1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Resource Economics
  4. Volume 11, 2019
  5. Article

Annual Review of Resource Economics

Volume 11, 2019

Ascertaining the Trajectory of Wood-Based Bioenergy Development in the United States Based on Current Economic, Social, and Environmental Constructs

Abstract

Wood-based bioenergy development could play a vital role in attaining energy independence, reducing carbon emissions, and ensuring rural prosperity in the United States. An understanding of policies supporting wood-based bioenergy development coupled with the current status of production of various wood-based bioenergy products would better the prospects of wood-based bioenergy development in the United States. An understanding of the economic feasibility, social acceptability, and environmental externalities would contribute to effective policy prescriptions for establishing the US bioeconomy. Based on a comprehensive review of existing studies, we show that the heat and electricity derived from woody feedstocks that would prevail in the future as a commercial-level conversion technology for wood-based ethanol production are still under development. Society in general is positive about the use of woody feedstocks for bioenergy development. The production cost of wood-based ethanol and electricity generation has not reduced over time, indicating a need for targeted policy support focusing on sharing the production cost of wood-based bioenergy products. Wood-based bioenergy development could meet the need for sustainable energy production without affecting existing roundwood markets with the advent of advanced silvicultural treatments and efficient biotechnologies.

Keyword(s): bioenergy development, bioenergy policy, economic feasibility, environmental sustainability, social acceptability, United States, woody feedstocks
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-093921
2019-10-05
2024-04-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/resource/11/1/annurev-resource-100518-093921.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-093921&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Abrams J, Becker D, Kudrna J, Moseley C 2017. Does policy matter? The role of policy systems in forest bioenergy development in the United States. For. Policy Econ. 75:41–48
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Abt KL, Abt RC, Galik CS 2012. Effect of bioenergy demands and supply response on markets, carbon, and land use. For. Sci. 58:5523–39
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Abt KL, Abt RC, Galik CS, Skog KE 2014. Effect of policies on pellet production and forests in the U.S. South: a technical document supporting the Forest Service update of the 2010 RPA assessment Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-202, US Dep. Agric Asheville, NC:
  4. Adams AB, Harrison RB, Sletten RS,, Strahm BD, Turnblom EC, Jensen CM 2005. Nitrogen-fertilization impacts on carbon sequestration and flux in managed coastal Douglas-fir stands of the Pacific Northwest. For. Ecol. Manag 220:1–3313–25
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Aguilar FX, Cai Z, D'Amato AW 2014. Non-industrial private forest owner's willingness-to-harvest: how higher timber prices influence woody biomass supply. Biomass Bioenergy 71:202–15
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Aguilar FX, Saunders AM. 2010. Policy instruments promoting wood-to-energy uses in the continental United States. J. For. 108:3132–40
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Aguilar FX, Saunders AM. 2011. Attitudes toward policy instruments promoting wood-to-energy initiatives in the United States. South. J. Appl. For. 35:273–79
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Aguilar FX, Song N, Shifley S 2011. Review of consumption trends and public policies promoting woody biomass as an energy feedstock in the U.S. Biomass Bioenergy 35:83708–18
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Balint S. 2009. Federal and state policy influence on woody biomass utilization Master's Thesis, Mich. Technol. Univ Houghton:
  10. Barbose GL. 2018. U.S. Renewables Portfolio Standards: 2017 annual status report Rep., Lawrence Berkeley Natl. Lab Berkeley, CA:
  11. Becker DR, Eryilmaz D, Klapperich JJ, Kilgore MA 2013. Social availability of residual woody biomass from non-industrial private woodlands in Minnesota and Wisconsin. Biomass Bioenergy 56:82–91
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Becker DR, Moseley C, Lee C 2011. A supply chain analysis framework for assessing state-level forest biomass utilization policies in the United States. Biomass Bioenergy 35:41429–39
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Bracmort K. 2018. The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS): an overview Rep. R43325, Congr. Res. Serv Washington, DC:
  14. Buchholz TS, Volk TA, Luzadis VA 2007. A participatory systems approach to modeling social, economic, and ecological components of bioenergy. Energy Policy 35:126084–94
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Budsberg E, Rastogi M, Puettmann ME, Caputo J, Balogh S et al. 2012. Life-cycle assessment for the production of bioethanol from willow biomass crops via biochemical conversion. For. Products J. 62:4305–13
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Caldwell PV, Jackson CR, Miniat CF, Younger SE, Vining JA et al. 2018. Woody bioenergy crop selection can have large effects on water yield: a southeastern United States case study. Biomass Bioenergy 117:180–89
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Coleman MD, Isebrands JG, Tolsted DN, Tolbert VR 2004. Comparing soil carbon of short rotation poplar plantations with agricultural crops and woodlots in north central United States. Environ. Manag. 33:299–308
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Cook J, Beyea J. 2000. Bioenergy in the United States: progress and possibilities. Biomass Bioenergy 18:6441–55
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Cornwall W. 2017. The burning question. Science 355:632018–21
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Costanza JK, Abt RC, McKerrow AJ, Collazo JA 2017. Bioenergy production and forest landscape change in the southeastern United States. GCB Bioenergy 9:5924–39
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Dale VH, Kline KL, Parish ES, Cowie AL, Emory R et al. 2017a. Status and prospects for renewable energy using wood pellets from the southeastern United States. GCB Bioenergy 9:81296–305
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Dale VH, Parish E, Kline KL, Tobin E 2017b. How is wood-based pellet production affecting forest conditions in the southeastern United States. For. Ecol. Manag. 396:143–49
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Daystar J, Reeb C, Gonzalez R, Venditti R, Kelley SS 2015. Environmental life cycle impacts of cellulosic ethanol in the southern U.S. produced from loblolly pine, eucalyptus, unmanaged hardwoods, forest residues, and switchgrass using a thermochemical conversion pathway. Fuel Process. Technol. 138:164–74
     [Google Scholar]
  24. DOE (US Dep. Energy) 2005. Biomass as feedstock for a bioenergy and bioproducts industry: the technical feasibility of a billion-ton annual supply Tech. Rep. ORNL/TM-2005/66, Oak Ridge Natl. Lab Oak Ridge, TN: https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/04/f14/final_billionton_vision_report2.pdf
  25. DOE (US Dep. Energy) 2011. U.S. billion-ton update. Biomass supply for a bioenergy and bioproducts industry Rep. ORNL/TM-2011/224, Oak Ridge Natl. Lab Oak Ridge, TN: https://www1.eere.energy.gov/bioenergy/pdfs/billion_ton_update.pdf
  26. DOE (US Dep. Energy) 2016. 2016 billion-ton report. Advancing domestic resources for a thriving bioeconomy Rep. ORNL/TM-2016/160, Oak Ridge Natl. Lab Oak Ridge, TN: https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/12/f34/2016_billion_ton_report_12.2.16_0.pdf
  27. DSIRE (Database State Incent. Renew. Effic.) 2018. Summary tables: policies and incentives by type http://programs.dsireusa.org/system/program/tables
  28. Duden AS, Verweij PA, Junginger HM, Abt RC, Henderson JD et al. 2017. Modeling the impacts of wood pellet demand on forest dynamics in southeastern United States. Biofuels Bioprod. Biorefin. 11:31007–29
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Duffield JA, Johansson R, Meyer S 2015. U.S. ethanol: an examination of policy, production, use, distribution, and market interactions Rep., US Dep. Agric Washington, DC:
  30. Dwivedi P, Alavalapati JRR. 2009. Stakeholders’ perceptions on forest biomass-based bioenergy development in the southern US. Energy Policy 37:51999–2007
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Dwivedi P, Bailis R, Bush TG, Marinescu M 2011. Quantifying GWI of wood pellet production in the southern United States and its subsequent utilization for electricity production in the Netherlands/Florida. Bioenergy Res 4:3180–92
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Dwivedi P, Johnson E, Greene D, Baker S 2016. Tracking economic and environmental indicators of exported wood pellets to the United Kingdom from the southern United States: Lessons for policy. Bioenergy Res 9:3907–16
