Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A scenario based analysis of land competition between food and bioenergy production in the US

  • Published:
Climatic Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Greenhouse gas abatement policies will increase the demand for renewable sources of energy, including bioenergy. In combination with a global growing demand for food, this could lead to a food-fuel competition for bio-productive land. Proponents of bioenergy have suggested that energy crop plantations may be established on less productive land as a way of avoiding this potential food-fuel competition. However, many of these suggestions have been made without any underlying economic analysis. In this paper, we develop a long-term economic optimization model (LUCEA) of the U.S. agricultural and energy system to analyze this possible competition for land and to examine the link between carbon prices, the energy system dynamics and the effect of the land competition on food prices. Our results indicate that bioenergy plantations will be competitive on cropland already at carbon taxes about US $20/ton C. As the carbon tax increases, food prices more than double compared to the reference scenario in which there is no climate policy. Further, bioenergy plantations appropriate significant areas of both cropland and grazing land. In model runs where we have limited the amount of grazing land that can be used for bioenergy to what many analysts consider the upper limit, most of the bioenergy plantations are established on cropland. Under the assumption that more grazing land can be used, large areas of bioenergy plantations are established on grazing land, despite the fact that yields are assumed to be much lower (less than half) than on crop land. It should be noted that this allocation on grazing land takes place as a result of a competition between food and bioenergy production and not because of lack of it. The estimated increase in food prices is largely unaffected by how much grazing land can be used for bioenergy production.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Azar C (2005) Emerging scarcities – Bioenergy-food competition in a carbon constrained world. In: Simpson RD, Toman MA, Ayers RU (eds) Scarcity and growth revisited, resources for the future. RFF, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Azar C, Berndes G (1999) The implication of CO2-abatement policies on food prices. In: Andrew D, Tisdell C (eds) Sustainable agriculture and environment: Globalization and trade liberalization impacts. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, pp 153–170

    Google Scholar 

  • Azar C, Dowlatabadi HA (1999) Review of technical change in assessment of climate policy. Annu Rev Energy Environ 24:513–544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azar C, Larson E (2000) Bioenergy and land-use competition in the Northeast of Brazil: A case study in the Northeast of Brazil. Energy for sustainable development 4:64–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azar C, Lindgren K, Andersson BA (2003) Global energy scenarios meeting stringent CO2 constraints – cost effective fuel choices in the transportation sector. Energy Policy 31:961–976

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azar C, Lindgren K, Larson E, Möllersten K (2006) Carbon capture and storage from fossil fuels and biomass – costs and the potential role in stabilizing the atmosphere. Clim Change 74:47–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berndes G, Hoogwijk M, van den Brock R (2003) The contribution of biomass in the future global energy supply: a review of 17 studies. Biomass Bioenergy 25:1–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown LR (1980) Food or fuel: new competition for the world’s cropland. Worldwatch Institute, Washington, D.C., USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Börjesson P, Gustavsson L, Christersson L, Linder S (1997) Future production and utilisation of biomass in Sweden: potentials and CO2 mitigation. Biomass Bioenergy 13:399–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Church DC (1991) Livestock feeds & feeding. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • de la Torre Ugarte DG, Walsh ME, Shapouri H, Slinsky SP (2000) The economic impact of bioenergy crop production on U.S. agriculture, available via http://www.michiganbioenergy.org/

  • Dixit AK, Pindyck RS (1993) Investment under Uncertainty. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Downing M, Graham RL (1996) The potential supply and cost of biomass from energy Crops in the Tennessee Valley authority region. Biomass Bioenergy 4:283–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyson T (1996) Population and food – global trends and future prospects. Routledge, London, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • EIA (2003) Annual energy outlook 2003. US Department of Energy, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • ECN (2004) MARKAL MATTER 4.2 Model input – processes producing other than electricity/heat, available via http://www.ecn.nl

  • ERS (2002a) Commodity cost and return. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington DC, available via http://www.ers.usda.gov/

  • ERS (2002b) Food marketing and price spreads. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington DC, available via http://www.ers.usda.gov/

  • FAO (2003) World agriculture: towards 2015/2030. An FAO perspective. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)/Earthscan, London, UK

  • Forest Service, USDA (2001) U.S. Forest facts and historical trends. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington DC, available via http://www.fs.fed.us/

  • Gielen D, de Feber MAPC, Bos AJM, Gerlagh T (2001) Biomass for energy or materials? A western European systems engineering perspective. Energy policy 29:291–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham RL (1994) An analysis of the potential land base for energy crops in the conterminous United States. Biomass Bioenergy 6:175–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham RL, Allison LJ, Becker DA (1996) The Oak Ridge Energy Crop County Level Database. Oak Ridge National Laboratory Program, available via http://bioenergy.ornl.gov/

  • Hall DO, Rosillo-Calle F, Woods J (1993) Biomass for energy: supply prospects. In: Johansson TB, Kelly H, Reddy AKN, Williams RH (eds) Renewable energy – sources for fuels and electricity. Island, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedenus F, Azar C (2005) Bioenergy plantations or long-term carbon sinks? – a model based analysis. Submitted to Biomass and Bioenergy

  • Herzog H, Drake E, Adams E (1997) CO2 capture, reuse, and storage technologies for mitigating global climate change – a white paper, DOE Order No. DE-AF22-96PC01257, Washington

  • Hoogwijk M, Faail A, Eickhout B, de Vries B, Turkenburg W (2005) Potential of biomass energy out to 2100, for four IPCC SRES land-use scenarios. Biomass Bioenerg 29:225–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang KS, Lin BH (2000) Estimation of food demand and nutrient elasticities from household survey data, Technical bulletin number 1887. Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Ignaciuk A, Vöhringer F, Ruijs A, Van Ireland EC (2006) Competition between biomass and food production in the presence of energy policies: a partial equilibrium analysis. Energy Policy 34:1127–1138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IIASA/WEC (1998) World energy outlook, Interactive Database. available http://via www.iiasa.ac.at/

