european energy policy analysis with gtap model in a … · · 2016-09-26european energy policy...

European energy policy analysis with GTAP model in a consequential prospective LCA framework

Thomas Dandres*, Pablo Tirado, Caroline Gaudreault and Réjean Samson

Swiss LCA Forum

9 September 2016 *Contact: [email protected]

Introduction

Assessing policies with LCA

Method

Objectives

Case study: 2005-2025 European energy policies

Prospective LCA: technological and economic background

Consequential LCA: direct and indirect consequences

Results

Comparison of two European energy policies

Environmental impacts of the economic growth

Uncertainty analysis

Conclusion

PRESENTATION OUTLINE

Large scale policies may harm the environment and the human society

Example: national biofuel policies may cause indirect land use changes emitting significant amounts of CO2 and increase prices of food products

There is a need to assess large scale policies from a global perspective

What are the characteristics of policies?

and what are the needs to conduct LCAs of policies?

May have indirect effects

Cause large changes in many life cycles

Over a long period of time

INTRODUCTION

Prospective LCA

Consequential LCA

Non-marginal variations

Consequential LCA is based on economic modeling, therefore an international policy assessment requires an economic model able to:

Investigate prospective scenarios

Handle non-marginal variations

Model all economic sectors to cover indirect effects

General equilibrium economic models meet these criteria

Especially:

INTRODUCTION

Hertel (1997)

• 57 economic sectors

• 113 regions

• Semi-dynamic

• Open source

• Many applications (GTAP7)

Introduction

• Assessing policies with LCA

Method

Objectives

Case study: 2005-2025 European energy policies

Prospective LCA: technological and economic background

Consequential LCA: direct and indirect consequences

Results

• Comparison of two European energy policies

• Environmental impacts of the economic growth

• Uncertainty analysis

Conclusion


PhD Project (2007-2012) = scientific development + case study

Scientific objective

Develop a method based on consequential and prospective LCA to study large changes occurring in several life cycles on the long term

Case study objective

Evaluate environmental impacts of a significant development of wood-bioenergy in Europe (heat and electricity sectors)

METHODOLOGY – PROJECT OBJECTIVES

What policies?

2 European energy policies implemented during 2005-2025 • A baseline policy (business as usual) and a bioenergy policy (large

increase of biomass use for heat and electricity generation)

METHODOLOGY – CASE STUDY

COAL

BIOMASS

COAL BIOMASS

« BIOENERGY »

Policy

2025 2025 2005

« BASELINE »

Policy

COAL

URANIUM

NATURAL GAS

OIL

BIOMASS

WASTE

HYDRO

WIND

OTHER RENEWABLE

IMPORTATIONS Prospective scenarios for electricity generation

(adapted from Mantzos et al. 2004)

Prospective scenarios

Baseline and bioenergy scenarios (PRIMES/POLE)

Describe evolution of European energy sector

Prospective data

Economy forecast (macroeconomic drivers of GTAP)

• Population

• Gross domestic product (GDP)

• Capital

• Skilled and unskilled labor forces

Technological innovation

• European energy sector: literature and experts

• Other economic sectors: extrapolation from total factor productivity (TFP)

METHODOLOGY – PROSPECTIVE LCA

METHODOLOGY – CONSEQUENTIAL PROSPECTIVE LCA

GTAP7

Changes in industrial productions

(physical unit)

International databases

INDIRECT ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT

GLOBAL

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

Technology

innovation

Economy

forecast

IMPACT2002+

DIRECT ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT

Attributional prospective LCA


(monetary value)

Large scale

policy

Direct environmental impacts

European heat and electricity sector

Indirect environmental impacts

All other economic sectors (all regions)

Dandres et al. (2011, 2012)

Introduction


Method

• Objectives

• Case study: 2005-2025 European energy policies

• Prospective LCA: technological and economic background

• Consequential LCA: direct and indirect consequences

Results

Comparison of two European energy policies

Environmental impacts of economic growth


Conclusion


Environmental impacts can be expressed

By region and by period (example: ecosystems)

RESULTS – COMPARISON OF TWO EUROPEAN ENERGY POLICIES

RESULTS – ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BY REGION AND BY PERIOD



By economic sector and midpoint category (example: ecosystems)


RESULTS – ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BY SECTOR AND MIDPOINT CATEGORY




By endpoint category (world scale)


RESULTS – ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BY ENDPOINT CATEGORY



By endpoint category (world scale)


Environmental impacts due to economic growth and benefits/impacts of the bioenergy policy


RESULTS – ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS DUE TO ECONOMIC GROWTH

Legend:

