• Energy Research
• 13. Climate action close
• 6. Clean water close
• English close
• University of California System close

This paper provides an overview of the environmental, economical, and policy considerations related to biofuels. While the biofuel production and consumption exhibited significant increase over the first decade of the new millennium, this and further increases in biofuel production are driven primarily by government policies. Currently available first generation biofuels are with a few exceptions not economically viable in the absence of fiscal incentives or high oil prices. Also the environmental impacts of biofuels as an alternative to fossil fuels are quite ambiguous. The review of the most recent economic models dealing with biofuels and their economic impacts provides a distinction between structural and reduced form models. The review of reduced models is structured toward the time series analysis approach to the dependencies between prices of feedstock, biofuels, and fossil fuels.

This paper provides an overview of the environmental, economical, and policy considerations related to biofuels. While the biofuel production and consumption exhibited significant increase over the first decade of the new millennium, this and further increases in biofuel production are driven primarily by government policies. Currently available first generation biofuels are with a few exceptions not economically viable in the absence of fiscal incentives or high oil prices. Also the environmental impacts of biofuels as an alternative to fossil fuels are quite ambiguous. The review of the most recent economic models dealing with biofuels and their economic impacts provides a distinction between structural and reduced form models. The review of reduced models is structured toward the time series analysis approach to the dependencies between prices of feedstock, biofuels, and fossil fuels.

The Venice Sustainability Advisory Panel (VSAP), an international group of experts in environmental sustainability put together by UC San Diego’s Sustainability Solutions Institute, was created to advise key authorities and decision-makers on how to prepare regular formal assessments of the environmental sustainability of the Venice Lagoon and its surrounding regions, taking into account the specific social and economic drivers of environmental change in the region. Assessment is regarded as a critical initial step in achieving adaptive management capability. The VSAP met three times - twice in Venice (in June 2008 and September 2008) and once in La Jolla (in January 2009).

The Venice Sustainability Advisory Panel (VSAP), an international group of experts in environmental sustainability put together by UC San Diego’s Sustainability Solutions Institute, was created to advise key authorities and decision-makers on how to prepare regular formal assessments of the environmental sustainability of the Venice Lagoon and its surrounding regions, taking into account the specific social and economic drivers of environmental change in the region. Assessment is regarded as a critical initial step in achieving adaptive management capability. The VSAP met three times - twice in Venice (in June 2008 and September 2008) and once in La Jolla (in January 2009).

Religious forms of environmental advocacy started emerging in the United States in the 1990s, seemingly within all branches of American Christianity, creating hope, both among these emerging movements and among secular environmental advocacy groups, that this would bring new constituencies to bear, constituencies with the moral authority to make ethical demands for environmental protection. It has led to persistent theorizing that religions, including Christianity, are about to intervene in a way that will alter the political situation and increase public demand for climate change action and environmental protection generally. So far this has not transpired. To investigate why, between 2016 and 2018, I did field work in congregations in Arizona (a Republican dominated state) and California (a state with strong Democratic Party influence). I divided my visits between a fundamentalist confederation of churches (Calvary Chapels) and liberal congregations affiliated with The Center for Progressive Christianity, an affiliation of liberal congregations (primarily United Church of Christ, Episcopalian) where more naturalistic, non-supernatural understandings of Christianity are more common. In interviewed pastors, church members, and key leaders within religious environmentalism, and conducted three direct focus groups. I also viewed a substantial number of online sermons posted at church websites. I found substantial indifference or outright hostility to environmental concerns and climate mitigation at all of my Calvary Chapel sites, due especially to intense apocalyptic expectation of imminent rapture. Other factors included belief in sovereignity of God (the idea the God causes all events), a tendency toward collective narcissism and and susceptibility to conspiracy theories. Progressive congregations were open to environmental concerns, talked about their importance, but ultimately were minimally involved. Social justice issues and the immediate needs of the homeless, immigrants, and advocating for LGBTQ equality in most cases took precedence.

Religious forms of environmental advocacy started emerging in the United States in the 1990s, seemingly within all branches of American Christianity, creating hope, both among these emerging movements and among secular environmental advocacy groups, that this would bring new constituencies to bear, constituencies with the moral authority to make ethical demands for environmental protection. It has led to persistent theorizing that religions, including Christianity, are about to intervene in a way that will alter the political situation and increase public demand for climate change action and environmental protection generally. So far this has not transpired. To investigate why, between 2016 and 2018, I did field work in congregations in Arizona (a Republican dominated state) and California (a state with strong Democratic Party influence). I divided my visits between a fundamentalist confederation of churches (Calvary Chapels) and liberal congregations affiliated with The Center for Progressive Christianity, an affiliation of liberal congregations (primarily United Church of Christ, Episcopalian) where more naturalistic, non-supernatural understandings of Christianity are more common. In interviewed pastors, church members, and key leaders within religious environmentalism, and conducted three direct focus groups. I also viewed a substantial number of online sermons posted at church websites. I found substantial indifference or outright hostility to environmental concerns and climate mitigation at all of my Calvary Chapel sites, due especially to intense apocalyptic expectation of imminent rapture. Other factors included belief in sovereignity of God (the idea the God causes all events), a tendency toward collective narcissism and and susceptibility to conspiracy theories. Progressive congregations were open to environmental concerns, talked about their importance, but ultimately were minimally involved. Social justice issues and the immediate needs of the homeless, immigrants, and advocating for LGBTQ equality in most cases took precedence.

The San Diego Foundation’s Regional Focus 2050 Study (Focus 2050 Study) was conceived of and commissioned by the Foundation’s Environment Program. The Foundation contracted with UC San Diego’s Environment and Sustainability Initiative (ESI) to serve as the project manager for the Focus 2050 study in coordination with Foundation staff. Contributing authors developed each working paper in a coordinated process, and then the combined report was externally peer-reviewed. A workshop was also held in June 2008 to present key findings to the study’s stakeholders and to invite final comments and suggestions for the report prior to publication. The Focus 2050 Study for the San Diego region is modeled, in part, on the Focus 2050 study undertaken by King County, Washington. This study also forms the basis for a technical assessment which was developed for inclusion in the 2008 Climate Change Impacts Assessment, Second Biennial Science Report to the California Climate Action Team.

The San Diego Foundation’s Regional Focus 2050 Study (Focus 2050 Study) was conceived of and commissioned by the Foundation’s Environment Program. The Foundation contracted with UC San Diego’s Environment and Sustainability Initiative (ESI) to serve as the project manager for the Focus 2050 study in coordination with Foundation staff. Contributing authors developed each working paper in a coordinated process, and then the combined report was externally peer-reviewed. A workshop was also held in June 2008 to present key findings to the study’s stakeholders and to invite final comments and suggestions for the report prior to publication. The Focus 2050 Study for the San Diego region is modeled, in part, on the Focus 2050 study undertaken by King County, Washington. This study also forms the basis for a technical assessment which was developed for inclusion in the 2008 Climate Change Impacts Assessment, Second Biennial Science Report to the California Climate Action Team.

Concern about the possible affects of biofuels on deforestation have led to assigning biofuel producers with the responsibility for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the indirect land use changes (ILUC) associated with their activities when assessing their compliance with biofuel policies. We show that the computation of the ILUC is shrouded with uncertainty; they vary frequently, and are strongly affected by policy choices. It seems that its overall impact on GHGs is relatively minor. Once the ILUCs are introduced other indirect effects of biofuel may need to be considered which will increase the cost of biofuel regulations. Concentrating on direct regulation of biofuel and on efforts to reduce deforestation, wherever it occurs, may be more effective than debating and refining the ILUC.