FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2016162544> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2016162544 endingPage "98" @default.
• W2016162544 startingPage "79" @default.
• W2016162544 abstract "Abstract Costs, environmental and macro-economic impacts of the use of energy crops may vary from country to country. To get insight into the causes of these differences, this study compared the impacts of energy crop based electricity generation in three countries and tried to explain the differences from country specific characteristics. We looked at three countries with a significantly different country profile: Ireland, Nicaragua and the Netherlands. Although the cost of producing energy crops in Nicaragua (1.8 / GJ ) is much lower than in the Netherlands (5.4– 14 / GJ ) and Ireland (4.7– 8.2 / GJ ), the resulting cost of electricity (0.072 / kW h ) is relatively close to that in the other two countries. This is mainly caused by the high internal rate of return required in Nicaragua. Electricity generation in the Netherlands from eucalyptus imported from Nicaragua would be just above the low cost estimate of energy crops cultivated in the Netherlands. Beside importing untreated wood, international trade could also be based on densified or liquified biomass, biomass-derived electricity or “import” of emission reduction credits. In the Netherlands, biomass energy can benefit significantly from the exemption of the regulating energy tax and other stimulative measures for renewables. The cost per tonne of CO 2 -eq . avoided is the lowest in Nicaragua (14 / tonne CO 2 -eq . ). In Ireland this ranges between 22 and 53 / tonne CO 2 -eq . In the Netherlands the two cheapest options cost 56 and 86 / tonne CO 2 -eq . , but the whole set of stimulative measures values 93 / tonne CO 2 -eq . Because of the low conversion efficiency, in Nicaragua only half the amount of CO 2 emission reduction could be obtained per ha of land as compared to the other two countries. The macro-economic advantages of energy crops are the largest in Nicaragua. This impact is also likely to be the most relevant in this country. Overall, it is concluded that the country context can have large impacts on the performance of systems that produce electricity out of energy crops, although these impacts are partly counteractive in the countries under consideration. It is questioned in this paper whether it is appropriate that import of biomass is considered as “domestic measure” in the framework of the Kyoto protocol." @default.
• W2016162544 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2016162544 creator A5015606005 @default.
• W2016162544 creator A5039178785 @default.
• W2016162544 creator A5047678634 @default.
• W2016162544 date "2002-02-01" @default.
• W2016162544 modified "2023-10-15" @default.
• W2016162544 title "Electricity from energy crops in different settings—a country comparison between Nicaragua, Ireland and the Netherlands" @default.
• W2016162544 cites W1980927405 @default.
• W2016162544 cites W1991925736 @default.
• W2016162544 cites W1996090710 @default.
• W2016162544 cites W2023176830 @default.
• W2016162544 cites W2029915074 @default.
• W2016162544 cites W2031499972 @default.
• W2016162544 cites W2062702017 @default.
• W2016162544 cites W2069581059 @default.
• W2016162544 cites W207830854 @default.
• W2016162544 cites W2096424828 @default.
• W2016162544 cites W2170971397 @default.
• W2016162544 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/s0961-9534(01)00063-0" @default.
• W2016162544 hasPublicationYear "2002" @default.
• W2016162544 type Work @default.
• W2016162544 sameAs 2016162544 @default.
• W2016162544 citedByCount "18" @default.
• W2016162544 countsByYear W20161625442012 @default.
• W2016162544 countsByYear W20161625442013 @default.
• W2016162544 countsByYear W20161625442014 @default.
• W2016162544 countsByYear W20161625442019 @default.
• W2016162544 countsByYear W20161625442022 @default.
• W2016162544 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2016162544 hasAuthorship W2016162544A5015606005 @default.
• W2016162544 hasAuthorship W2016162544A5039178785 @default.
• W2016162544 hasAuthorship W2016162544A5047678634 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConcept C119599485 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConcept C205649164 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConcept C206658404 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConcept C39432304 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConcept C48824518 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConcept C54286561 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConceptScore W2016162544C119599485 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConceptScore W2016162544C127413603 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConceptScore W2016162544C144133560 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConceptScore W2016162544C162324750 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConceptScore W2016162544C205649164 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConceptScore W2016162544C206658404 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConceptScore W2016162544C39432304 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConceptScore W2016162544C48824518 @default.
• W2016162544 hasConceptScore W2016162544C54286561 @default.
• W2016162544 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2016162544 hasLocation W20161625441 @default.
• W2016162544 hasOpenAccess W2016162544 @default.
• W2016162544 hasPrimaryLocation W20161625441 @default.
• W2016162544 hasRelatedWork W2104950272 @default.
• W2016162544 hasRelatedWork W2147990030 @default.
• W2016162544 hasRelatedWork W2358673967 @default.
• W2016162544 hasRelatedWork W2370258473 @default.
• W2016162544 hasRelatedWork W2559980898 @default.
• W2016162544 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W2016162544 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W2016162544 hasRelatedWork W3134839809 @default.
• W2016162544 hasRelatedWork W3215728477 @default.
• W2016162544 hasRelatedWork W4386420510 @default.
• W2016162544 hasVolume "22" @default.
• W2016162544 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2016162544 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2016162544 magId "2016162544" @default.
• W2016162544 workType "article" @default.