IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v41y2012icp484-493.html

Price projections of feedstocks for biofuels and biopower in the U.S

Author

Listed:
  • Langholtz, Matthew
  • Graham, Robin
  • Eaton, Laurence
  • Perlack, Robert
  • Hellwinkel, Chad
  • De La Torre Ugarte, Daniel G.

Abstract

The economic availability of biomass resources is a critical component in evaluating the commercial viability of biofuels. To evaluate projected farmgate prices and grower payments needed to procure 295 million dry Mg (325 million dry tons) of biomass in the U.S. by 2022, this research employs POLYSYS, an economic model of the U.S. agriculture sector. A price-run simulation suggests that a farmgate price of $58.42Mg−1 ($53.00dryton−1) is needed to procure this supply, while a demand-run simulation suggests that prices of $34.56 and $71.61Mg−1 ($30.00 and $62.00dryton−1) in are needed in 2012 and 2022, respectively, to procure the same supply, under baseline yield assumptions. Grower payments are reported as farmgate price minus resource-specific harvest costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Langholtz, Matthew & Graham, Robin & Eaton, Laurence & Perlack, Robert & Hellwinkel, Chad & De La Torre Ugarte, Daniel G., 2012. "Price projections of feedstocks for biofuels and biopower in the U.S," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 484-493.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:41:y:2012:i:c:p:484-493
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.11.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030142151100886X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.11.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Torre Ugarte, Daniel de la & Sanford, Scott & Skinner, Robert A. & Westcott, Paul C. & Lin, William W., 2000. "Supply Response Under The 1996 Farm Act And Implications For The U.S. Field Crops Sector," Technical Bulletins 33568, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    2. Walsh, Marie E. & Torre Ugarte, Daniel de la & English, Burton C. & Jensen, Kimberly L. & Hellwinckel, Chad M. & Menard, R. Jamey & Nelson, Richard G., 2007. "Agricultural Impacts of Biofuels Production," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 39(2), pages 1-8, August.
    3. Dicks, Michael R. & Campiche, Jody & Ugarte, Daniel De La Torre & Hellwinckel, Chad & Bryant, Henry L. & Richardson, James W., 2009. "Land Use Implications of Expanding Biofuel Demand," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(2), pages 435-453, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ladislav Kristoufek & Karel Janda & David Zilberman, 2012. "Mutual Responsiveness of Biofuels, Fuels and Food Prices," CAMA Working Papers 2012-38, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    2. Jeffers, Robert F. & Jacobson, Jacob J. & Searcy, Erin M., 2013. "Dynamic analysis of policy drivers for bioenergy commodity markets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 249-263.
    3. Ladislav Kristoufek & Karel Janda & David Zilberman, 2013. "Non-linear Price Transmission between Biofuels, Fuels and Food Commodities," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp481, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    4. Santos, Andreia & Carvalho, Ana & Barbosa-Póvoa, Ana Paula & Marques, Alexandra & Amorim, Pedro, 2019. "Assessment and optimization of sustainable forest wood supply chains – A systematic literature review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 112-135.
    5. Gorelick, David E. & Baskaran, Latha M. & Jager, Henriëtte I., 2019. "Visualizing feedstock siting in biomass production: Tradeoffs between economic and water quality objectives," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    6. Langholtz, Matthew H. & Coleman, Andre M. & Eaton, Laurence M. & Wigmosta, Mark S. & Hellwinckel, Chad M. & Brandt, Craig C., 2016. "Potential land competition between open-pond microalgae production and terrestrial dedicated feedstock supply systems in the U.S," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 201-214.
    7. Zhou, Xia “Vivian” & Clark, Christopher D. & Lambert, Dayton M. & English, Burton C. & Larson, James A. & Boyer, Christopher N., 2015. "Biomass supply and nutrient runoff abatement under alternative biofuel feedstock production subsidies," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 250-259.
    8. Dale, Virginia H. & Kline, Keith L. & Buford, Marilyn A. & Volk, Timothy A. & Tattersall Smith, C. & Stupak, Inge, 2016. "Incorporating bioenergy into sustainable landscape designs," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 1158-1171.
