All News Aggregated

Summary: Private enterprises are active in conservation initiatives in Africa. Some of these enterprises have long-term licences for the development of conservation areas. The motivation of these organisations to participate in conservation is ultimately determined by the economic output of their activities. An electric fence is being constructed in the Maputo Elephant Reserve, Mozambique. A costs-benefit analysis was carried out, in order to assist in the optimisation of the management activities of the elephant population, based on elephant population size, fence costs, crop raid costs, elephant poaching, and benefits derived from tourism (game-viewing and hunting). Tourist numbers increased with increasing elephant density through a concave utility function. Optimal harvest/hunting strategies were calculated from optimal control theory, using dynamic optimisation (Pontryagin's Maximum Principle). Poaching and raid costs could be compared to fence construction costs at different elephant population sizes. Costs generated through elephant poaching and elephant crop raid costs were higher than fence construction costs at a population size over 100. Elephant hunting was a less favourable activity, economically and ecologically, than elephant viewing, due to the large game-viewing profits per elephant. Only if the licence fee increases from US$6500 to 28,500 would hunting become attractive, although ecological and economical constraints would probably prevent the development of hunting activities in the area. The assumed resource price of elephant (US$5000) was lower than the marginal value derived from tourism, indicating that elephants should be bought until the maximum stocking rate is reached.

Keywords: Cost benefit analysis; Crop damage; Fence; Game-viewing; Hunting; Poaching

by W.F. de Boer 1, J.D. Stigter 2 and C.P. Ntumi 3
1. Resource Ecology Group, Wageningen University, Droevendaalsesteeg 3a, 6708 PB Wageningen, The Netherlands; Telephone: +31 317 482691; fax: +31 317 419000.
2. Systems and Control Group, Wageningen University, Bornsesteeg 59, 6708 PD Wageningen, The Netherlands
3. Departamento de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Eduardo Mondlane, CP 257 Maputo, Mozambique

Journal for Nature Conservation via Elsevier Science Direct www.ScienceDirect.com
Volume 15, Issue 4; December 11, 2007, Pages 225-236
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2006.11.002

To hear the candidates tell it -- especially those on the stump in Iowa -- ethanol is the answer to America's energy-security woes. And back in Washington, politicians since 1978 have been putting your money where their mouths are: Ethanol is currently subsidized to the tune of 51 cents per gallon when blended with gasoline.

To make sure foreigners don't share the ride on the ethanol gravy train, moreover, Congress has imposed a 54-cent tariff on imported ethanol. ...

Farmers and refiners remain bullish on ethanol, even though market prices have dipped in recent months -- and domestic production capacity will nearly double once refineries now under construction come on line. Yet in all the decades ethanol has been subsidized, Washington has never rigorously applied cost-benefit analysis to ethanol's myriad preferences.

A study Robert Hahn authored with Caroline Cecot, just released by the AEI-Brookings Joint Center, attempts to fill that gap. The results, based on a recent Environmental Protection Agency report on the economics of mandating the production of alternative fuels, strongly suggest that the case for ethanol is lacking.

The authors used EPA numbers to calculate the environmental benefits of ethanol, along with the security benefits linked to its potential to reduce oil imports. They then compared these benefits with the direct costs of producing and distributing ethanol, the environmental costs associated with its manufacture and combustion, and the cost of the slew of incentives offered to refiners and corn farmers.

If annual production increases by three billion gallons in 2012 -- a plausibly modest number when the EPA made its own calculations -- they estimate that the costs will exceed the benefits by about $1 billion a year. If domestic production reaches the more "optimistic" Energy Department projection for that year, net economic costs would likely top $2 billion annually.

Their analysis is deliberately weighted to give ethanol the benefit of a doubt.
...
Even if ways are found to make alcohol cost-effectively from otherwise worthless sources of carbon, the process would undermine local air quality as it slowed global warming. Though ethanol is likely to reduce tailpipe emissions of carbon monoxide and toxic hydrocarbons including benzene and formaldehyde, the extra nitrogen oxides react in sunlight to form smog.

For each barrel of oil displaced by ethanol, there are benefits in the form of slightly lower oil prices and reduced potential for economic dislocation from oil-price spikes. We estimate these to be in the neighborhood of $500 million annually in 2012.

In 2005, the ethanol program used about 15% of U.S. corn supplies but displaced less than 2% of gasoline use. Even if all corn produced in the U.S. were devoted to distilling ethanol, the renewable fuel would amount to about 12% of the gasoline demand in 2005. And the more corn used to make alcohol, the greater the potential for collateral damage. Beef producers, not to mention Mexico's tortilla makers, are already upset with high corn prices. Environmentalists, too, seem to be waking up to the fact that ethanol from corn is no panacea.

by Robert Hahn, Executive director of the AEI-Brookings Joint Center and was co-chair of the U.S. Alternative Fuels Council under President George H.W. Bush.

This article was published in the Wall Street Journal on November 24, 2007.
AEI-Brookings Joint Center www.aei-brookings.org
http://www.aei-brookings.org/policy/page.php?id=302

Abstract: This article outlines the results of a study carried out in Florida in 2004 regarding the effect that cell phone tower proximity has on residential property prices. The study involved an analysis of residential property sales transaction data. Both GIS and multiple regression analysis in a hedonic framework were used to determine the effect of linear distance of homes to towers on residential property prices. The results of the research show that prices of properties decreased by just over 2%, on average, after a tower was built. This effect generally diminished with distance from the tower and was almost negligible after about 656 feet.

by Sandy Bond; PhD, MBS, DipBusAdmin, SPINZ, is a senior member of the Property Institute of New Zealand (PINZ) and a past president of the Pacific Rim Real Estate Society (PRRES). She was awarded the PRRES Achievement Award in 2002 and the New Zealand Institute of Valuers' Presidential Citation in 1997, currently a senior lecturer at Curtin University of Technology; email: dr_sandybond@yahoo.com
The Appraisal Journal via the Appraisal Institute www.AppraisalInstitute.org
Volume 75, Issue 4; Fall, 2007; pages 362-371
http://www.appraisalinstitute.org/publications/periodicals/taj/default.asp

Abstract: Agricultural irrigation permits in the Flint River Basin in Georgia had been routinely granted until a moratorium was placed on permit issuance in 1999. This research exploits this policy change within a hedonic-pricing framework to estimate the value of irrigation rights in the southeastern United States. While the value of irrigation rights has been studied extensively in the western United States, differences in property rights and legal regimes, as well as a lack of established water-rights markets in the eastern United States, leave us with little information regarding the value of irrigation rights in this setting.

by Ragan A Petrie and Laura O Taylor
Land Economics http://le.uwpress.org
Volume 83, Issue 3; August, 2007; page 302
http://le.uwpress.org/cgi/content/abstract/83/3/302?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&author1=Taylor%2C+Laura&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=HWCIT

Abstract: Emissions distribution is a focus variable for the design of future international agreements to tackle global warming. This paper specifically analyses the future path of emissions distribution and its determinants in different scenarios. Whereas our analysis is driven by tools which are typically applied in the income distribution literature and which have recently been applied to the analysis of CO2 emissions distribution, a new methodological approach is that our study is driven by simulations run with a popular regionalised optimal growth climate change model over the 1995-2105 period. We find that the architecture of environmental policies, the implementation of flexible mechanisms and income concentration are key determinants of emissions distribution over time. In particular we find a robust positive relationship between measures of inequalities in the distribution of emissions and income and that their magnitude will essentially depend on technological change.

by Nicola Cantore 1 and Emilio Padilla 2
1. Alma Mater Studiorum-University of Bologna - Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan - University of York
2. Departamento de Economía Aplicada, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona

Departamento de Economía Aplicada, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona www.ecap.uab.es
http://www.ecap.uab.es/RePEc/doc/wpdea0705.pdf
September, 2007

With poor countries much more dependent on natural resources as assets than rich countries, policy changes that affect the natural environmental – particularly at the household level – are critical to reducing poverty, according to a new report from the World Bank, Poverty and the Environment: Understanding Linkages at the Household Level.

“Poverty reduction can be seen as a three-part program.” said Warren Evans, Director of Environment, World Bank. “It involves stemming the fall of households into further poverty, enabling movements out of poverty, and ensuring that the non-poor do not become poor. Reducing vulnerability is as important as reducing poverty. There is a role for environmental management, including policy reforms, in each of these areas.”

According to the report, it is important to understand how countries rely on the environment. For example, the ratio of people to forested land is over three times higher in low-income countries compared with high income. This gives an indication of the pressure on forests, and the outcome is visible in the adjoining table. While forested lands are growing at 0.1 percent per year in high-income countries, they are shrinking at 0.5 percent per year in low-income countries. Access to ‘environmental infrastructure’ in the form of improved water and sanitation shows a similar divide. The result is that mortality rates for children under the age of five are nearly 18 times higher in low-income compared with high-income countries.

According to Kirk Hamilton, Lead Environmental Economist and one of the authors of the publication, “Looking at the distribution of health outcomes and access to environmental infrastructure across different classes within developing countries, the same general picture can be seen: wealthier households within these countries have greater access to environmental infrastructure and better health outcomes.”

Poor households have limited assets that they can use to make investments; they have fewer income-earning opportunities, are exposed to higher health risks, and are less able to cope with adverse economic and health shocks.

The report says that policy changes that affect the natural environment can have direct and indirect impacts on household welfare. These include poverty alleviation and an increase in a household’s economic welfare, as well as better nutritional and health outcomes.

According to the report, reforms with positive environmental and welfare impacts do not always originate from the environmental sector. Some reforms – such as the creation of common property rights, incentives for better management of natural resources, or creation of new markets for environmental services – pertain directly to environmental resources. In other cases, sectoral or macro policies intended to improve other aspects of the economy may also have environmental and welfare benefits – for example, strengthening of private property rights.

