Implications of emissions timing on the cost‐effectiveness of greenhouse gas mitigation strategies: application to forest bioenergy systems

Abstract

AbstractConventional cost‐effectiveness calculations ignore the implications of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions timing and thus may not properly inform decision‐makers in the efficient allocation of resources to mitigate climate change. To begin to address this disconnect with climate change science, we modify the conventional cost‐effectiveness approach to account for emissions timing. GHG emissions flows occurring over time are translated into an ‘Equivalent Present Emission’ based on radiative forcing, enabling a comparison of system costs and emissions on a consistent present time basis. We apply this ‘Present Cost‐Effectiveness’ method to case studies of biomass‐based electricity generation (biomass co‐firing with coal, biomass cogeneration) to evaluate implications of forest carbon trade‐offs on the cost‐effectiveness of emission reductions. Bioenergy production from forest biomass can reduce forest carbon stocks, an immediate emissions source that contributes to atmospheric greenhouse gases. Forest carbon impacts thereby lessen emission reductions in the near‐term relative to the assumption of biomass ‘carbon neutrality’, resulting in higher costs of emission reductions when emissions timing is considered. In contrast, conventional cost‐effectiveness approaches implicitly evaluate strategies over an infinite analytical time horizon, underestimating nearer term emissions reduction costs and failing to identify pathways that can most efficiently contribute to climate change mitigation objectives over shorter time spans (e.g. up to 100 years). While providing only a simple representation of the climate change implications of emissions timing, the Present Cost‐Effectiveness method provides a straightforward approach to assessing the cost‐effectiveness of emission reductions associated with any climate change mitigation strategy where future GHG reductions require significant initial capital investment or increase near‐term emissions. Timing is a critical factor in determining the attractiveness of any investment; accounting for emissions timing can better inform decisions related to the merit of alternative resource uses to meet near‐, mid‐, and long‐term climate change mitigation objectives.