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Dwivedi P, Khanna M. 2014a. Abatement cost of GHG emissions for wood-based electricity and ethanol at production and consumption levels. PLOS ONE 9:6e100030
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Dwivedi P, Khanna M. 2014b. Wood-based bioenergy products—land or energy efficient. Can. J. For. Res. 44:101187–95
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Dwivedi P, Khanna M. 2015. Abatement cost of wood-based energy products at the production level on afforested and reforested lands. GCB Bioenergy 7:5945–57
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Dwivedi P, Khanna M, Fuller M 2019. Is wood pellet-based electricity less carbon intensive than coal-based electricity? It depends on perspectives, baselines, feedstocks, and forest management practices. Environ. Res. Lett. 14:024006
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Ebers A, Malmsheimer RW, Volk TA, Newman DH 2016. Inventory and classification of United States federal and state forest biomass electricity and heat policies. Biomass Bioenergy 842016:67–75
     [Google Scholar]
  38. EIA (US Energy Inf. Admin.) 2018a. Electric power annual 2017 Rep., US Energy Inf. Admin Washington, DC: https://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/pdf/epa.pdf
  39. EIA (US Energy Inf. Admin.) 2018b. Monthly densified biomass fuel report Updated Feb. 20, 2019. https://www.eia.gov/biofuels/biomass/#dashboard
  40. EPA (US Environ. Prot. Agency) 2018. RINs generated transactions Updated Sept. 20, 2018. https://www.epa.gov/fuels-registration-reporting-and-compliance-help/rins-generated-transactions
  41. EU (Eur. Union) 2009. Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC Dir., May 6, Eur. Union Brussels:
  42. Fan J, Kalnes TN, Alward M, Klinger J, Sadehvandi A, Shonnard DR 2011. Life cycle assessment of electricity generation using fast pyrolysis bio-oil. Renew. Energy 36:232–41
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Forisk Consult 2018. Wood bioenergy US free summary Updated Feb. 2019. http://forisk.com/resources/resources-from-forisk-wood-bioenergy-us-free-summary/
  44. Fox TR. 2000. Sustained productivity in intensively managed forest plantations sustained productivity in intensively managed forest plantations. For. Ecol. Manag. 138:187–202
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Fox TR, Allen HL, Albaugh TJ, Rubilar R, Carlson CA 2007b. Tree nutrition and forest fertilization of pine plantations in the southern United States. South. J. Appl. For. 31:15–11
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Fox TR, Jokela EJ, Allen HL 2007a. The development of pine plantation silviculture in the southern United States. J. For. 105:7337–47
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Frederick WJ, Lien SJ, Courchene CE, DeMartini NA, Ragauskas AJ, Iisa K 2008a. Co-production of ethanol and cellulose fiber from southern pine: a technical and economic assessment. Biomass Bioenergy 32:121293–302
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Frederick WJ, Lien SJ, Courchene CE, DeMartini NA, Ragauskas AJ, Iisa K 2008b. Production of ethanol from carbohydrates from loblolly pine: a technical and economic assessment. Bioresour. Technol. 99:115051–57
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Fritts SR, Moorman CE, Grodsky SM, Hazel DW, Homyack JA et al. 2017. Rodent response to harvesting woody biomass for bioenergy production. J. Wildlife Manag. 81:71170–78
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Galik CS, Abt R, Wu Y 2009. Forest biomass supply in the southeastern United States—implications for industrial roundwood and bioenergy production. J. For. 107:269–77
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Gan J, Smith CT. 2007. Co-benefits of utilizing logging residues for bioenergy production: the case for east Texas, USA. Biomass Bioenergy 31:9623–30
     [Google Scholar]
  52. GC S, Mehmood SR. 2010. Factors influencing nonindustrial private forest landowners’ policy preference for promoting bioenergy. For. Policy Econ. 12:8581–88
     [Google Scholar]
  53. GC S, Mehmood SR. 2012. Determinants of nonindustrial private forest landowner willingness to accept price offers for woody biomass. For. Policy Econ. 25:47–55
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Gnansounou E, Dauriat A. 2011. Technoeconomic analysis of lignocellulosic ethanol. Biofuels 2011:123–48
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Goerndt ME, Aguilar FX, Skog K 2013. Resource potential for renewable energy generation from co-firing of woody biomass with coal in the northern U.S. Biomass Bioenergy 59:348–61
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Gonzalez R, Daystar J, Jett M, Treasure T, Jameel H, Venditti R, Phillips R 2012. Economics of cellulosic ethanol production in a thermochemical pathway for softwood, hardwood, corn stover and switchgrass. Fuel Process. Technol. 94:1113–22
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Griffiths NA, Jackson CR, Bitew MM, Fortner AM, Fouts KL et al. 2017. Water quality effects of short-rotation pine management for bioenergy feedstocks in the southeastern United States. For. Ecol. Manag. 400:181–98
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Griffiths NA, Rau BM, Vaché KB, Starr G, Bitew MM et al. 2018. Environmental effects of short-rotation woody crops for bioenergy: what is and isn't known. GCB Bioenergy 11:554–72
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Grodsky SM, Moorman CE, Fritts SR, Campbell JW, Sorenson CE et al. 2017. Invertebrate community response to coarse woody debris removal for bioenergy production from intensively managed forests. Ecol. Appl. 28:1135–48
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Grodsky SM, Moorman CE, Fritts SR, Castleberry SB, Wigley TB 2016. Breeding, early-successional bird response to forest harvests for bioenergy. PLOS ONE 11:10e165070
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Gruchy SR, Grebner DL, Munn IA, Joshi O, Hussain A 2012. An assessment of nonindustrial private forest landowner willingness to harvest woody biomass in support of bioenergy production in Mississippi: a contingent rating approach. For. Policy Econ. 15:140–45
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Guo Z, Hodges DG, Young TM 2012. Woody biomass utilization policies: state rankings for the U.S. For. Policy Econ. 21:54–61
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Guo Z, Sun C, Grebner DL 2007. Utilization of forest derived biomass for energy production in the USA: status, challenges, and public policies. Int. For. Rev. 9:3748–58
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Hanson PJ, Weltzin JF. 2000. Drought disturbance from climate change: response of United States forests. Sci. Total Environ. 262:205–20
     [Google Scholar]
  65. He L, English BC, De La Torre Ugarte DG, Hodges DG 2014. Woody biomass potential for energy feedstock in United States. J. For. Econ. 20:2174–91
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Heller MC, Keoleian GA, Mann MK, Volk TA 2004. Life cycle energy and environmental benefits of generating electricity from willow biomass. Renew. Energy 29:71023–42
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Henderson JE, Joshi O, Parajuli R, Hubbard WG 2017. A regional assessment of wood resource sustainability and potential economic impact of the wood pellet market in the U.S. South. Biomass Bioenergy 105:421–27
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Hitchner S, Schelhas J, Brosius JP 2016. Snake oil, silver buckshot, and people who hate us: metaphors and conventional discourses of wood-based bioenergy in the rural southeastern United States. Hum. Organ. 75:3204–17
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Huang CH, Bagdon BA. 2018. Quantifying environmental and health benefits of using woody biomass for electricity generation in the southwestern United States. J. For. Econ. 32:123–34
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Joshi O, Grebner DL, Henderson JE, Grado SC, Munn IA 2012. Input-output modeling of wood-based bioenergy industries in Mississippi. For. Prod. J. 62:8528–37
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Joshi O, Grebner DL, Hussain A, Grado SC 2013. Landowner knowledge and willingness to supply woody biomass for wood-based bioenergy: sample selection approach. J. For. Econ. 19:297–109
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Joshi O, Mehmood SR. 2011. Factors affecting nonindustrial private forest landowners’ willingness to supply woody biomass for bioenergy. Biomass Bioenergy 35:1186–92
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Khanal S, Anex RP, Anderson CJ, Herzmann DE, Jha MK 2013. Implications of biofuel policy-driven land cover change for rainfall erosivity and soil erosion in the United States. GCB Bioenergy 5:6713–22
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Khanna M, Dwivedi P, Abt R 2017. Is forest bioenergy carbon neutral or worse than coal? Implications of carbon accounting methods. Int. Rev. Environ. Resour. Econ. 10:3–4299–346
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Kim TJ, Wear DN, Coulston J, Li R 2018. Forest land use responses to wood product markets. For. Policy Econ. 93:45–52
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Leitch ZJ, Lhotka JM, Stainback GA, Stringer JW 2013. Private landowner intent to supply woody feedstock for bioenergy production. Biomass Bioenergy 56:127–36
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Loeffler D, Anderson N. 2014. Emissions tradeoffs associated with cofiring forest biomass with coal: a case study in Colorado, USA. Appl. Energy 113:67–77
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Mann M, Spath P. 2001. A life cycle assessment of biomass cofiring in a coal-fired power plant. Clean Prod. Process. 3:281–91
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Mayfield CA, Foster CD, Smith CT, Gan J, Fox S 2007. Opportunities, barriers, and strategies for forest bioenergy and bio-based product development in the southern United States. Biomass Bioenergy 31:9631–37
     [Google Scholar]
  80. McDonald RI, Fargione J, Kiesecker J, Miller WM, Powell J 2009. Energy sprawl or energy efficiency: climate policy impacts on natural habitat for the United States of America. PLOS ONE 4:8e6802
     [Google Scholar]
  81. McKechnie J, Colombo S, Chen J, Mabee W, MacLean HL 2011. Forest bioenergy or forest carbon? Assessing trade-offs in greenhouse gas mitigation with wood-based fuels. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45:2789–95
     [Google Scholar]
  82. McMinimy MA. 2015. Biomass crop assistance program: status and issues Rep. R41296, Congr. Res. Serv Washington, DC:
  83. Niphadkar S, Bagade P, Ahmed S 2018. Bioethanol production: insight into past, present and future perspectives. Biofuels 9:2229–38
     [Google Scholar]
  84. NYSERDA (N.Y. State Energy Res. Dev. Auth.) 2018. Renewable heat NY small biomass boiler program manual Prog. Opp. Notice 3010 Albany, NY: https://portal.nyserda.ny.gov/servlet/servlet.FileDownload?file=00Pt000000CqgyVEAR
  85. Oswalt S, Miles PD, Pugh SA, Smith WB 2018. Forest resources of the United States, 2017: a technical document supporting the Forest Service 2020 update of the RPA Assessment Gen. Tec. Rep. 2058, US Dep. Agric. For. Serv Washington, DC: https://www.fia.fs.fed.us/program-features/rpa/docs/2017RPAFIATABLESFINAL_050918.pdf
  86. Parish ES, Dale VH, Kline KL, Abt RC 2017. Reference scenarios for evaluating wood pellet production in the southeastern United States. WIREs Energy Environ 6:6e259
     [Google Scholar]
  87. Peksa-Blanchard M, Dolzan P, Grassi A, Heinimö J, Junginger M, Ranta T, Walter A 2007. Global wood pellets markets and industry: policy drivers, market status and raw material potential IEA Bioenergy Task 40, Int. Energy Agency Paris:
  88. Perez-Verdin G, Grebner DL, Munn IA, Sun C, Grado SC 2008. Economic impacts of woody biomass utilization for bioenergy in Mississippi. For. Prod. J. 58:1175–83
     [Google Scholar]
  89. Phillips SD. 2007. Technoeconomic analysis of a lignocellulosic biomass indirect gasification process to make ethanol via mixed alcohols synthesis. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 46:268887–97
     [Google Scholar]
  90. Plate RP, Monroe MC, Oxarart A 2010. Public perceptions of using woody biomass as a renewable energy source. J. Extension 48:33FEA7
     [Google Scholar]
  91. Pokharel R, Grala RK, Grebner DL, Grado SC 2017. Factors affecting utilization of woody residues for bioenergy production in the southern United States. Biomass Bioenergy 105:278–87
     [Google Scholar]
  92. RFA (Renew. Fuels Assoc.) 2018. Ethanol biorefinery locations Updated April 2019. https://ethanolrfa.org/resources/biorefinery-locations/
  93. Robinson AL, Rhodes JS, Keith DW 2003. Assessment of potential carbon dioxide reductions due to biomass-coal cofiring in the United States. Environ. Sci. Technol. 37:225081–89
     [Google Scholar]
  94. Röder M, Whittaker C, Thornley P 2014. How certain are greenhouse gas reductions from bioenergy? Life cycle assessment and uncertainty analysis of wood pellet-to-electricity supply chains from forest residues. Biomass Bioenergy 79:50–63
     [Google Scholar]
  95. Schelhas J, Hitchner S, Brosius JP 2018. Envisioning and implementing wood-based bioenergy systems in the southern United States: imaginaries in everyday talk. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 35:182–92
     [Google Scholar]
