First-generation vs. second-generation: A market incentives analysis for bioethanol supply chains with carbon policies

Seyed Ali Haji Esmaeili, Ahmad Sobhani, Joseph Szmerekovsky, Alan Dybing and Ghasideh Pourhashem

Applied Energy, 2020, vol. 277, issue C, No S0306261920311132

Abstract: Increasing demand for energy, the food versus fuel debate, and competitive market pressure for environmental sustainability are driving bioethanol supply chain decision-makers to use second-generation biomass feedstocks and reduce carbon emissions. Currently, most biomass supply chains use edible first-generation feedstocks to produce bioethanol, therefore incentivizing them to switch to a non-edible second-generation feedstock seems necessary and motivating in this context. Implementing various carbon policy mechanisms to curb carbon emissions plays a vital role in planning bioethanol supply chains. This research proposes a quantitative optimization model for designing and planning biomass bioethanol supply chains considering monetary incentives. The model is developed further by investigating the impact of four different carbon policies including carbon tax, carbon cap, carbon cap-and-trade, and carbon offset policy on the supply chain decisions. Also, the proposed model compares a first-generation (corn) and two different second-generation (corn stover and switchgrass) bioethanol supply chain networks to identify a better alternative for first-generation bioethanol producers. The presented methodology is implemented by applying a case study for the state of North Dakota to derive more realistic results and policies. The results show that switchgrass is a better alternative for corn rather than corn stover both economically and environmentally. A minimum incentive of $0.204/liter and $0.167/liter of bioethanol are needed to switch from corn-based to corn-stover-based and switchgrass-based bioethanol supply chains, respectively. Also, carbon cap-and-trade is the best carbon policy since it causes the lowest profit loss (31.5%) and the highest reduction in emissions (up to 1.98%) compared to other policies.

Keywords: Biomass supply chain; Bioethanol production; Motivational incentives; Carbon policy; Optimization approach; Environmental sustainability (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (10)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261920311132
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:appene:v:277:y:2020:i:c:s0306261920311132

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/bibliographic
http://www.elsevier. ... 405891/bibliographic

DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115606

Access Statistics for this article

Applied Energy is currently edited by J. Yan

More articles in Applied Energy from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().