Economic growth

Bioenergy policy

RESULTS – UNCERTAINTY

Many sources of uncertainty

Economic and technological forecasts

GTAP database and parameters

GTAP model

Databases mapping (GTAP ↔ UNDATA ↔ ecoinvent)

Ecoinvent data and IMPACT2002+ method


27 prospective scenarios (GTAP simulations)

• combination of economic, technological and GTAP parameters changed by: +50%; +0%; -50%

1 what-if scenario: EU-US joint bioenergy policy

Monte-Carlo simulations (LCA uncertainty)

RESULTS – UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS

GTAP7


(physical unit)

International databases

INDIRECT ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT

GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT

28 prospective

scenarios

IMPACT2002+

DIRECT ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT

Attributional prospective LCA


(monetary value)

Large

perturbation

Monte-Carlo

simulations

0

1020

30

40

50

60

70

80

90100

-1.5E+05

-1.0E+05

-5.0E+04

0.0E+00

5.0E+04

1.0E+05

1.5E+05

2.0E+05

2.5E+05

D G A H E P V I F B M Q C N Y R S J O K Z @W L X T U #

% DALY

Scenarios

Human health Certainty (%)

0

1020

30

40

50

60

70

80

90100

-3.0E+11

-2.0E+11

-1.0E+11

0.0E+00

1.0E+11

2.0E+11

3.0E+11


% kg CO2 eq.

Scenarios

Climate change Certainty (%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

-2.0E+11

-1.5E+11

-1.0E+11

-5.0E+10

0.0E+00

5.0E+10

1.0E+11

1.5E+11


% PDF.m².year

Scenarios

Ecosystem Certainty (%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

-1.5E+13

-1.0E+13

-5.0E+12

0.0E+00

5.0E+12

1.0E+13

1.5E+13


% MJ Primary

Scenarios

Natural resources Certainty (%)

RESULTS – UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS

Scenarios with low economic growth

and/or low technological development

Reference

scenario

GHG emissions Human Health

Ecosystems Resources

EU-US

bionergy

policy

Introduction


Method

• Objectives

• Case study: 2005-2025 European energy policies

• Prospective LCA: technological and economic background

• Consequential LCA: direct and indirect consequences

Results

• Comparison of two European energy policies

• Environmental impacts of the economic growth

• Uncertainty analysis

Conclusion


CONCLUSION

Macro LCA approach

Consequential prospective LCA made to study large scale policies (with non-marginal variations)

Policy assessment

European bioenergy policy (heat and electricity) is better than the baseline policy for human health, climate change and natural resources but not for ecosystems

Uncertainty

Modeled uncertainty does not really affect the comparison of the two policies

PUBLICATION AND REFERENCES

Assessing non-marginal variations with consequential LCA: Application to

European energy sector (2011). Dandres, T., Gaudreault, C., Tirado-Seco, P., &

Samson, R. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(6), 3121-3132. doi: DOI:

10.1016/j.rser.2011.04.004

Macroanalysis of the economic and environmental impacts of a 2005-2025

European Union bioenergy policy using the GTAP model and life cycle

assessment (2012). Dandres, T., Gaudreault, C., Tirado-Seco, P., & Samson, R.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16(2), 1180-1192. doi:

10.1016/j.rser.2011.11.003

Uncertainty management in a macro life cycle assessment of a 2005–2025

European bioenergy policy (2014). Dandres, T., Gaudreault, C., Seco, P. T., &

Samson, R. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 36(0), 52-61.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.042

• Hertel, T. W. (1997). Global Trade Analysis - Modeling and Applications: Cambridge

University Press.

• Mantzos, L., Capros, P., & Zeka-Paschou, M. (2004). European Energy and Transports

Scenarios on Key Drivers. In Directorate-General for Energy and Transport (Ed.), (pp. 262).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT – Project Partners

CYCLE 2016 - 5th international Forum on the life cycle

management of products and services

Implementing sustainability through life cycle thinking

METHODOLOGY – GTAP SETUP (20 ECONOMIC SECTORS)

Grains and crops

Processed

food

Forestry

Wood products

Paper products

Mining and

extraction

Coal

extraction Oil

extraction

Gas

extraction

Petroleum

and coal

products

Gas

manufacture

and

distribution

Electricity

and heat

Textiles and

clothing

Light

manufacturing

Heavy

manufacturing

Water

Utilities and

construction

Transport and

communication

Other services

Livestock

and meat

products

METHODOLOGY – GTAP SETUP (13 REGIONS)

european energy policy analysis with gtap model in a … · · 2016-09-26european energy policy...

Documents