Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T18:41:29.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Carbon Emissions, Renewable Electricity, and Profits: Comparing Policies to Promote Anaerobic Digesters on Dairies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Nigel Key  and
Stacy Sneeringer
Nigel Key
Affiliation:
Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Stacy Sneeringer
Affiliation:
Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Get access

Abstract

Anaerobic digesters can provide renewable energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from manure management. Government policies that encourage digester adoption by livestock operations include construction cost-share grants, renewable electricity subsidies, and carbon pricing (offset) programs. However, the effectiveness and efficiency of these policies is not well understood. For the U.S. dairy sector, we compare predicted digester adoption rates, carbon emission reductions, renewable electricity generation and sales, and net returns and social benefits of several policies. We find that a carbon pricing policy provides the greatest net social benefit for a range of assumptions about the benefits of carbon reductions and renewable energy.

Keywords

anaerobic digestercarbon offsetsclimate changedairymethanerenewable electricitysubsidy
Type
Research Article
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 41 , Issue 2 , August 2012 , pp. 139 - 157
Copyright
Copyright © 2012 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

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

AgSTAR. 2011. The AgSTAR Program: Accomplishments. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. Available at http://www.epa.gov/agstar/projects/index.html (accessed June 30, 2011).Google Scholar
Bishop, C., and Shumway, C.R. 2009. “The Economics of Dairy Anaerobic Digestion with Coproduct Marketing.” Review of Agricultural Economics 31 (3): 394–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
California Energy Commission. 2011. Renewables Portfolio Standards (RPS) Proceeding Docket # 03-PRS-1078 . California Energy Commission, Sacramento, CA. Available at http://www.energy.ca.gov/portfolio/index.html (accessed June 2011).Google Scholar
Chicago Climate Exchange. 2009. Chicago Climate Exchange: Agricultural Methane Collection and Combustion Offset Project Protocol. CCX, Intercontinental Exchange, Chicago, IL. Available at http://www.chicagoclimatex.com/docs/offsets/CCX_Agricultural_Methane_Final.pdf (accessed February 2012).Google Scholar
Database of State Incentives for Renewable Energy. 2010. Rules, Regulations, and Policies for Renewable Energy. DSIRE, North Carolina Solar Center and the Interstate Renewable Energy Council, Raleigh, NC. Available at http://www.dsireusa.org/summarytables/rrpre.cfm (accessed June 2010).Google Scholar
Department of Energy. 2000. Carbon Dioxide Emissions from the Generation of Electric Power in the United States. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. Available at: ftp://ftp.eia.doe.gov/environment/co2emiss00.pdf (accessed February 2012).Google Scholar
Department of Energy. 2011. “Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs).” Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. Available at http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/markets/certificates.shtml?page=0 (accessed June 2011).Google Scholar
Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2005. “2005 Dairy Production Practices and Costs and Returns.” ERS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. “EPA Analysis of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, H.R. 2454 in the 111th Congress, June 23.” EPA, Washington, D.C. Available at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/economics/pdfs/HR2454_Analysis.pdf (accessed February 2012).Google Scholar
Environmental Protection Agency. 2010a. “EPA Administrator and Agriculture Secretary Team Up to Promote Farm Energy Generation Agreement will help cut greenhouse gas emissions.” News Release. May 3. Available at http://www.epa.gov/agstar/news-events/ad.html (accessed May 2012).Google Scholar
Environmental Protection Agency. 2010b. Market Opportunities for Biogas Recovery Systems at U.S. Livestock Facilities. AgSTAR Program, Washington, D.C. Available at http://www.epa.gov/agstar/documents/biogas_recovery_systems_screenres.pdf (accessed February 2012).Google Scholar
Environmental Protection Agency. 2010c. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2008. EPA Report 430-R-10-006, EPA, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Forster, P., Ramaswamy, V., Artaxo, P., Berntsen, T., Betts, R., Fahey, D.W., Haywood, J., Lean, J., Lowe, D.C., Myhre, G., Nganga, J., Prinn, R., Raga, G., Schulz, M., and Van Dorland, R. 2007. “Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing.” In S. Solomon et al. eds., Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gloy, B.A. 2011. “The Potential Supply of Carbon Dioxide Offsets from Anaerobic Digestion of Dairy Waste in the United States.” Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 33(1): 59–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Key, N., and Sneeringer, S. 2011a. Climate Change Policy and the Adoption of Methane Digesters on Livestock Operations. Research Report 111, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Key, N., and Sneeringer, S. 2011b. “Carbon Markets and Methane Digesters: Potential Implications for the Dairy Sector.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 43(4): 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lazarus, W., and Rudstrom, M. 2007. “The Economics of Anaerobic Digester Operation on a Minnesota Dairy Farm.” Review of Agricultural Economics 29(2): 349–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leuer, E., Hyde, J., and Richard, T. 2008. “Investing in Methane Digesters on Pennsylvania Dairy Farms: Implication of Scale Economies and Environmental Programs.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 37(2): 188–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Department of Energy. 2010. “Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs): Retail Products.” DOE, Washington, D.C. Available at http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/markets/certificates.shtml?page=1 (accessed February 2012).Google Scholar
National Research Council. 2010. Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. 2008–2011. “Annual Report on the Market for RGGI CO2 Allowances.” RGGI, New York, NY. Available at www.rggi.org/market/market_monitor.Google Scholar
Stokes, J., Rajagopalan, R., and Stefanou, S. 2008. “Investment in a Methane Digester: An Application of Capital Budgeting and Real Options.” Review of Agricultural Economics 30(4): 664–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tol, R.S.J. 2008. “The Social Cost of Carbon: Trends, Outliers, and Catastrophes.” Economics: The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-journal (2): 2008–25. Available at http://www.economics-ejoumal.org/economics/joumalarticles/2008-25 (accessed February 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar