Local-scale analysis of carbon mitigation strategies: Tompkins County, New York, USA

• Published in: Energy policy Vol. 35; no. 11; pp. 5515 - 5525
• Main Authors: Vadas, Timothy M., Fahey, Timothy J., Sherman, Ruth E., Kay, David
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford Elsevier Ltd 01.11.2007; Elsevier; Elsevier Science Ltd
• Series: Energy Policy
• Subjects: Applied sciences; Atmospheric pollution; Carbon emissions; Carbon sequestration; Case studies; Climate change; Combustion and energy production; Ecology; Electricity generation; Emissions control; Energy; Energy economics; Energy efficiency; Energy policy; Environmental conditions; Environmental policy; Exact sciences and technology; General, economic and professional studies; Global warming; Local government; Market penetration; Mitigation potential; New York (state); Policy analysis; Pollution; Pollution sources. Measurement results; Reforestation; Renewable energy sources; Studies; New York; United States; North America; America; Tompkins County New York; United States > US; Mitigation potential; Carbon emissions; Policy analysis; Performance evaluation; Commercial sector; Economic analysis; Pollution control; Carbon dioxide; Forest management; Biomass; Pollutant emission; Wind energy; Energy conservation; Co-combustion; Transportation policy; Pollution prevention; Energy policy; Carbon sequestration; Energy savings; Case study; Environment impact; Strategy; Local scope; Electric power production; Cost analysis; Residential sector
• ISSN: 0301-4215; 1873-6777
• DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2007.05.016

The costs and potential for several carbon mitigation options were analyzed for Tompkins County, NY, within several categories: terrestrial carbon sequestration, local power generation, transportation, and energy end-use efficiency. The total county emissions are about 340 Gg C/year, with current biomass sequestration rates of about 121 Gg C/year. The potential for mitigation with the options examined, assuming full market penetration, amounts to at least 234 Gg C/year (69%), with 100 Gg C/year (29%) at no net cost to the consumer. Effective carbon mitigation strategies for this county based on costs per mg carbon and maximum potential include reforestation of abandoned agricultural lands for terrestrial carbon sequestration, biomass production for residential heating and co-firing in coal power plants, changes in personal behavior related to transportation (e.g., carpooling or using public transportation), installation of numerous residential energy-efficient products and development of local wind power. The principal barriers to the implementation of these approaches are discussed and policies for overcoming these barriers are analyzed.