In particular, the last two decades have seen reforms in environmental management that put community participation and economic development as core goals. The report finds that decentralization of natural resource management is beginning to work for some communities. Benefits can be found in reforms that strengthened community rights, created stronger incentives for resource management, and developed new markets that facilitate payments for environmental services. There were also positive outcomes from reforms outside the environment sector that strengthened private property rights and increased access to services.

“Unsafe water, lack of sanitation and poor indoor air quality are major killers of children.” said Evans, “An important finding is that the extent of coverage of communities to safe water and sanitation is a significant contributor to child health. This means that targeting poor communities for access to water and sanitation can yield real benefits.”

The poor are willing to participate in a variety of resource management programs, according to the report, some of which lead to significant welfare improvements. The publication recommends continuing to make prudent investments in projects that create new incentives and strengthen property rights, as well as increasing efforts to collect good data to help monitor and evaluate environmental investments that yield benefits to poor households.

For more information, visit: www.worldbank.org/environment

http://go.worldbank.org/GNZ32LYNJ0
The World Bank www.worldbank.org
Press Release November 19, 2007

Report summary:

The next two or three years will be critical. A much greater sense of urgency is required if the UK is to meet its targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions at an affordable cost, and to establish an international leadership role in the low carbon economy of the future.

Already it is clear that the government’s targets for cutting greenhouse gases by 2020 are unlikely to be met solely through measures taken in the UK. Its longerterm goals for 2050 are also very challenging, and will not be achieved without significant additional effort. Failure to act now will mean that the costs of tackling climate change in the future will be much higher. The UK will also miss out on the commercial opportunities that will emerge on the pathway to a low carbon economy.

The CBI’s Climate Change Task Force has spent 10 months analysing this challenge. It is made up of business leaders from key sectors of the UK economy and whose companies globally employ nearly 2 million people, generating annual revenues of approximately £1000bn. Informed by a major study commissioned from McKinsey, the Task Force has assessed the economic benefits and costs of different options for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We have focused on what needs to be done by 2030 to be on track for the government’s 2050 target.

And its conclusion is that substantial changes will be needed in the way the economy works if the UK is to meet its goals. Many of the technologies and solutions that will be required already exist but are not yet commercially viable. The pace and scale of implementation must now be accelerated.

The report shows that by 2030, moving to low carbon sources of electricity and improving energy use in buildings can each deliver about 30 per cent of the additional cuts needed, with the remaining 40 per cent coming from transport and industry. For the longer term to 2050, further change is needed to more than double the level of energy efficiency and halve the carbon content of the energy used in the economy compared with today.

But most taxes and regulations were designed for the old economy. The report calls for a shift to a world where carbon becomes a new currency – so that consumers and businesses are rewarded for making the right choices. Carbon has to be priced according to supply and demand, under a system which leads to lower emissions, crosses national borders, and rewards good behaviour.

According to the McKinsey analysis, additional action needed in the UK to meet the government’s targets implies a maximum price of €40 per tonne of CO2 equivalent (tCO2e) by 2030 provided that the full range and scale of initiatives are implemented. The maximum price would be higher in 2020 (€60-€90 per tCO2e and possibly more) given the higher cost of emerging technologies in the short term.

This translates into an investment of around £100 a year per household (under 1 per cent of GDP) by 2030. This investment will help pay for a more sustainable way of life and shift resources to those parts of the economy providing low carbon products and services. Some households would pay less than this, depending on things such as their current use of energy and how successfully they take up cost-effective measures to improve energy efficiency.

A much greater sense of urgency is required if the UK is to meet its targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions

Changes on the scale needed and at affordable cost will only happen if government, business and consumers work together. Government cannot do the job by itself, nor can business: but together we can use our position as one of the world’s great trading nations to secure global action.

If we are to succeed, the climate change agenda must therefore become everybody’s business.
Our commitment is to help achieve that and work with others to implement the necessary actions at home and abroad.