  96. Schlamadinger B, Spitzer J, Kohlmaier GH, Lüdeke M 1995. Carbon balance of bioenergy from logging residues. Biomass Bioenergy 8:4221–34
     [Google Scholar]
  97. Schlesinger WH. 2018. Are wood pellets a green fuel. Science 359:63821328–29
     [Google Scholar]
  98. Sebastián F, Royo J, Gómez M 2011. Cofiring versus biomass-fired power plants: GHG (greenhouse gases) emissions savings comparison by means of LCA (life cycle assessment) methodology. Energy 36:42029–37
     [Google Scholar]
  99. Shepard JP. 2006. Water quality protection in bioenergy production: the US system of forestry best management practices. Biomass Bioenergy 30:4378–84
     [Google Scholar]
  100. Shumaker GA, Luke-Morgan A, McKissick JC 2009. The economic feasibility of using Georgia biomass for electrical energy production. J. Agribus. 27:125–36
     [Google Scholar]
  101. So KS, Brown RC. 1999. Economic analysis of selected lignocellulose-to-ethanol conversion technologies. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 79:633–40
     [Google Scholar]
  102. Solomon BD, Barnes JR, Halvorsen KE 2007. Grain and cellulosic ethanol: history, economics, and energy policy. Biomass Bioenergy 31:6416–25
     [Google Scholar]
  103. Springer N, Kaliyan N, Bobick B, Hill J 2017. Seeing the forest for the trees: How much woody biomass can the Midwest United States sustainably produce. Biomass Bioenergy 105:266–77
     [Google Scholar]
  104. Stidham M, Simon-Brown V. 2011. Stakeholder perspectives on converting forest biomass to energy in Oregon, USA. Biomass Bioenergy 35:1203–13
     [Google Scholar]
  105. Susaeta A, Alavalapati JRR, Carter DR 2009. Modeling impacts of bioenergy markets on nonindustrial private forest management in the southeastern United States. Nat. Resour. Model. 22:3345–69
     [Google Scholar]
  106. Susaeta A, Alavalapati JRR, Lal P, Matta JR, Mercer E 2010. Assessing public preferences for forest biomass based energy in the southern United States. Environ. Manag. 45:4697–710
     [Google Scholar]
  107. Susaeta A, Lal P, Alavalapati JRR, Mercer E 2011. Random preferences towards bioenergy environmental externalities: a case study of woody biomass based electricity in the southern United States. Energy Econ 33:61111–18
     [Google Scholar]
  108. Tarr NM, Rubino MJ, Costanza JK, McKerrow AJ, Collazo JA, Abt RC 2017. Projected gains and losses of wildlife habitat from bioenergy-induced landscape change. GCB Bioenergy 9:5909–23
     [Google Scholar]
  109. Tharakan PJ, Volk TA, Lindsey CA, Abrahamson LP, White EH 2005. Evaluating the impact of three incentive programs on the economics of cofiring willow biomass with coal in New York State. Energy Policy 33:3337–47
     [Google Scholar]
  110. Thomas G. 2000. Overview of storage development: DOE hydrogen program. Proceedings of the 2000 U.S. DOE Hydrogen Program Review56–69 Golden, CO: Natl. Renew. Energy Lab https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy01osti/28890.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  111. Tsai CJ, Xue LJ. 2015. CRISPRing into the woods. GM Crops Food 6:4206–15
     [Google Scholar]
  112. Tyner WE. 2008. The US ethanol and biofuels boom: its origins, current status, and future prospects. BioScience 58:7646–53
     [Google Scholar]
  113. Wang W, Dwivedi P, Abt R, Khanna M 2015. Carbon savings with transatlantic trade in pellets: accounting for market-driven effects. Environ. Res. Lett. 10:114019
     [Google Scholar]
  114. Wooley R, Ruth M, Sheehan J, Ibsen K, Majdeski H, Galvez A 1999. Lignocellulosic biomass to ethanol process design and economics utilizing co-current dilute acid prehydrolysis and enzymatic hydrolysis current and futuristic scenarios Rep. NREL/TP-580–2615, Natl. Renew. Energy Lab Golden, CO:
  115. Yeh S, Witcover J, Lade GE, Sperling D 2016. A review of low carbon fuel policies: principles, program status and future directions. Energy Policy 97:220–34
     [Google Scholar]
  116. Young JD, Anderson NM, Naughton HT, Mullan K 2018. Economic and policy factors driving adoption of institutional woody biomass heating systems in the U.S. Energy Econ 69:456–70
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-093921
Loading
Ascertaining the Trajectory of Wood-Based Bioenergy Development in the United States Based on Current Economic, Social, and Environmental Constructs
Annual Review of Resource Economics 11, 169 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-093921
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-093921
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-093921
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error