Band 5, Heft 2 - Explorations in Biofuels Economics, Policy, and History

Biofuels are prominent in current discussion both as a solution to problems and as a creator of problems. They have promise as a substitute for fossil fuels, particularly for petroleum as the raw material for transportation fuel. But biofuels also have pitfalls, especially when produced at a scale sufficient to replace a significant proportion of the world's use of petroleum. The articles in this special issue analyze key aspects of both the promise and pitfalls of biofuels. They address issues in the technology of producing raw materials for biofuels and converting these raw materials into fuel, resource constraints facing expansion of biofuel production, and the demand for fuels. Particular attention is paid to the relationship between expanded biofuel production and the cost of food. The economics of biofuels is inherently linked to policy issues as well as market analysis because biofuels in every country have received subsidies from governments. Consequently several articles address the welfare economics of governmental efforts to promote biofuels, with a focus on U.S. ethanol subsidies. These subsidies generate net social losses (deadweight costs) on a global scale, although not necessarily from the U.S. national viewpoint. Governmental promotion of biofuels can be justified on the grounds of externalities created by the use of fossil fuels, most notably in recent debates on global warming caused by the release of sequestered carbon in the form of carbon dioxide. This justification is weakened and perhaps even nullified by externalities in the production and use of biofuels. The articles in this issue consider a range of topics concerning these matters, and the welfare losses caused by biofuel subsidies absent net environmental gains from biofuels.

US and state governments have subsidized ethanol since 1978, and the rationale for these subsidies has varied over time from supporting farm prices and income, to environmental quality, and more recently to energy security and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. The recent boom in ethanol investment and production can be considered as an unintended consequence of an ethanol subsidy keyed to $20 crude oil and fixed at 51 cents per gallon combined with oil surging to $70/bbl. Thus, in the 2005-07 period, ethanol was extremely profitable inducing substantial new investment. For the future, different political action groups and political figures propose renewable fuels targets or standards ranging from 35 to 100 billion gallons per year. To achieve anything like these levels, it is likely that the current policy set will need to be reconsidered. In addition to the current policy, this paper considers using a subsidy tied to the energy security gains and greenhouse gas emission reductions provided by renewable fuels, subsidies targeted specifically at cellulose ethanol, and different versions of a renewable fuel standard such as the one passed by the US Senate. It is clear that we must develop a better understanding of the consequences of these alternative policy pathways.

The sharp rise in energy prices in the 1980s triggered a strong interest in the production of ethanol as an additional energy component. Economists are divided as to the payoffs from ethanol derived corn in part because of the complex interrelationship between energy produced from ethanol and energy from fossil fuels. Using a welfare economic framework, we calculate that there can be treasury savings from ethanol using tax credits as these subsidies can be smaller than direct payments to corn farmers which are essentially eliminated from the expansion of ethanol. Also, to the extent that ethanol dampens fuel prices there can be a net welfare gain from ethanol production in the presence of ethanol subsidies.

Ethanol subsidies are well established in U.S. policy and have high priority in corn growers' political agenda. This paper develops a vertical market model of ethanol, byproducts, and corn which is used to analyze whether corn growers would prefer the government's subsidy dollar to be spent directly on corn subsidies (though deficiency payments) rather than on a subsidy on ethanol made from corn. Because the subsidy dollar has to be shared with ethanol manufacturers under the ethanol subsidy, it is to be expected, and the model confirms, that a dollar spent on a direct corn subsidy increases corn growers' producer surplus more than an a dollar spent on an ethanol subsidy under many plausible values of the relevant parameters. But there are equally plausible parameter values under which the ethanol subsidy is preferred by corn growers. The economics of this result turn mainly on the price discrimination an ethanol subsidy creates between ethanol and corn used for feed and export purposes, reducing the buyers' price of ethanol and byproducts but increasing the price of corn fed and exported. This enables producers of corn and ethanol to increase their joint producer surpluses above the total value of subsidies paid. The paper also analyzes the social cost (deadweight loss) of these subsidies, and finds the ethanol subsidy to generate deadweight losses likely to be in the billions of dollars annually.

In this paper the impact of distortions on U.S. imports of ethanol from Brazil are calculated. This is achieved by using two-stage least squares to estimate a partial equilibrium trade model based on annual data from 1975 to 2006. From this the derived export supply and import demand elasticities are used to derive "back-of-the-envelope" measures of the static and cumulative deadweight losses, assuming the distortions are not eliminated. The results presented support the hypothesis that the U.S. and Brazil would reap gains from trade if distortions in the U.S. ethanol market were eliminated.

This paper examines the impact of ethanol expansion in the United States, brought about by higher crude oil prices, on agricultural commodity prices. Given the United States's stature as a major producer and exporter of many agricultural commodities, the resulting increase in commodity prices has spillover effects into the global market. Using the price changes estimated within a multi-commodity, multi-country agricultural modeling system, this paper attempts to show how an increase in world commodity prices would affect the costs of food baskets around the world and how higher food costs will impact food security, particularly in developing countries. In general, we find that countries where corn is the major food grain experience larger increases in food basket cost while countries where rice is the major food grain have smaller food basket cost increases. Countries where wheat and/or sorghum are the major food grains fall in between. Consequently, the highest percentage increases are seen in Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America where food basket costs are estimated to increase by at least 10%. The lowest percentage increases are seen in Southeast Asia, with cost increases of less than 2.5%.

The EU has set ambitious targets to raise the share of renewable energies, particularly biofuels. With an increasingly controversial public debate and more scientific evidence about the downsites of biofuels, recently the European Unions biofuel targets have been bound to the condition that they have to be produced sustainable. Therefore the European Commission is currently developing sustainability criteria for biofuels.Establishing certification schemes is a possible strategy to ensure that bioenergy crops are produced in a sustainable manner. However, many questions with regard to the design and implementation of sustainability criteria and certification schemes remain unsolved.This article discusses the role that bioenergy plays in the European policy context and the approach the EU is currently following in order to ensure the sustainability of biofuels. It addresses the limits of the chosen approach, concluding that certification schemes can not serve as the only safeguard for sustainable bioenergy, but need to be complemented by other tools and policies.

The governments of Asian countries are promoting biofuels programs to deal with energy security and environmental problems, and to increase farm income. However, securing raw materials for biofuels is a crucial problem, because these raw materials comprise various agricultural products which are used as food sources in Asian countries. Increasing biofuel consumption is exacerbating this problem. To address it, the governments of Asian countries are working on biofuel programs which will not compete with food security. Most of the Asian countries are food-importing countries. Increasing food prices, due to competition, could lead to social unrest. It is expected that the introduction and development of second-generation biofuels can mitigate the competition between food and energy. As various countries develop second-generation biofuels, international cooperation is needed to maximize such development in Asia and other regions. Establishing international cooperation to develop second-generation biofuels is urgently needed in Asian countries.

In this paper we investigate the potential production and implications of a global biofuels industry. We develop alternative approaches to consistently introduce land as an economic factor input and in physical terms into a computable general equilibrium framework. The approach allows us to parameterize biomass production consistent with agro-engineering information on yields and a "second generation" cellulosic biomass conversion technology. We explicitly model land conversion from natural areas to agricultural use in two different ways: in one approach we introduced a land supply elasticity based on observed land supply responses and in the other approach we considered only the direct cost of conversion. We estimate biofuels production at the end of the century could reach 221 to 267 EJ in a reference scenario and 319 to 368 EJ under a global effort to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. The version with the land supply elasticity allowed much less conversion of land from natural areas, forcing intensification of production, especially on pasture and grazing land, whereas the pure conversion cost model led to significant deforestation. These different approaches emphasize the importance of somehow reflecting the non-market value of land more fully in the conversion decision. The observed land conversion response we estimate may be a short turn response that does not fully reflect the effect of long run pressure to convert land if rent differentials are sustained over 100 years.

Research indicates that large biorefineries capable of handling 5000-10000MT of biomass per day are necessary to achieve process economies. However, such large biorefineries also entail increased costs of biomass transportation and storage, high transaction costs of contracting with a large number of farmers for biomass supply, potential market power issues, and local environmental impacts. We propose a network of regional biomass preprocessing centers (RBPC) that form an extended biomass supply chain feeding into a biorefinery, as a way to address these issues. The RBPC, in its mature form, is conceptualized as a flexible processing facility capable of pre-treating and converting biomass into appropriate feedstocks for a variety of final products such as fuels, chemicals, electricity, and animal feeds. We evaluate the technical and financial feasibility of a simple RBPC that uses ammonia fiber expansion pretreatment process and produces animal feed along with biorefinery feedstock.

When the automobile was developed near the beginning of the last century, it was the relatively new fuel gasoline, not the familiar ethanol that became the fuel of choice. We examine the intersections of the early development of the automobile and the petroleum industry and consider the state of the agriculture sector during the same period. Through this process, we find a series of influences, such as relative prices and alternative markets, that help to explain how in the early years of automobile development, gasoline won out over the equally likely technical alternative ethanol. We also examine the industrial relations in the automobile industry that seem to have influenced the later adoption of leaded gasoline, rather than ethanol, as a solution to the problem of engine knock.