The report sends out five clear messages:
• The government’s targets for 2050 are stretching but achievable and at a manageable cost – provided early action is taken. The three interdependent players are consumers, who drive change; government, which sets the framework and works with other countries to build international agreements for reducing emissions; and business, which invests and delivers.
• In the run up to 2020, the emphasis must be on much higher energy efficiency together with
preparations for a major shift to low carbon energy sources in the years to 2030 and beyond. The big opportunity here is that a third of our generating capacity will become obsolete over the next 25 years, and must be replaced. This opens the way to a smaller carbon footprint.
• Technology has a vital part to play in opening up sustainable solutions. The UK has a unique opportunity to prosper in key markets of the future by taking a lead in the development of low carbon technologies and services in power, buildings, transport and industry. Government must give higher priority to existing research and technology programmes in these areas, and support the launch of new programmes to develop emerging solutions.
• Empowering consumers to make low carbon choices is equally vital. Business and government must work together not only to encourage take-up of greener products, but also to promote new ways of doing things (such as smarter ways of working) which can help improve our quality of life as well as cutting emissions.
• Market forces will drive big changes, but they will not by themselves be enough to do the job. The full range of public policies must be deployed to create the right incentives. Priorities include promoting an effective market price for carbon; revenue-neutral tax reform (such as changes to business rates and council tax) to reward greener behaviour; and bigger, more focused research and development (R&D) programmes to finance new technologies and solutions until they become commercial.
...
Consumers are the essential driver for change. Combining the emissions for which they are directly responsible with those that they influence through their purchasing decisions, they have an impact on some 60 per cent of UK emissions. As voters, they have a powerful influence on public policy. They need the information, the incentives, and the opportunity
to make low carbon choices. They will require:
• Reliable and consistent information about the consequences of their choices.
• Much wider access to low carbon products and services than is on offer today.
• Incentives to make low carbon investments. For example, consumers could already be making
worthwhile cost savings through improved insulation of their homes – but they do not, because for them the payback period is too long. Government and business must look for creative ways to bridge this timing gap.

The UK government has done more than most others to set a framework for change. We welcome the proposals in the Climate Change Bill as important elements of a framework to promote significant cuts in emissions. But it must now focus on implementation as a matter of urgency. It must go with the grain of the market wherever possible, by removing barriers to
change. This means it must:
• In the coming 12 months, pass the legislation needed to rebuild the UK’s power generation capacity in a timely manner, with a diverse, low carbon energy mix. All options will have to be available, including renewable energy and nuclear. Early reform of the planning system is essential.
• Push for agreement early next year on the post-2012 design of the EU ETS, which will be vital in establishing an effective long-term carbon price.
• Prioritise investment in relevant research and technology. That means re-allocating existing resources, and adding new funds where necessary. The aim should be at least to match the EU average for investing in energy and climate change technology.
• Empower consumers through education, communications and incentives.
• Provide incentives, regulation and tax structures which stimulate a low carbon economy, and ensure consistently supportive policies.
• Take a leadership role in international negotiations for climate change agreements.

Business has already made significant progress in responding to the climate change agenda. It is well placed to make an early and decisive contribution to finding and implementing solutions to the challenge of climate change. Its priorities now must be to:
• Incorporate climate change policies into its DNA. Consumer demand will stimulate competition to produce greener alternatives to current products and services, and reward those businesses that take a lead. In the low carbon future, companies will have to be green to grow.
• Redouble efforts to improve energy efficiency, by focusing on areas such as transport and buildings.
• Work with employees and the supply chain to reduce emissions, and adapt the current workplace to cope with the climatic and other changes that are already likely as a result of past CO2 emissions.
• Measure its carbon footprint, and develop reporting systems to benchmark performance.
• Provide consumers with the reliable communications and product developments they will require.

Members of the Task Force are committed to meeting the challenge. With a global carbon footprint from their operations of close to 370 mtCO2e, or roughly 1 per cent of global emissions, they readily accept their responsibility to take positive action.

The main focus of this report is the reduction of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (mitigation of climate change) which at its simplest can be achieved by reducing the carbon emitted from use of energy and improving energy efficiency. The report analyses which technologies can save carbon (abatement measures) and what financial incentive (price of carbon) is required to encourage take-up of these technologies. In some cases, such as home
insulation, the technologies will not have any overall cost to society, but for others, such as wind power, there will be an additional cost (or marginal cost of carbon) for using carbon-saving technologies over more traditional technologies such as fossil fuel-fired power stations.

To a lesser extent the report also deals with reducing the inevitable impacts of a changing
climate (adaptation) such as building flood defence barriers or locating infrastructure away from vulnerable areas like flood plains or coastal lowlands, and in particular, the need for a better understanding of what effect these impacts might have on business.

Confederation of British Industries (CBI) www.cbi.org.uk
http://www.avtclient.co.uk/climatereport/docs/climatereport2007full.pdf

Major supermarkets today joined with EPA to show that protecting the stratospheric ozone layer is cool -- literally. EPA and the supermarket, refrigeration equipment and chemical refrigerant industries launched the new GreenChill Advanced Refrigeration Partnership – a voluntary program to promote green technologies, strategies, and practices that protect the stratospheric ozone layer, reduce greenhouse gases, and save money.

"As Americans make greener choices, we look for companies that support a greener lifestyle," said Robert J. Meyers, principal deputy assistant administrator of EPA's Office of Air and Radiation. "The GreenChill logo is a clear sign of a supermarket's environmental commitment. It shows that GreenChill members are doing their utmost to save the ozone layer."

The ten GreenChill founding partners are: Whole Foods Market; Food Lion, LLC; Giant Eagle Inc.; Hannaford Bros. Co.; Harris Teeter; Hill PHOENIX; Honeywell International; Kysor//Warren; Publix Super Markets Inc.; and DuPont.

These partners, as well as those in the future, must pledge to go above and beyond regulatory requirements by establishing an inventory of current refrigerant emissions that may affect climate change and the stratospheric ozone layer, and then setting reduction targets for these emissions. Partners will also participate in an industry/government research initiative to assess the performance of cutting edge "green" technologies in terms of energy efficiency, reduction of ozone-depleting refrigerant charges, and minimization of refrigerant leaks.

As an example of GreenChill Partnership initiatives that decrease the impact of supermarkets on climate change, EPA estimates that widespread adoption of advanced refrigeration technologies, best practices, and improved equipment design and service could reduce refrigerant emissions by one million metric tons of carbon equivalent per year, the equivalent of taking 800,000 automobiles off the road every year.

To counteract the depletion of stratospheric ozone, which protects earth's citizens from the sun's ultraviolet radiation, partners guarantee to use only ozone-friendly alternatives and advanced refrigeration techologies in all new and remodeled stores.

EPA believes that GreenChill partners' adoption of advanced refrigeration technologies will lead to increased energy efficiency and reduce operating expenses to the industry by over $12 million annually.

More information is online at: epa.gov/ozone/partnerships/greenchill

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) www.EPA.gov
Press Release November 27, 2007
http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/names/hq_2007-11-27_greenchill

Abstract: The stabilisation of GHG atmospheric concentrations at levels expected to prevent dangerous climate change has become an important, global, long-term objective. It is therefore crucial to identify a cost-effective way to achieve this objective. In this paper we use WITCH, a hybrid climate-energy-economy model, to obtain a quantitative assessment of some cost-effective strategies that stabilise CO2 concentrations at 550 or 450 ppm. In particular, this paper analyses the energy investment and R&D policies that optimally achieve these two GHG stabilisation targets (i.e. the future optimal energy mix consistent with the stabilisation of GHG atmospheric concentrations at 550 and 450 ppm). Given that the model accounts for interdependencies and spillovers across 12 regions of the world, optimal strategies are the outcome of a dynamic game through which inefficiency costs induced by global strategic interactions can be assessed. Therefore, our results are somehow different from previous analyses of GHG stabilisation policies, where a central planner or a single global economy are usually assumed. In particular, the effects of free-riding incentives in reducing emissions and in investing in R&D are taken into account. Technical change being endogenous in WITCH, this paper also provides an assessment of the implications of technological evolution in the energy sector of different stabilisation scenarios. Finally, this paper quantifies the net costs of stabilising GHG concentrations at different levels, for different allocations of permits and for different technological scenarios. In each case, the optimal long-term investment strategies for all available energy technologies are determined. The case of an unknown backstop energy technology is also analysed.

Keywords: Climate Policy, Energy R&D, Investments, Stabilisation Costs

By Valentina Bosetti 1, Carlo Carraro 2, 3, 4 and 5, Emanuele Massetti 1 5 and 6 and Massimo Tavoni 1, 5 and 6
1. Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei
2. University of Venice
3. CEPR,
4. CESifo
5. CMCC
6. Catholic University of Milan

Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei www.feem.it
NOota Di Lavoro 95.2007; October, 2007
http://www.feem.it/NR/rdonlyres/3D949B7E-3626-4277-A8E5-0C945BD3B1A1/2446/9509.pdf

The hedonic literature has established that public water bodies provide external benefits that are reflected in the value of nearby residential real estate. The literature has employed several approaches to quantify these nonmarket services. With a residential hedonic model, this paper tests whether model specification affects resource valuation using an actively managed reservoir in Indiana and a passively managed lake in Connecticut. The results indicate that valuation is quite sensitive to model specification,and that omitting either the waterview or waterfront variables from the hedonic function likely results in a misspecified model. The findings from this study are important for researchers and public agencies charged with managing water resources to bear in mind as the external benefits from existing or man-made lakes and reservoirs are estimated. Therefore, while it requires considerably more effort to determine which properties are in waterfront locations and which properties have a view, the potential misspecification of distance-only models likely justifies these extra research costs. Further, the findings in this analysis call into question results from distance-only models in the literature.

By Nicholas Z. Muller
Middlebury College Department of Economics www.middlebury.edu/services/econ
Middlebury College Economics Discussion Paper No. 07-21; October, 2007
http://www.middlebury.edu/services/econ/repec/mdl/ancoec/0721.pdf

With food, consumers often face a trade-off between taste and nutrition. A priori, it is not obvious which would be more important to the average consumer, so it is an empirical question how consumers value food characteristics that simultaneously affect taste and nutritional value. In this paper, Swedish consumer preferences regarding food characteristics in breakfast cereals, hard bread and potato products are analyzed. In particular, the value consumers attach to fat, fibre, salt and sugar is studied, as well as the value of easily accessible nutritional information provided by a nutrition symbol. The equations estimated are derived from a hedonic price model. The price data originates from a household panel and scanner data, whereas the corresponding data on food characteristics was collected manually in supermarkets or from producers. The value consumers attach to food characteristics are found to vary by product and the results also imply that these values could be sensitive to changes in the combination of characteristics in a product.

