1.LifecycleaccountingandBiofuels.docVIP

Lifecycle Carbon Footprint, Bioenergy and Leakage: Empirical Investigations Bruce McCarl, Texas AM Agriculture may help mitigate climate change risks by reducing net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (McCarl and Schneider, 2000). One way of doing this is that agriculture may provide substitute products that can replace fossil fuel intensive products or production processes. One such possibility involves providing feedstocks for conversion into consumable forms of energy, where the feedstocks are agriculturally produced products, crop residues, wastes or processing byproducts. Such items may be used to generate bioenergy encompassing the possibilities where feedstocks are used To fuel electrical power plants As inputs into processes making liquid transportation fuels e.g. ethanol or biodiesel. Employing agriculturally produced products in such a way generally involves recycling of carbon dioxide because the photosynthetic process of plant growth removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere while combustion releases it. This has implications for the need for permits for GHG emissions from energy generation or use (If we ever have such a program). Namely Direct net emissions from biofeedstock combustion are virtually zero because the carbon released is the recycled atmospheric carbon. As such this combustion may not require electrical utilities or liquid fuel users/producers to have emissions permits. Use of fossil fuels for power and liquid fuels, releases substantial carbon dioxide and would require emission rights. This would mean that the willingness to pay for agricultural commodities on behalf of those using them for bioenergy use would rise because their use would not require acquisition or use of potentially costly/valuable emissions permits. This means biofeedstocks may be a way that both (a) energy firms can cost effectively reduce GHG liabilities and (b) be a source of agricultural income. But, before wholeheartedly embracing biofuels as a GHG redu