The rise and fall of bioenergy

Michael Hoel

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 2020, vol. 101, issue C

Abstract: If bioenergy has a less negative impact on the climate than fossil energy, it may be optimal to have a significant increase in the use of bioenergy over time. Due to the difference in the way the climate is affected by the two types of energy, the future time path of the use of bioenergy may be non-monotonic: It may be optimal to first have an increase in its use, and later a reduction. Optimal taxes/subsidies are derived both for the first-best case and for the case of a constraint on the size of the fossil tax.

Keywords: Bioenergy; Renewable energy; Climate policy; Carbon tax; Second best; Subsidies (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q42 Q48 Q54 Q58 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069620300371
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:jeeman:v:101:y:2020:i:c:s0095069620300371

DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2020.102314

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management is currently edited by M.A. Cole, A. Lange, D.J. Phaneuf, D. Popp, M.J. Roberts, M.D. Smith, C. Timmins, Q. Weninger and A.J. Yates

More articles in Journal of Environmental Economics and Management from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().