Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Potential Environmental Impacts of Increased Reliance on Corn-Based Bioenergy

  • Published:
Environmental and Resource Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper integrates economic and physical models to assess: a) how increases in agricultural commodity prices, driven by ethanol production and other factors, affect land use and cropping systems in the US Midwest, and b) how the changes in land use and cropping systems in turn affect environmental quality in the region. The empirical framework includes a set of econometric models that predict land conversion, crop choices, and crop rotations at the parcel level based on commodity prices, land quality, climate conditions, and other physical characteristics at the sites. The predictions are then combined with site-specific environmental production functions to determine the effect of rising commodity prices on nitrate runoff and leaching, soil water and wind erosion, and carbon sequestration. Results suggest that increasing commodity prices will result in widespread conversions of non-cropland to cropland. Fifty percent of the region’s pasture and range land will be converted to cropland with $6 corn. Rising commodity prices will also result in dramatic changes in crop mix and rotation systems in the Midwest. With $6 corn, the total acreage of corn will increase by 23% and 40% in the Corn Belt and Lake States, respectively; the acreage of continuous corn will increase considerably in both regions as well. These changes in land use and crop mix will have a large impact on agricultural pollution. Approaches to mitigating the environmental impacts are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Almirall C, Auffhammer M, Berck P (2010) Farm acreage shocks and food prices: an SVAR approach to understanding the impacts of biofuels. Paper presented in the Fourth World Congress of Environmental and Resource Economists. June 28 to July 2, Montreal, Canada

  • Baker A, Zahmser S (2006) Reshapes the corn market. Amber Waves 4: 30–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Caswell M, Zilberman D (1985) The choice of irrigation technologies in California. Am J Agric Econ 67: 224–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chavas J, Holt MT (1990) Acreage decisions under risk: the case of corn and soybeans. Am J Agric Econ 72: 529–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chavas J, Pope RD, Kao RS (1983) An analysis of the role of future prices, cash prices, and government programs in acreage response. West J Agric Econ 8: 27–33

    Google Scholar 

  • De La Torre Ugarte D, English BC, Jensen K (2007) Sixty billion gallons by 2030: economic and agricultural impacts of ethanol and biodiesel expansion. Am J Agric Econ 89: 1290–1295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dicks MR, Campiche J, De La Torre Ugarte D, Hellwinckel C, Bryant HL, Richardson JW (2009) Land use implications of expanding biofuel demand. J Agric Appl Econ 41: 435–453

    Google Scholar 

  • Duffy M (2010) Estimated costs of crop production in Iowa—2010. Ag Decision Maker. File A1-20. Iowa State University Extension

  • Farrell AE, Plevin RJ, Turner BT, Jones AD, O’Hare M, Kammen DM (2006) Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals. Science 311(5760): 506–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (2009) FAPRI 2009 U.S. and World Agricultural Outlook. FAPRI Staff Report 09-FSR 1. Iowa State University, University of Missouri-Columbia

  • Gardner BL (1976) Futures prices in supply analysis. Am J Agric Econ 58: 81–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gassman PW, Wu JJ, Mitchell P, Babcock BA, Hurley TM, Chung SW (1998) Impact of U.S. Agricultural Policy on Regional Nitrogen Losses. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on diffuse pollution (Poster Papers), 31 Aug.–4 Sept., Edinburgh, Scotland. International Association of Water Quality, London, England pp 115–22

  • Green RC (1990) Program provisions for program crops: a database for 1961–90. Agriculture and trade analysis division, economic research service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Staff Report No. AGES 9010

  • Hardie IW, Parks PJ (1997) Land use with heterogeneous land quality: an application of an area base model. Am J Agric Econ 79: 299–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Just RE, Rausser GC (1981) Commodity price forecasting with large-scale econometric models and the futures market. Am J Agric Econ 63: 197–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakshminarayan PG, Babcock BA, Ogg C (1996) Temporal and spatial evaluation of soil conservation policies. Working Paper 96-WP 149, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, Iowa State University

