IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea09/49438.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Efficiency of New Ethanol Plants in the U.S. North-Central Region

Author

Listed:
  • Sesmero, Juan P.
  • Perrin, Richard K.
  • Fulginiti, Lilyan E.

Abstract

Continuation of policy support for the U.S. corn ethanol industry will depend upon the greenhouse gas (GHG) effects of the industry, and its economic viability. The environmental and economic performance of ethanol plants is determined by the productivity of new technologies and, in addition, by the efficiency with which technologies are used (technical efficiency) and output and inputs are combined (economic efficiency). This study estimates the technical and economic efficiency of seven recently‐constructed ethanol plants in the North Central region of the US during 2006-2007. It uses nonparametric data envelopment analysis (DEA) and investigates both the drivers and implications of inefficiency differentials. In terms of drivers, results are consistent with the hypothesis that economic (profit) efficiency of productive units tends to be positively correlated with their size. Regarding implications results show that, on average, the maximum feasible reduction in Greenhouse Gases (GHG) emissions that can be achieved by these ethanol plants, when comparing across plants, is very limited (7,769 milligrams). We calculate that, by eliminating inefficiency, plants can achieve a 17% increase in returns over operating costs per gallon of ethanol produced, or about 12 cents a gallon. Therefore, plants can potentially increase their returns improving their economic viability. By enhancing economic viability, public policies can profoundly affect survival of this industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Sesmero, Juan P. & Perrin, Richard K. & Fulginiti, Lilyan E., 2009. "Efficiency of New Ethanol Plants in the U.S. North-Central Region," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49438, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea09:49438
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.49438
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/49438/files/SesmeroPerrinFulginiti%20Efficiency%207-28-09.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.49438?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tim Coelli & Ludwig Lauwers & Guido Huylenbroeck, 2007. "Environmental efficiency measurement and the materials balance condition," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 3-12, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Atkinson, Scott E. & Tsionas, Mike G., 2021. "Generalized estimation of productivity with multiple bad outputs: The importance of materials balance constraints," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(3), pages 1165-1186.
    2. A. M. Aldanondo & V. L. Casasnovas, 2015. "Input aggregation bias in technical efficiency with multiple criteria analysis," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(6), pages 430-435, April.
    3. Rajesh Singh & Quinn Weninger, 2017. "Cap-and-trade under transactions costs and factor irreversibility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 64(2), pages 357-407, August.
    4. Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffe, Laure, 2016. "Modelling pollution-generating technologies in performance benchmarking: Recent developments, limits and future prospects in the nonparametric frameworkAuthor-Name: Dakpo, K. Hervé," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 347-359.
    5. Lisann Krautzberger & Heike Wetzel, 2012. "Transport and CO 2 : Productivity Growth and Carbon Dioxide Emissions in the European Commercial Transport Industry," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 53(3), pages 435-454, November.
    6. CARPENTIER, Alain & GOHIN, Alexandre & SCKOKAI, Paolo & THOMAS, Alban, 2015. "Economic modelling of agricultural production: past advances and new challenges," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 96(1), March.
    7. Dios-Palomares, Rafaela & José-Diz, David Alcaide & Jurado, Manuel & Guijarro, Angel Prieto & Martinez-Paz, J. M. & Zúniga-González, Carlos Alberto, 2015. "Aspectos medioambientales en los análisis de eficiencia," Revista Iberoamericana de Bioeconomía y Cambio Climàtico, National Autonomous University of Nicaragua, Leon, vol. 1(1), pages 1-7, July.
    8. Magambo, Isaiah & Dikgang, Johane & Gelo, Dambala & Tregenna, Fiona, 2021. "Environmental and Technical Efficiency in Large Gold Mines in Developing Countries," MPRA Paper 108068, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Ramilan, Thiagarajah & Scrimgeour, Frank & Marsh, Dan, 2011. "Analysis of environmental and economic efficiency using a farm population micro-simulation model," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 81(7), pages 1344-1352.
    10. Pham, Manh D. & Zelenyuk, Valentin, 2019. "Weak disposability in nonparametric production analysis: A new taxonomy of reference technology sets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(1), pages 186-198.
    11. J. Van Meensel & A. Kanora & L. Lauwers & J. Jourquin & L. Goossens & G. Van Huylenbroeck, 2010. "From research to farm: ex ante evaluation of strategic deworming in pig finishing," Veterinární medicína, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 55(10), pages 483-493.
    12. Huysveld, Sophie & Van Meensel, Jef & Van linden, Veerle & De Meester, Steven & Peiren, Nico & Muylle, Hilde & Dewulf, Jo & Lauwers, Ludwig, 2017. "Communicative farm-specific diagnosis of potential simultaneous savings in costs and natural resource demand of feed on dairy farms," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 34-45.
    13. Wang, Q.W. & Zhou, P. & Shen, N. & Wang, S.S., 2013. "Measuring carbon dioxide emission performance in Chinese provinces: A parametric approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 324-330.
    14. Rødseth, Kenneth Løvold, 2023. "Shadow pricing of electricity generation using stochastic and deterministic materials balance models," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 341(C).
    15. Arnaud Abad & Paola Ravelojaona, 2020. "A Generalization of Environmental Productivity Analysis," Working Papers hal-02964799, HAL.
    16. Zuniga Gonzalez, Carlos Alberto, 2012. "Total factor productivity and Bio Economy effects," MPRA Paper 49355, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 13 Nov 2012.
    17. Kao, Chiang & Hwang, Shiuh-Nan, 2023. "Separating the effect of undesirable outputs generation from the inefficiency of desirable outputs production in efficiency measurement," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 311(3), pages 1097-1102.
    18. Graham, Mary, 2009. "Developing a social perspective to farm performance analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2390-2398, June.
    19. Kenneth Rødseth & Eirik Romstad, 2014. "Environmental Regulations, Producer Responses, and Secondary Benefits: Carbon Dioxide Reductions Under the Acid Rain Program," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 59(1), pages 111-135, September.
    20. Mahlberg, Bernhard & Luptacik, Mikulas & Sahoo, Biresh K., 2011. "Examining the drivers of total factor productivity change with an illustrative example of 14 EU countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 60-69.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Production Economics; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aaea09:49438. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.