Ethanol and a Changing Agricultural Landscape
by
Scott Malcolm,
Marcel Aillery, and
Marca WeinbergEconomic Research Report No. (ERR-86) 64 pp, November 2009
U.S. policy to expand the production of biofuel for domestic
energy use has significant implications for agriculture and
resource use. While ongoing research and development investment may
radically alter the way biofuel is produced in the future, for now,
corn-based ethanol continues to account for most biofuel
production. As corn ethanol production increases, so does the
production of corn. The effect on agricultural commodity markets
has been national, but commodity production adjustments, and
resulting environmental consequences, vary across regions. Changes
in the crop sector have also affected the cost of feed for
livestock producers. As the Nation demands more biofuel production,
and markets for new biofuel feedstocks, such as crop residues,
emerge, the agricultural landscape will be further transformed.
What Is the Issue?
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA)
specifies a minimum total amount of U.S. biofuel production through
2022, and also sets target levels for fuels produced from specific
feedstock categories. Together with volatile energy prices, this
and earlier Federal legislation supporting biofuel processing have
increased demand for biofuels and the agricultural feedstocks used
to produce them. Greater demand for biofuel increases pressure on
the agricultural land base as more land is put into production
and/or more inputs, such as fertilizer, water, and pesticides, are
applied to cropland. Rising demand for corn, the principal biofuel
feedstock in the United States, changes the profitability of
growing corn and other "energy crops". Farmers respond by changing
their planting decisions, which alter crop mix, land use, and use
of inputs, such as fertilizer, which then influence water quality,
soil erosion, and other environmental indicators. The environmental
consequences of shifts in agricultural production vary by
region.
This report also looks at the economic and environmental
implications should crop residues, such as corn stover and wheat
straw, become commercially viable as biofuel feedstocks. Widespread
harvesting of crop residues as an alternative biofuel feedstock has
implications for input use, nutrient runoff, erosion control, and
soil productivity.
What Did the Study Find?
Land for new biofuel feedstock production comes from two main
sources: acreage not currently in production and acreage shifted
from other crops. The amount of additional land and displaced crops
associated with increased biofuel production differs by region. If
the RFS targets are met, total cropland is projected to increase by
1.6 percent over baseline conditions by 2015, with corn acreage
expanding by 3.5 percent and accounting for most of the cropland
increase. While corn acreage expands in every region, traditional
corn-growing areas would likely see the largest increases-up 8.6
percent in the Northern Plains, 1.7 percent in the Corn Belt, and
2.8 percent in Lake States. Prices are expected to increase
slightly for most crops compared with the baseline, although the
price increase could be reduced if corn yields increase at a faster
rate than expected.
Corn is a heavy user of nitrogen fertilizer. Given the RFS
targets, the resulting increase in fertilizer use and shift from
corn-soybean rotations to continuous corn production leads to
deterioration of key environmental performance measures. Nitrogen
losses to surface water and groundwater increase by 1.7 and 2.8
percent, respectively, while soil runoff increases by 1.6 percent
from the baseline. Differences in geography, soil type, and
prevailing agricultural production activities lead to considerable
variation in environmental effects among regions. The increases in
leaching to groundwater are greatest in the Lake States and
Southeast, while increases in runoff to surface water are greatest
in the Corn Belt and Northern Plains.
As energy feedstocks that are also used as animal feed move more
toward biofuel use, higher costs of animal feed reduce returns to
animal production. Production of livestock declines slightly by
2015 relative to the baseline-0.6 percent for farm-fed cattle and
0.5 percent for poultry-which may result in reduced manure nutrient
runoff and leaching in some areas.
Technical advances in biofuel production may soon allow other
plant material to be used as energy feedstock. One of the most
readily available sources of "cellulosic" feedstock is crop
residues. Increased use of residue could reduce demand for corn,
reducing requirements for most agricultural inputs. But replacing
corn-based ethanol with biofuel created from crop residues could
have mixed results on environmental quality. Removal of large
amounts of crop residues requires replacement of nutrients through
increased application of fertilizer and increases runoff and soil
erosion. Replacing 3 billion gallons of corn ethanol with crop
residue ethanol could increase nitrogen runoff and leaching in the
Corn Belt, although reduced corn plantings in other regions cause
these measures to decline in much of the United States.
How Was the Study Conducted?
A regionalized agricultural sector mathematical programming
model with linked environmental process models was used to
simultaneously estimate profit-maximizing decisions on land use,
livestock production, crop mix, crop rotations, tillage practices,
and fertilizer application rates. In essence, we compare the market
equilibrium prior to EISA's passage with the market equilibrium
expected if the new RFS production targets are met in 2015, the
year that the corn-ethanol target peaks. The environmental impacts
of land use and agronomic practices were estimated by applying
coefficients derived from a crop biophysical simulation model that
incorporates soil, weather, and management information to estimate
crop yields, erosion, and chemical (pesticide and fertilizer)
discharges to the environment under various crop rotation and soil
management regimes. Changes to U.S. agriculture and environmental
outputs from meeting EISA's biofuel production targets for 2015
were evaluated against a baseline case that reflects 2007 U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) projections for biofuel demand in
2015 (developed just prior to EISA's passage).