Michael O'Hare
University of California, Berkeley
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Michael O'Hare.
BioScience | 2010
Thomas W. Hertel; Alla A. Golub; Andrew D. Jones; Michael O'Hare; Richard J. Plevin; Daniel M. Kammen
Releases of greenhouse gases (GHG) from indirect land-use change triggered by crop-based biofuels have taken center stage in the debate over the role of biofuels in climate policy and energy security. This article analyzes these releases for maize ethanol produced in the United States. Factoring market-mediated responses and by-product use into our analysis reduces cropland conversion by 72% from the land used for the ethanol feedstock. Consequently, the associated GHG release estimated in our framework is 800 grams of carbon dioxide per megajoule (MJ); 27 grams per MJ per year, over 30 years of ethanol production, or roughly a quarter of the only other published estimate of releases attributable to changes in indirect land use. Nonetheless, 800 grams are enough to cancel out the benefits that corn ethanol has on global warming, thereby limiting its potential contribution in the context of Californias Low Carbon Fuel Standard.
Environmental Science & Technology | 2010
Richard J. Plevin; Michael O'Hare; Andrew D. Jones; Margaret S. Torn; Holly K. Gibbs
The life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions induced by increased biofuel consumption are highly uncertain: individual estimates vary from each other and each has a wide intrinsic error band. Using a reduced-form model, we estimated that the bounding range for emissions from indirect land-use change (ILUC) from US corn ethanol expansion was 10 to 340 g CO(2) MJ(-1). Considering various probability distributions to model parameters, the broadest 95% central interval, i.e., between the 2.5 and 97.5%ile values, ranged from 21 to 142 g CO(2)e MJ(-1). ILUC emissions from US corn ethanol expansion thus range from small, but not negligible, to several times greater than the life cycle emissions of gasoline. The ILUC emissions estimates of 30 g CO(2) MJ(-1) for the California Air Resources Board and 34 g CO(2)e MJ(-1) by USEPA (for 2022) are at the low end of the plausible range. The lack of data and understanding (epistemic uncertainty) prevents convergence of judgment on a central value for ILUC emissions. The complexity of the global system being modeled suggests that this range is unlikely to narrow substantially in the near future. Fuel policies that require narrow bounds around point estimates of life cycle GHG emissions are thus incompatible with current and anticipated modeling capabilities. Alternative policies that address the risks associated with uncertainty are more likely to achieve GHG reductions.
Journal of the Royal Society Interface | 2012
Susan Tarka Sanchez; Jeremy Woods; Mark Akhurst; Matthew Brander; Michael O'Hare; Terence P. Dawson; Robert Edwards; Adam J. Liska; Rick Malpas
The expansion of land used for crop production causes variable direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions, and other economic, social and environmental effects. We analyse the use of life cycle analysis (LCA) for estimating the carbon intensity of biofuel production from indirect land-use change (ILUC). Two approaches are critiqued: direct, attributional life cycle analysis and consequential life cycle analysis (CLCA). A proposed hybrid ‘combined model’ of the two approaches for ILUC analysis relies on first defining the system boundary of the resulting full LCA. Choices are then made as to the modelling methodology (economic equilibrium or cause–effect), data inputs, land area analysis, carbon stock accounting and uncertainty analysis to be included. We conclude that CLCA is applicable for estimating the historic emissions from ILUC, although improvements to the hybrid approach proposed, coupled with regular updating, are required, and uncertainly values must be adequately represented; however, the scope and the depth of the expansion of the system boundaries required for CLCA remain controversial. In addition, robust prediction, monitoring and accounting frameworks for the dynamic and highly uncertain nature of future crop yields and the effectiveness of policies to reduce deforestation and encourage afforestation remain elusive. Finally, establishing compatible and comparable accounting frameworks for ILUC between the USA, the European Union, South East Asia, Africa, Brazil and other major biofuel trading blocs is urgently needed if substantial distortions between these markets, which would reduce its application in policy outcomes, are to be avoided.
Journal of Cultural Economics | 2004
Francesca Borgonovi; Michael O'Hare
This paper examines the impact of the National Endowment for the Arts on private donations to the arts. The aim of the analysis is to assess whether public funding generates a crowding effect on private giving. We distinguish between institutional and sectoral crowding phenomena and discuss their possible implications.We used both a qualitative approach and an econometric model to estimate the effect of NEA introduction and appropriations on donations. Our results suggest that at the institutional level NEA grants do not generally induce donations to recipients while at the sectoral level appropriations and private giving are independent. The introduction of the agency appears to have caused a decrease in donations.
Journal of Policy Analysis and Management | 1993
Michael O'Hare
Why does the classroom chalkboard persist in an electronic world? Should we free ourselves of this primitive technology, or is it still a useful tool? If the latter, why is it rare in business facilities, and in teaching spaces like hotel conference rooms where mid-career training occurs? These questions occurred to me as I spent several hours outside my own classroom in the space of a month (teaching a group of third graders how an airplane flies, watching some high school history and English classes, and being trained in media and press skills by the experienced staff of a large public affairs firm). Forced to cope with alternatives at conferences and invited presentations, I have long realized how much variation exists among the information-carrying capacities of the blackboard and its competition-the newsprint tablet on an easel, the slide projector, and the overhead projector. (For reasons that will become clear, when I speak of blackboards or chalkboards, I include wipe-off markerboards.) I only recently realized how differently a blackboard functions in the different institutions that use it, or even how diversely it is used by individuals similarly situated-for example, teachers in classrooms. Since I recall little conversation about this among colleagues, it seems worth recording some reflections on this venerable technology and its alternatives. The following is much in debt to the kind of exploration Erving Goffman demonstrated in Forms of Talk [1983] and elsewhere.
Archive | 2010
Michael O'Hare; Richard J. Plevin; Derek Lemoine
Implementation of many policies intended to reduce fuels’ contribution to global warming require an estimate of the global warming intensity (GWI) of various fuels. Determining the climate effect of a direct substitution of fuels is not the same as determining the official value of each fuel’s GWI used to implement the policy. Choosing the second, which depends in part on estimates of the first and their intrinsic uncertainty, is a decision that should reflect the shape of the probability distribution of the first and of the cost of error (the difference between the chosen value and the ‘real’ value. Decision analysis helps clarify the difference between these GWI’s, how they relate to each other, and how standard engineering practice like a safety factor applies to the regulator’s decision.
Science | 2006
Alexander E. Farrell; Richard J. Plevin; Brian T. Turner; Andrew D. Jones; Michael O'Hare; Daniel M. Kammen
Archive | 1983
Michael O'Hare; Lawrence S. Bacow; Debra Sanderson
Environmental Science & Technology | 2015
Richard J. Plevin; Jayson Beckman; Alla A. Golub; Julie Witcover; Michael O'Hare
UC Berkeley Transportation Sustainability Research Center | 2007
Brian T. Turner; Richard J. Plevin; Michael O'Hare; Alexander E. Farrell