  • Joyce LA (1989) An analysis of the range forage situation in the united states: 1989–2040 – A technical document supporting the 1989 USDA Forest Service RPA assessment, General technical report RM-180. Forest Service – United States of Agricultural Department

  • Lee HC, McCarl BA, Gillig D (2005) The dynamic competitiveness of US agricultural and forest carbon sequestration. Can J Agric Econ 53:343–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loulou R, Lavigne D (1996) MARKAL model with elastic demands: application to greenhouse gas emission control. In: Carraro C, Haurie (eds) Operations research and environmental management. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 201–220

    Google Scholar 

  • Lubowski RN (2002) Determinants of land-use transitions in the United States: econometric estimation of a Markov model, paper presented at the Forestry and Agriculture Greenhouse Gas Modeling Forum, October 8–11, available via http://foragforum.rti.org/

  • Manne AS, Richels RG (1992) Buying Greenhouse insurance – The economic costs of CO2 emissions Limits. MIT, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Manne AS, Richels RG (2004) Merge 5.0 – Model code, available via http://www.stanford.edu/group/MERGE/code.htm, visited 2004-01-19

  • McCarl BA, Adams DA, Alig RJ, Chmelik JT (2000) Competitiveness of biomass-fueled electrical power plants. Ann Oper Res 94:37–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarl BA, Schneider UA (2001) Greenhouse gas mitigation in U.S. agriculture and forestry. Science 294:2481–2482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarl BA, Spreen TH (1980) Price endogenous mathematical programming as a toll for sector analysis. Am J Agric Econ 62:37–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Meekhof RL, Tyner WE, Holland FD (1980) United States agricultural policy and gasohol – a policy simulation. Am J Agric Econ 62:408–415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NASS (1995) Production annual summary, available via usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/

  • Nordhaus WD (2004) RICE-99 Spreadsheet version, available via http://www.econ.yale.edu/, visited 2004-01-19

  • NRCS (2000) Summary Report, Natural Resource Inventory, table 2, available via http://www.nrcs.usda.gov

  • OECD (2001) Market effects of crop support measures. Paris, France

  • Parks PJ (1995) Explaining “irrational” land use: Risk aversion and marginal agricultural land. J Environ Econ Manage 28:34–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters M, House R, Lewandrowski J, McDowell H (2001) Economic implications of carbon charges on U.S. agriculture. Clim Change 50:445–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regmi A (2001) Changing structure of global food consumption and trade. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosegrant MW, Cline SA (2003) Global food security: challenges and policies. Science 302:1917–1919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosegrant MW, Paisner MS, Meijer S, Witcover J (2001) Global food projections to 2020 – emerging trends and alternative futures. International Food policy Research Institute, Washington DC, available via http://www.ifpri.org

  • Sands RD, Leimbach M (2003) Modeling agriculture and land use in an integrated assessment framework. Clim Change 56:185–210

    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 

  • SEI (2005) Policy debate on global biofuels development. Newsletter of the Energy Programme at Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI), 18(2) available via http://www.sei.se

  • Sperow M, Eve M, Paustian K (2003) Potential soil C sequestration on US agricultural soils. Clim Change 57:319–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torell LA, Godfrey EB, Nielsen DB (1986) Forage utilization cost differentials in a ranch operation: a case study. J Range Manag 39:34–39

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Census Bureau (2000) National population projections. Washington DC, available via http://www.census.gov

  • USDA (2003) USDA agricultural baseline projection tables. US Department of Agriculture, Washington DC, available via http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/, visited 2004-01-19

  • Van Tassell LW, Torell LA, Rimbey NR, Bartlett ET (1997) Comparison of forage value on private and public grazing leases. J Range Manag 50:300–306

    Google Scholar 

  • Vesterby M, Krupa KS (2001) Major uses of land in the United States, Statistical Bulletin No. 973. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh ME, Perlack RL, Turhollow A, de la Torre Ugarte D, Becker DA, Graham RL, Slinsky SE, Ray DE (2000) Biomass feedstock availability in the United States: 1990 State level analysis. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, available via bioenergy.ornl.gov

  • Webster MD, Babiker M, Mayer M, Reilly JM, Harnisch J, Hyman R, Sarofim MC, Wang C (2002) Uncertainty in emissions projections for climate models. Atmos Environ 36:3659–3670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wirsenius S (2000) Human use of land and organic materials. Dissertation. Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg

  • Wirsenius S, Azar C, Berndes G (2004) Global Bioenergy Potentials: A new approach using a model-based assessment of biomass flows and land demand in the food and agricultural sector 2030. In: Proceedings of the Second World Biomass Conference – Biomass for Energy, Industry and Climate Protection, Rome, Italy, 10–14 May, 2004

  • Yotopoulos PA (1985) Middle-income classes and food crises: the “new” food-feed competition. Econ Dev Cult Change 33:463–483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuidema G, Van Den Born GJ, Alcamo J, Kreileman GJJ (1994) Simulating changes in global land cover as affected by economic and climatic factors. In: Alcamo J (eds) Image 2.0: Integrtaed modelling of global climate change. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physical Resource Theory, Chalmers University of Technology, 412 96, Göteborg, Sweden

    Daniel J. A. Johansson & Christian Azar

Authors
  1. Daniel J. A. Johansson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christian Azar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel J. A. Johansson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Johansson, D.J.A., Azar, C. A scenario based analysis of land competition between food and bioenergy production in the US. Climatic Change 82, 267–291 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9208-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9208-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation