carbone, Jared C. & Helm, Carsten & Rutherford, Thomas F., 2009. "The case for international emission trade in the absence of cooperative climate policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 266-280, November.
    5. Peterson, Everett B. & Schleich, Joachim, 2007. "Economic and environmental effects of border tax adjustments," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S1/2007, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    6. Warwick J. McKibbin & Peter J. Wilcoxen, 2009. "The economic and environmental effects of border tax adjustments for climate policy," CAMA Working Papers 2009-09, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    7. Mustafa H. Babiker & Thomas F. Rutherford, 2005. "The Economic Effects of Border Measures in Subglobal Climate Agreements," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 99-126.
    8. Roland Ismer & Karsten Neuhoff, 2007. "Border tax adjustment: a feasible way to support stringent emission trading," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 137-164, October.
    9. Copeland, Brian R. & Taylor, M. Scott, 2005. "Free trade and global warming: a trade theory view of the Kyoto protocol," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 205-234, March.
    10. Bhagwati, Jagdish & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2007. "Is action against US exports for failure to sign Kyoto Protocol WTO-legal?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 299-310, July.
    11. Fischer, Carolyn & Fox, Alan K., 2009. "Comparing Policies to Combat Emissions Leakage: Border Tax Adjustments versus Rebates," RFF Working Paper Series dp-09-02, Resources for the Future.
    12. Brown, Drusilla K., 1987. "Tariffs, the terms of trade, and national product differentiation," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 503-526.
    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. Winchester Niven & Paltsev Sergey & Reilly John M, 2011. "Will Border Carbon Adjustments Work?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-29, January.
    2. Zhang, Zhong Xiang, 2012. "Competitiveness and Leakage Concerns and Border Carbon Adjustments," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 6(3), pages 225-287, December.
    3. Nicole A. MATHYS & Jaime DE MELO, 2010. "Trade and Climate Change: The Challenges Ahead," Working Papers P14, FERDI.
    4. Fischer, Carolyn & Fox, Alan K., 2009. "Comparing Policies to Combat Emissions Leakage: Border Tax Adjustments versus Rebates," RFF Working Paper Series dp-09-02, Resources for the Future.
    5. Boehringer Christoph & Fischer Carolyn & Rosendahl Knut Einar, 2010. "The Global Effects of Subglobal Climate Policies," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(2), pages 1-35, December.
    6. Fischer, Carolyn & Fox, Alan K., 2012. "Comparing policies to combat emissions leakage: Border carbon adjustments versus rebates," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 199-216.
    7. Bao, Qin & Tang, Ling & Zhang, ZhongXiang & Wang, Shouyang, 2013. "Impacts of border carbon adjustments on China's sectoral emissions: Simulations with a dynamic computable general equilibrium model," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 77-94.
    8. Monjon, Stéphanie & Quirion, Philippe, 2011. "Addressing leakage in the EU ETS: Border adjustment or output-based allocation?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1957-1971, September.
    9. Ghosh, Madanmohan & Luo, Deming & Siddiqui, Muhammad Shahid & Zhu, Yunfa, 2012. "Border tax adjustments in the climate policy context: CO2 versus broad-based GHG emission targeting," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(S2), pages 154-167.
    10. Springmann, Marco, 2012. "Carbon tariffs for financing clean development," Conference papers 332255, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    11. Bao, Qin & Tang, Ling & Zhang, ZhingXiang & Qiao, Han & Wang, Shouyang, 2012. "Impact of Border Carbon Adjustments on China’s Sectoral Emissions: Simulations with a Dynamic Computable General Equilibirum Model," Working Papers 249391, Australian National University, Centre for Climate Economics & Policy.
    12. Branger, Frédéric & Quirion, Philippe, 2014. "Would border carbon adjustments prevent carbon leakage and heavy industry competitiveness losses? Insights from a meta-analysis of recent economic studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 29-39.
    13. Niven Winchester, 2018. "Can tariffs be used to enforce Paris climate commitments?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(10), pages 2650-2668, October.
    14. Jared C. Carbone & Nicholas Rivers, 2014. "Climate policy and competitiveness: Policy guidance and quantitative evidence," Working Papers 2014-05, Colorado School of Mines, Division of Economics and Business.
    15. Kuik, Onno & Hofkes, Marjan, 2010. "Border adjustment for European emissions trading: Competitiveness and carbon leakage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 1741-1748, April.
    16. Madison Condon & Ada Ignaciuk, 2013. "Border Carbon Adjustment and International Trade: A Literature Review," OECD Trade and Environment Working Papers 2013/6, OECD Publishing.
    17. Antimiani, Alessandro & Costantini, Valeria & Martini, Chiara & Salvatici, Luca & Tommasino, Maria Cristina, 2013. "Assessing alternative solutions to carbon leakage," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 299-311.
    18. Acar, Mustafa & Aydin, Levent, 2011. "Turkey’s Shifting Axis to the East: Implications of Regional Integration with the Neighborhood," Conference papers 332160, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    19. van Asselt, Harro & Brewer, Thomas, 2010. "Addressing competitiveness and leakage concerns in climate policy: An analysis of border adjustment measures in the US and the EU," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 42-51, January.
    20. Löschel, Andreas & Alexeeva-Talebi, Victoria & Mennel, Tim, 2008. "Climate Policy and the Problem of Competitiveness: Border Tax Adjustments or Integrated Emission Trading?," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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:ags:pugtwp:331933. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.html .

    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.