IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/midasp/98277.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Biomass Supply from Alternative Cellulosic Crops and Crop Residues: A Preliminary Spatial Bioeconomic Modeling Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Egbendewe-Mondzozo, Aklesso
  • Swinton, Scott M.
  • Izaurralde, R. Cesar
  • Manowitz, David H.
  • Zhang, Xuesong

Abstract

This paper introduces a spatial bioeconomic model for study of potential cellulosic biomass supply at regional scale. By modeling the profitability of alternative crop production practices, it captures the opportunity cost of replacing current crops by cellulosic biomass crops. The model draws upon biophysical crop input-output coefficients, price and cost data, and spatial transportation costs in the context of profit maximization theory. Yields are simulated using temperature, precipitation and soil quality data with various commercial crops and potential new cellulosic biomass crops. Three types of alternative crop management scenarios are simulated by varying crop rotation, fertilization and tillage. The cost of transporting biomass to a specific demand location is obtained using road distances and bulk shipping costs from geographic information systems. The spatial mathematical programming model predicts the supply of biomass and implied environmental consequences for a landscape managed by representative, profit maximizing farmers. The model was applied and validated for simulation of cellulosic biomass supply in a 9-county region of southern Michigan. Results for 74 cropping systems simulated across 39 sub-watersheds show that crop residues are the first types of biomass to be supplied. Corn stover and wheat straw supply start at $21/Mg and $27/Mg delivered prices. Perennial bioenergy crops become profitable to produce when the delivered biomass price reaches $46/Mg for switchgrass, $118/Mg for grass mixes and $154/Mg for Miscanthus giganteus. The predicted effect of the USDA Biomass Conversion Assistance Program is to sharply reduce the minimum biomass price at which miscanthus would become profitable to supply. Compared to conventional crop production practices in the area, the EPIC-simulated environmental outcomes with crop residue removal include increased greenhouse gas emissions and reduced water quality through increased nutrient loss. By contrast, perennial cellulosic biomass crops reduced greenhouse gas emissions and improved water quality compared to current commercial cropping systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Egbendewe-Mondzozo, Aklesso & Swinton, Scott M. & Izaurralde, R. Cesar & Manowitz, David H. & Zhang, Xuesong, 2010. "Biomass Supply from Alternative Cellulosic Crops and Crop Residues: A Preliminary Spatial Bioeconomic Modeling Approach," Staff Papers 98277, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:midasp:98277
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/98277
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Torre Ugarte, Daniel de la & Walsh, Marie E. & Shapouri, Hosein & Slinsky, Stephen P., 2003. "The Economic Impacts of Bioenergy Crop Production on U.S. Crop Production," Agricultural Economics Reports 33997, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    2. Paul Gallagher & Mark Dikeman & John Fritz & Eric Wailes & Wayne Gauthier & Hosein Shapouri, 2003. "Supply and Social Cost Estimates for Biomass from Crop Residues in the United States," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 24(4), pages 335-358, April.
    3. Wallace E. Tyner & Farzad Taheripour, 2007. "Renewable Energy Policy Alternatives for the Future," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1303-1310.
    4. Argyris Kanellopoulos & Paul Berentsen & Thomas Heckelei & Martin van Ittersum & Alfons Oude Lansink, 2010. "Assessing the Forecasting Performance of a Generic Bio-Economic Farm Model Calibrated With Two Different PMP Variants," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 274-294.
    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. Moon, Jin-Young & Apland, Jeffrey & Folle, Solomon & Mulla, David J., 2012. "Environmental Impacts of Cellulosic Feedstock Production: A Case Study of a Cornbelt Aquifer," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 125016, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    biomass production; bioenergy supply; biofuel policy; bioenergy; cellulosic ethanol; agro-ecosystem economics; ecosystem services economics; agro-environmental trade-off analysis; mathematical programming; EPIC; Agricultural and Food Policy; Crop Production/Industries; Environmental Economics and Policy; Land Economics/Use; Production Economics; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy; Q16; Q15; Q57; Q18;

    JEL classification:

    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services
    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food 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:midasp:98277. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/damsuus.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.