MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769939648 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v10n6p262

Economic Evaluation of Bioenergy Production from Biomass in Germany

2017· article· en· W2769939648 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Martin Paul Jr. Tabe‐Ojong, Naphtal Habiyaremye

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBioeconomy and Sustainability Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioenergyProfitability indexBiomass (ecology)Production (economics)Natural resource economicsInvestment (military)Environmental economicsBusinessInternal rate of returnPayback periodBiofuelAgricultural economicsEconomicsFinanceEcologyMicroeconomicsWaste managementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The production of bioenergy from plant sources has been an emerging issue in the global bioeconomy. This is as a result of the depletion of fossil fuel sources and its high adverse effects on the environment as the main source of conventional energy. Biobased products from fruit trees and crops have been thought and proven to play an important role in supplying future bioenergy and contributing to the achievement of some sustainable development goals. Many studies have focused on this novel technology without focusing on the economic aspect of it. In a bid to build and improve on literature, this study sought to economically evaluate the production of bioenergy from biomass using robust and standard profitability measures like the net present value (NPV), internal rate of return (IRR) and the payback period (PBP). Data was obtained through expert interviews from the Klein-Altendorf project site in Bonn, Germany. A business as usual scenario and a carbon avoidance scenario were investigated to ascertain the economic viability of this sustainable activity. Results in the business as usual scenario showed the process as a non-profitable venture. However, based on the carbon avoidance scenario, we argued that the project is economically viable especially in terms of carbon avoidance which reduces emissions and goes a long way to protect the environment. These social benefits obtained make the investment worthy. The greatest constraint and cost come from establishing such initiatives. The study found initial investment costs to be very high. Moreover, bioenergy produced is valued at the same price like energy produced from fossil fuels despite its numerous benefits to the environment. The results recommend to policy the maintenance of such initiatives as they have a big role to play in the global bioeconomy. In addition, other countries should join Germany in supporting this initiative by subsidising producers of bioenergy. This is justifiable and arguably the reason for Germany’s global recognition in bioeconomic issues.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.551
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicBioeconomy and Sustainability DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207