Keywords: hedonic pricing; willingness to pay; food characteristics

By Linda Thunström, The Swedish Retail Institute

AB Handelns Utredningsinstitut (HUI) www.hui.se
http://www.hui.se/LitiumDokument20/GetDocument.asp?archive=3&directory=72&document=938
November 6, 2007

Abstract: Interventions on hydro/ecological systems by different categories of stakeholders characterised by different political, decision-making and discursive power, and varied access to resources, tend to generate costs, benefits and risks that are distributed unevenly across spatial and temporal scales and across social groups. This is due to the interconnectedness of users through the hydrologic cycle entailed by their dependence upon the same resource. As pressure over resources increases and basins ‘close’, this interdependence becomes more critical, increasing the frequency and seriousness of water shortages and conflicts. A political ecology approach seeks to identify and understand the mechanisms that underpin the transformations of aquatic socio-environmental systems. Basin interconnectedness, with its hydrological, ecological and social dimensions, and three instances of the concept of scale are shown to be relevant to the understanding of these transformations. The paper analyses the case of the Chao Phraya river basin, in Thailand, and shows how land and water resources have been appropriated and identifies the different interest groups and their related discourses and power; it examines how they have adapted to socio-environmental changes, and highlights how risks, costs and benefits have been distributed.

Keywords: Thailand, river basin management, political ecology, water resources, allocation, discourse

by Francois Molle; Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, France, and International Water Management Institute, Sri Lanka E-mail: f.molle@cgiar.org

The Geographical Journal via Blackwell Publishing www.Blackwell-Synergy.com
Volume 173, Issue 4; December, 2007; Page 358-373,
doi:10.1111/j.1475-4959.2007.00255.x
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1475-4959.2007.00255.x

Abstract: The identification of high-performance indicator taxa that combine practical feasibility and ecological value requires an understanding of the costs and benefits of surveying different taxa. We present a generic and novel framework for identifying such taxa, and illustrate our approach using a large-scale assessment of 14 different higher taxa across three forest types in the Brazilian Amazon, estimating both the standardized survey cost and the ecological and biodiversity indicator value for each taxon. Survey costs varied by three orders of magnitude, and dung beetles and birds were identified as especially suitable for evaluating and monitoring the ecological consequences of habitat change in our study region. However, an exclusive focus on such taxa occurs at the expense of understanding patterns of diversity in other groups. To improve the cost-effectiveness of biodiversity research we encourage a combination of clearer research goals and the use of an objective evidence-based approach to selecting study taxa.

by Toby A. Gardner, Jos Barlow, Ivanei S. Araujo, Teresa Cristina Ávila-Pires, Alexandre B. Bonaldo, Joana E. Costa, Maria Cristina Esposito, Leandro V. Ferreira, Joseph Hawes, Malva I. M. Hernandez, Marinus S. Hoogmoed, Rafael N. Leite, Nancy F. Lo-Man-Hung, Jay R. Malcolm, Marlucia B. Martins, Luiz A. M. Mestre, Ronildon Miranda-Santos, William L. Overal, Luke Parry, Sandra L. Peters, Marco Antônio Ribeiro-Junior, Maria N. F. da Silva, Catarina da Silva Motta, Carlos A. Peres

Ecology Letters via Blackwell Publishing www.Blackwell-Synergy.com
Online Early
doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01133.x
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01133.x

Abstract: A simple model of yield was used along with climate scenarios to assess the impact of climate change on grain maize productivity and associated economic risk in Switzerland. In a first application, changes in the precipitation regime alone were shown to affect the distribution of yield considerably, with shifts not only in the mean but also in the standard deviation and the skewness. Production risk was found to respond more markedly to changes in the long-term mean than in the inter-annual variability of seasonal precipitation amounts. In a further application, yield projections were generated with respect to a full climate scenario, with the emission pathway as specified in the IPCC A2 scenario. Anticipation of the sowing date was found to reduce the negative impact of climate change on yield stability, but was not sufficient to ensure average productivity levels comparable to those observed at present. We argued that this was caused by the reduction in the duration of the growing season, which had a stronger impact than suggested by previous studies. Assuming no change in price relations, the results also revealed a strong increase in production risk with climate change, with more than a doubling in the probability of yield falling short of a critical threshold as compared to today’s situation.

