Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T04:15:29.603Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Economic Impacts of Carbon Taxes and Biomass Feedstock Usage in Southeastern United States Coal Utilities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Burton C. English ,
Kim Jensen ,
Jamey Menard ,
Marie E. Walsh ,
Craig Brandt ,
Jim Van Dyke  and
Stanton Hadley
Burton C. English
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN
Kim Jensen
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN
Jamey Menard
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN
Marie E. Walsh
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN
Craig Brandt
Affiliation:
Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN
Jim Van Dyke
Affiliation:
Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN
Stanton Hadley
Affiliation:
Engineering Science and Technology Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN
Get access

Abstract

The Southeastern United States depends on coal to supply 60% of its electricity needs. The region leads in CO2 emissions and ranks second in emissions of SO2 and NO2. Compared with coal, biomass feedstocks have lower emission levels of sulfur or sulfur compounds and can potentially reduce nitrogen oxide emissions. This study examines the economic impacts of cofiring biomass feedstocks with coal in coal-fired plants under three emission credit and two cofiring level scenarios. Economic impacts are estimated for producing, collecting, and transporting feedstock; retrofitting coal-fired utilities for burning feedstock; operating cofired utilities; and coal displaced from burning the feedstock.

Keywords

biomasscoalcofiringeconomic impactselectricityinput-output modelQ42R15
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 39 , Issue 1 , April 2007 , pp. 103 - 119
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alich, J. A. Jr., and Inman, R.E.. “Evaluation of the Use of Agricultural Residues as an Energy Feedstock, Volume I.” Menlo Park, CA: Stanford Research Institute, July 1976.Google Scholar
Antares Group Inc. and Parsons Power. Utility Coal-Biomass Cofiring Plant Opportunities and Conceptual Assessments. Final Report prepared for the Northeast Regional Biomass Program and the United States Department of Energy, December 1996. Internet site: http://www.nrbp.org/pdfs/publ2.pdf (Accessed May 2, 2002).Google Scholar
Comer, K., Gray, E., and Packney, D.. “Coal and Biomass—A Symbiotic Relationship is Developing via Cofiring.” BIOPOWER—Renewable Electricity from Plant Material. Internet site: http://www.eere.energy.gov/biopower/bplib/library/li_coal_biomass.htm (Accessed April 23, 2004).Google Scholar
Demirbas, A. “Sustainable Cofiring of Biomass with Coal.” Energy Conversion and Management 44,9(June 2003):1465–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
English, B.C., Short, C., and Heady, E.O.. “The Economic Feasibility of Crop Residues as Auxiliary Fuel in Coal-fired Power Plants.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 63,4(November 1981):636–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epplin, F., Mapemba, L.D., and Tembo, G.. “Economic Modeling of a Lignocellulosic Bio-mass Biorefining Industry.” Agriculture as a Producer and Consumer of Energy, Outlaw, J., Collins, K., and Duffield, J., eds. Wallingford Oxfordshire, UK: CABI Publishing, 2005.Google Scholar
Gallagher, P., Dikeman, M., Fritz, J., Wailes, E., Gauthier, W., and Shapouri, H.. “Supply and Social Cost Estimates for Biomass from Crop Residues in the United States.” Environmental and Resource Economics 24(April 2003):335–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, R., English, B., Noon, C., Liu, W., Daly, M., and Jager, H.. “A Regional-Scale GIS-Based Modeling System for Evaluating the Potential Costs and Supplies of Biomass from Biomass Crops.” Internet site: http://bioenergy.ornl.gov/papers/bioen96/grahaml.html (Accessed February 15, 2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, R., and Walsh, M.. “Evaluating the Economic Costs, Benefits and Tradeoffs of Dedicated Biomass Energy Systems: The Importance of Scale.” Second Biomass Conference of the Americas Proceedings, 1995.Google Scholar
Haq, Z.Biomass for Electricity Generation. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Energy/Energy Information Administration, Internet site: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/analysispaper/biomass/ (Accessed February 15, 2003).Google Scholar
Mann, M., and Spath, P.. “Life Cycle Assessment of Biomass Cofiring in a Coal-Fired Power Plant.” Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 3,2(August 2001):81–91.Google Scholar
Morris, G.The Value of the Benefits of U. S. Biomass Power. Golden, CO: U. S. Department of Energy, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, NREL/ST-570-27541, 1999. Internet site: http://www.energyproducts.com/Documents/NREL%20Biomass%20Power%20value.pdf (Accessed February 15, 2003).Google Scholar
Noon, C, Daly, M., Graham, R., and Zhan, B.. “Transportation and Site Location Analysis for Regional Integrated Biomass Assessment (RIBA).” Internet site: http://bioenergy.ornl.gov/papers/bioen96/noonl.html (Accessed February 15, 2003).Google Scholar
Olson, D., and Lindall, S.. “IMPLAN Professional Software, Analysis, and Data Guide.” Minnesota IMPLAN Group, Inc., Stillwater, MN. Internet site: www.implan.com (Accessed February 15, 2003).Google Scholar
Southeastern Electric Reliability Council—North American Electric Reliability Council, Internet site: http://www.nerc.com/regional/serc.html (Accessed February 15, 2003).Google Scholar
U.S. Congress, Senate and House of Representatives. Energy Policy Act, H.R. 6. Washington, DC:109th Cong., 1st sess., 4 January 2005.Google Scholar
U.S. DOE—EIA (U.S. Department of Energy-Energy Information Administration). “Analysis of a 10-percent Renewable Portfolio Standard.” 2003. Internet site: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/rps2/pdf/sroiaf(2003)01.pdf (Accessed October 27, 2005).Google Scholar
U.S. DOE—EIA (U.S. Department of Energy-Energy Information Administration). “Analysis of Strategies for Reducing Multiple Emissions from Power Plants: Sulfur Dioxide, Nitrogen Oxides, and Carbon Dioxide.” 2001. Internet site: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/powerplants/ (Accessed February 15, 2003).Google Scholar
U.S. DOE—EIA (U.S. Department of Energy-Energy Information Administration). “Content and Layout of the EIA-906/EIA-920 Monthly Time Series File Preliminary Data File for 2005.” 2005. Internet site: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia906_920.html (Accessed June 6, 2006).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Energy—National Renewable Energy Laboratory. “Choices for a Brighter Future: Perspectives on Renewable Energy.” 1999. Internet site: http://www.eren.doe.gov/power/pdfs/choices.pdf (Accessed February 15, 2003).Google Scholar
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation. “Clear Skies—Better Health, Brighter Future.” Internet site: http://www.epa.gov/clearskies/#regional (Accessed February 15, 2003).Google Scholar
Van Dyke, J. Personal Communication. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Environmental Sciences Division, May 2002.Google Scholar
Walsh, M., De La Torre Ugarte, D., Shapouri, H., and Slinsky, S.. “Bioenergy Crop Production in the United State: Potential Quantities, Land Use Changes, and Economic Impacts on the Agricultural Sector.” Environmental and Resource Economics 24(April 2003):313–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar