Open AccessA model‐based quantitative assessment of the carbon benefits of introducing iLUC factors in the European Renewable Energy Directive
Author(s) -
Malins Chris
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
gcb bioenergy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.378
H-Index - 63
eISSN - 1757-1707
pISSN - 1757-1693
DOI - 10.1111/j.1757-1707.2012.01207.x
Subject(s) - greenhouse gas , biofuel , renewable energy , land use, land use change and forestry , fossil fuel , mandate , directive , environmental economics , natural resource economics , energy policy , economics , environmental science , land use , engineering , waste management , political science , computer science , ecology , civil engineering , electrical engineering , law , biology , programming language
The E uropean C ommission has a mandate from the EU 's R enewable E nergy and F uel Q uality D irectives to propose a methodology, consistent with the best available science, to address indirect land use change (i LUC ). One proposed solution to the i LUC problem is the application of i LUC factors in E uropean fuels policy – it is widely expected that should the EU adopt such i LUC factors, they would be based on i LUC modelling using the I nternational F ood P olicy R esearch I nstitute's ( IFPRI ) MIRAGE model. Taking the i LUC factors from IFPRI MIRAGE as our central estimate, we use M onte C arlo analysis on a simple model of potential biofuel pathways for E urope to assess the likely average carbon saving from three possible E uropean biofuel policy scenarios: no action on i LUC ; raised GHG thresholds for direct emissions savings; and the introduction of i LUC factors. We find that without i LUC factors (or some other effective i LUC minimization approach) E uropean biofuel mandates are unlikely to deliver significant GHG emissions benefits in 2020, and have a substantial probability of increasing net GHG emissions. In contrast, the implementation of i LUC factors is likely to significantly increase the carbon savings from EU biofuel policy. With i LUC factors, it is likely that most permitted pathways would conform to the R enewable E nergy D irective requirement for a minimum 50% GHG reduction compared to fossil fuels.