Keywords: Maize productivity, Production risk, Climate change, Climate variability, Parametric yield model

by Daniele Torriani 1, Pierluigi Calanca 1, Markus Lips 2, Helmut Ammann 2, Martin Beniston 3 and Jürg Fuhrer 1
1. Air Pollution/Climate Group, Agroscope Research Station ART, Reckenholzstrasse 191, 8046 Zurich, Switzerland; Email: pierluigi.calanca@art.admin.ch
2. Farm Management Group, Agroscope Research Station ART, 8356 Ettenhausen, Switzerland
3. Climate Change and Climate Impacts, University of Geneva, 7 Route de Drize, 1227 Carouge, Switzerland

Regional Environmental Change via Springer Publishing www.SpringerLink.com
Volume 7, Number 4; December, 2007; Pages 209-221
DOI: 10.1007/s10113-007-0039-z
http://www.springerlink.com/content/e3r1rk0460267227/

Abstract: In 2002, one of the oil pipelines owned by Merit Energy Co leaked onto the Patricia and Michael Poffenbargers' land. In 2003, the Poffenbargers sued Merit, seeking compensatory damages of $2,608,740, the cost of repairing their property. The Supreme Court of Alabama found that this loss should be addressed by consequential or punitive damages. The court held that the proper measure of direct, compensatory damages for the oil spill on the land was the diminution in the fair market value of the property caused by the contamination.

by Alan M Weinberger
The Appraisal Journal http://www.appraisalinstitute.org/ecom/publications/default.asp
Volume 75, Issue 4; Fall, 2007; Pages 309-310

More than 60 energy, environmental and other organizations have collaborated on a new report that could save Americans more than $500 billion in energy costs over 25 years and reduce annual greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to those from 90 million vehicles. This report, the National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency Vision for 2025, provides a framework for states, utilities and other stakeholders to consider when seeking policies and programs to achieve all cost effective energy efficiency measures.

"Opportunities to increase and maximize energy efficiency in our homes, commercial buildings, and industrial facilities are both enormous and quantifiable and are a key component of the president's robust energy initiatives," Kevin Kolevar, DOE assistant secretary for Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, said. "The national action plan recognizes the role of prioritizing energy efficiency through incentive based programs and policies, which can reduce energy use, benefit our environment and add to a company's bottom line."

The action plan, launched in 2006, is facilitated by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy. The plan provides five recommendations for helping states and utilities overcome policy, regulatory, and other barriers that limit investment in energy efficiency even when investment in more efficient homes, buildings and industries would cost less than new supply and would lead to overall lower energy bills. Along with the vision for 2025, the Action Plan Leadership Group released a number of 'how-to' resources to help parties meet energy efficiency commitments and announced new commitments under the action plan from more than 30 organizations. The list of organizations and their new commitments can be found at: epa.gov/eeactionplan under Leadership Commitments.

The action plan is advancing the dialogue on removing barriers to energy efficiency as a resource to serve electricity customers and promoting policy and program best practices among gas and electric utilities, their regulators and partner organizations. Nearly 120 organizations have already taken action over the past year to make the action plan a reality. These commitments to energy efficiency from 42 utility commissions and state and local agencies, 34 utilities, 9 large-end-users, and nearly 40 other organizations have helped remove barriers to energy efficiency by establishing and supporting new energy efficiency programs, collaborating and the state and local levels, exploring policies to align utility incentives with cost-effective energy efficiency, educating stakeholders and meeting aggressive energy savings goals.

The action plan was developed by a leadership group of more than 60 organizations. The leadership group includes 30 electric and gas utilities, 17 state agencies, and 12 other organizations, with 24 organizations observing the work of the leadership group.

The vision document, additional new resources, and a full list of new commitments and successes to date: epa.gov/cleanenergy/actionplan/resources.htm

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) www.EPA.gov
Press Release: November 13, 2007
http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/d0cf6618525a9efb85257359003fb69d/cced997c123c4308852573920068e6a6!OpenDocument

Abstract: This paper measures the ensuing changes in productivity in the French pig sector following the introduction of the European regulation addressing water pollution by nitrates from agriculture. Productivity is measured using the Malmquist–Luenberger index. The sources of changes in productivity observed are examined by breaking down this index into its technical progress and efficiency components. The results show that in the early stages, increases in productivity were stimulated by increased efficiency, before being driven by technical progress. The estimations regarding the sources of efficiency gains for the farms in the sample (technical efficiency, efficiency of scale and environmental efficiency) are then used to estimate the indirect costs and benefits (or negative costs) linked to the introduction of the environmental regulation controlling the disposal of organic manure and the management of nitrogen surplus from pig farms. The existence of a “win-win” effect as regards the Porter hypothesis relation between efficiency and environmental regulation is highlighted for the French pig sector.

Keywords: Environmental costs, Porter Hypothesis, Environmental efficiency, Productive efficiency, Directional distance function, Malmquist–Luenberger index

by Isabelle Piot-Lepetit and Monique Le Moing both of INRA-UR122, 4 allée Adolphe Bobierre, CS 61103, Rennes cedex, 35011, France; Email: Isabelle.Piot@rennes.inra.fr

Environmental and Resource Economics via Springer Netherlands www.SpringerLink.com
Volume 38, Number 4; December, 2007; Pages 433-446
DOI: 10.1007/s10640-007-9086-7
http://www.springerlink.com/content/46315w7j28611577/

Researchers have developed a method of producing hydrogen gas from biodegradable organic material, potentially providing an abundant source of this clean-burning fuel. The technology offers a way to cheaply and efficiently generate hydrogen gas from readily available and renewable biomass such as cellulose or glucose, and could be used for powering vehicles, making fertilizer and treating drinking water.

The method combines electron-generating bacteria and a small electrical charge in a microbial fuel cell to produce hydrogen gas. Microbial fuel cells work through the action of bacteria which can pass electrons to an anode. The electrons flow from the anode through a wire to the cathode producing an electric current. In the process, the bacteria consume organic matter in the biomass material. An external jolt of electricity helps generate hydrogen gas at the cathode.

In the past, the process, which is known as electrohydrogenesis, has had poor efficiency rates and low hydrogen yields. But researchers chemically modified elements of the reactor.

In laboratory experiments, their reactor generated hydrogen gas at nearly 99 percent of the theoretical maximum yield using aetic acid, a common dead-end product of glucose fermentation. The process produces 288 percent more energy in hydrogen than the electrical energy that is added in the process. The technology is reportedly economically viable now.

Abstract: Hydrogen gas has tremendous potential as an environmentally acceptable energy carrier for vehicles, but most hydrogen is generated from nonrenewable fossil fuels such as natural gas. Here, we show that efficient and sustainable hydrogen production is possible from any type of biodegradable organic matter by electrohydrogenesis. In this process, protons and electrons released by exoelectrogenic bacteria in specially designed reactors (based on modifying microbial fuel cells) are catalyzed to form hydrogen gas through the addition of a small voltage to the circuit. By improving the materials and reactor architecture, hydrogen gas was produced at yields of 2.01–3.95 mol/mol (50–99% of the theoretical maximum) at applied voltages of 0.2 to 0.8 V using acetic acid, a typical dead-end product of glucose or cellulose fermentation. At an applied voltage of 0.6 V, the overall energy efficiency of the process was 288% based solely on electricity applied, and 82% when the heat of combustion of acetic acid was included in the energy balance, at a gas production rate of 1.1 m3 of H2 per cubic meter of reactor per day. Direct high-yield hydrogen gas production was further demonstrated by using glucose, several volatile acids (acetic, butyric, lactic, propionic, and valeric), and cellulose at maximum stoichiometric yields of 54–91% and overall energy efficiencies of 64–82%. This electrohydrogenic process thus provides a highly efficient route for producing hydrogen gas from renewable and carbon-neutral biomass resources.

by Shaoan Cheng and Bruce E. Logan; Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences www.pnas.org
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/104/47/18871?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=hydrogen&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=date&resourcetype=HWCIT
World Business Council for Sustainable Development www.wbcsd.org
http://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/DocSearch/details.asp?type=DocDet&ObjectId=MjcyOTI

Is world oil production peaking? Quite possibly. Data from the International Energy Agency (IEA) show a pronounced loss of momentum in the growth of oil production during the last few years. After climbing from 82.90 million barrels per day (mb/d) in 2004 to 84.15 mb/d in 2005, output only increased to 84.80 mb/d in 2006 and then declined to 84.62 mb/d during the first 10 months of 2007.

The combination of world production slowing down or starting to decline while demand continues to rise rapidly is putting strong upward pressure on prices....

There are many ways of assessing the oil production prospect. One is to look at the relationship between oil discoveries and production....

Globally, oil discoveries peaked in the 1960s. Each year since 1984, world oil production has exceeded new oil discoveries, and by a widening gap. In 2006, the 31 billion barrels of oil extracted far exceeded the discovery of 9 billion barrels.

The aging of oil fields also tells us something about the oil prospect. The world’s 20 largest oil fields were all discovered between 1917 and 1979. Sadad al-Husseini, former senior Saudi oil official, reports that the annual output from the world’s aging fields is falling by 4 mb/d. Offsetting this decline with new discoveries or with more-advanced extraction technologies is becoming increasingly difficult.
...

by Lester R. Brown
Earth Policy Institute www.earth-policy.org
November 15, 2007
http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/2007/Update67.htm

Abstract: It is seen that many developed nations are taking serious actions to use domestic rather than imported energy resources. Contrary, Turkey -a developing country- is getting more dependent on imported resources of energy, such as natural gas. This study analyses the
consequences of this policy on some macroeconomic variables. Granger causality test statistics are calculated to search for relations between total energy consumption /
imported energy resources and gross domestic product, industrial production index or private sector fixed investment. The results indicate that although total and imported quantity of energy affects gross domestic product, the national income, the origin of energy resource –such as being domestic or not – does not effect industrial production. As for the determinants of energy imports the test statistics indicate that private sector investment Granger causes energy imports.

Keywords: Energy consumption, Granger causality, VAR

by Oya S. Erdogdu; Ankara University, Faculty of Political Sciences, Department of Economics, Cebeci / Ankara; Telephone: (312) 319 7720 – 383, Fax: (312) 319 7736; E mail: ose301@gmail.com, oerdogdu@politics.ankara.edu.tr

Munich Personal RePEc Archive MPRA http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
MPRA Paper No. 5413, posted November 7, 2007
http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/5413/1/MPRA_paper_5413.pdf