    9. Xu, Jie & Yuan, Zhenhong & Chang, Shiyan, 2018. "Long-term cost trajectories for biofuels in China projected to 2050," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 452-465.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Okwo, Adaora & Thomas, Valerie M., 2014. "Biomass feedstock contracts: Role of land quality and yield variability in near term feasibility," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 67-80.
    2. Kanlaya J. Barr & Bruce A. Babcock & Miguel A. Carriquiry & Andre M. Nassar & Leila Harfuch, 2011. "Agricultural Land Elasticities in the United States and Brazil," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 449-462.
    3. Jaeger, William K. & Egelkraut, Thorsten M., 2011. "Biofuel economics in a setting of multiple objectives and unintended consequences," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(9), pages 4320-4333.
    4. Elanor Starmer & Aimee Witteman & Timothy A. Wise, "undated". "Feeding the Factory Farm: Implicit Subsidies to the Broiler Chicken Industry," GDAE Working Papers 06-03, GDAE, Tufts University.
    5. Hoekman, S. Kent & Broch, Amber, 2018. "Environmental implications of higher ethanol production and use in the U.S.: A literature review. Part II – Biodiversity, land use change, GHG emissions, and sustainability," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 3159-3177.
    6. Thompson, Wyatt & Meyer, Seth D. & Westhoff, Patrick C., 2010. "Us Biofuel And Climate Policies Duel Over Cellulosic Biomass," 2010: Climate Change in World Agriculture: Mitigation, Adaptation, Trade and Food Security, June 2010, Stuttgart-Hohenheim, Germany 91404, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    7. Bai, Yun & Ouyang, Yanfeng & Pang, Jong-Shi, 2012. "Biofuel supply chain design under competitive agricultural land use and feedstock market equilibrium," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1623-1633.
    8. Murnaghan, Kitty, 2017. "A comprehensive evaluation of the EU's biofuel policy: From biofuels to agrofuels," IPE Working Papers 81/2017, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Institute for International Political Economy (IPE).
    9. Bento, Antonio M. & Klotz, Richard & Landry, Joel R., 2011. "Are there Carbon Savings from US Biofuel Policies? Accounting for Leakage in Land and Fuel Markets," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 104008, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. Johansson, Robert C. & Livingston, Michael J. & Westra, John & Guidry, Kurt, 2006. "Simulating the U.S. Impacts of Alternative Asian Soybean Rust Treatment Regimes," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 116-127, April.
    11. Thomas Hertel & Jevgenijs Steinbuks & Uris Baldos, 2013. "Competition for land in the global bioeconomy," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 44(s1), pages 129-138, November.
    12. Fabienne Femenia & Alexandre Gohin & Alain Carpentier, 2010. "The Decoupling of Farm Programs: Revisiting the Wealth Effect," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(3), pages 836-848.
    13. Liang, Yan & Miller, J. Corey & Harri, Ardian & Coble, Keith H., 2011. "Crop Supply Response under Risk: Impacts of Emerging Issues on Southeastern U.S. Agriculture," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 181-194, May.
    14. Fewell, Jason E. & Bergtold, Jason S. & Williams, Jeffery R., 2011. "Farmers’ Willingness to Grow Switchgrass as a Cellulosic Bioenergy Crop: A Stated Choice Approach," 2011 Annual Meeting, June 29-July 1, 2011, Banff, Alberta,Canada 109776, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    15. Langholtz, Matthew H. & Coleman, Andre M. & Eaton, Laurence M. & Wigmosta, Mark S. & Hellwinckel, Chad M. & Brandt, Craig C., 2016. "Potential land competition between open-pond microalgae production and terrestrial dedicated feedstock supply systems in the U.S," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 201-214.
    16. U. Martin Persson, 2015. "The impact of biofuel demand on agricultural commodity prices: a systematic review," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(5), pages 410-428, September.
    17. William Lin & Robert Dismukes, 2007. "Supply Response under Risk: Implications for Counter-Cyclical Payments' Production Impact," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(1), pages 64-86.
    18. Christian Langpap & JunJie Wu, 2011. "Potential Environmental Impacts of Increased Reliance on Corn-Based Bioenergy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(2), pages 147-171, June.
    19. Affuso, Ermanno & Hite, Diane, 2013. "A model for sustainable land use in biofuel production: An application to the state of Alabama," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 29-39.
    20. Williams, Brian R. & Pounds-Barnett, Gayle, 2023. "Producer Supply Response for Area Planted of Seven Major U.S. Crops," Economic Research Report 340567, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:41:y:2012:i:c:p:484-493. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.