  • Lichtenberg E (1989) Land quality, irrigation development, and cropping patterns in the northern high plains. Am J Agric Econ 71: 187–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maddala GS (1983) Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin A (2007) Food and fuel compete for land. The New York Times, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell PD, Lakshminarayan PG, Otake T, Babcock BA (1998) The impact of soil conservation policies on carbon sequestration in agricultural soils of the central U.S. In: Lal R, Kimble JM, Follett RF, Stewart BA (eds) Management of carbon sequestration in soil. CRC Press, Boca Raton FL

    Google Scholar 

  • National Agricultural Statistics Service (2009) Crop Production 2008 Summary. Washington DC

  • Pimentel D, Patzek T (2005) Ethanol production using corn, switchgrass, and wood; biodiesel production using soybean and sunflower. Natl Resour Res 14(1): 65–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plantinga AJ, Mauldin T, Miller DJ (1999) An econometric analysis of the cost of sequestering carbon in forests. Am J Agric Econ 81: 812–824

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajagopal D, Sexton SE, Roland-Holst D, Zilberman D (2007) Challenge of biofuel: filling the tank without emptying the stomach?. Environ Res Lett 2: 1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider UA, McCarl BA (2003) Economic potential of biomass based fuels for greenhouse gas emission mitigation. Environ Resour Econ 24: 291–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Secchi S, Babcock BA (2007) Impact of high crop prices on environmental quality: a case of Iowa and the conservation reserve program. Working Paper 07-WP 447 Center for Agricultural and Rural Development Iowa State University

  • Sharpley AN, Williams JR (eds) (1990) EPIC—Erosion/productivity impact calculator: 1. Model Documentation. Technical Bulletin No. 1768. USDA, Washington DC

  • Sheehan J, Aden A, Paustian K, Killian K, Brenner J, Walsh M, Nelson R (2003) Energy and environmental aspects of using corn stover for fuel ethanol. J Ind Ecol 7: 117–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shumway CR (1983) Supply, demand, and technology in a multiproduct industry: Texas field crops. Am J Agric Econ 65: 748–760

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D, Hill J, Lehman C (2006) Carbon-negative biofuels from low-input high-diversity grassland biomass. Science 314: 1598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyner WE (2007) Policy alternatives for the future biofuels industry. J Agric Food Ind Organ 5(2):1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture (1975–1999) Agricultural statistics. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Annual series, Washington DC

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture (1998) Economic Research Service. Agricultural Chemical Usage 1997. Field Crops Summary. http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/nass/AgriChemUsFC//1990s/1998/AgriChemUsFC-05-20-1998.txt

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture: (2009) 2007 Census of Agriculture. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington DC

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture (2009) USDA Long-Term Agricultural Projection Tables. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington DC http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/MannUsda/viewStaticPage.do?url=http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/ers/94005/./2010/

  • Williams JR, Llewelyn RV, Barnaby GA (1990) Risk analysis of tillage alternatives with government programs. Am J Agric Econ 72: 172–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu JJ, Adams RM, Kling CL, Tanaka K (2004) From micro-level decisions to landscape changes: an assessment of agricultural conservation policies. Am J Agric Econ 86: 26–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Babcock BA (1998) The choice of tillage, rotation, and soil testing practices: economic and environmental implications. Am J Agric Econ 80: 494–511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Babcock BA (1999) Metamodeling potential nitrate water pollution in the Central United States. J Environ Qual 28: 1916–1928

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Segerson K (1995) The impact of policies and land characteristics on potential groundwater pollution in Wisconsin. Am J Agric Econ 77: 1033–1047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zilberman D, Rajagopal D (2007) Review of environmental, economic and policy aspects of biofuels. Policy Research Working Paper 4341. The World Bank Development Research Group. Sustainable Rural and Urban Development Team

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christian Langpap.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Langpap, C., Wu, J. Potential Environmental Impacts of Increased Reliance on Corn-Based Bioenergy. Environ Resource Econ 49, 147–171 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-010-9428-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-010-9428-8

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation