IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Impact of Biofuel Mandates and Switchgrass Production on Hay Markets


  • Acheampong, Kwame
  • Dicks, Michael R.
  • Adam, Brian D.


The Renewable Fuel Standard mandate in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 requires 16 billion gallons out of 36 billion gallons of ethanol be produced from cellulosic feedstocks in 2022, but the mandate was apparently enacted without critical assessments of the agricultural impacts of attempting to achieve energy independence. The feedstock production will likely compete with lands currently used for producing other traditional crops of which hay is likely to be affected the most since it has comparatively lower net returns. Thus ruminant production will consequently be affected greatly. This study uses ordinary least squares (OLS) to estimate and predict Oklahoma hay price which is used as objective value in linear programming (LP) model that determines the profitability options between hay and switchgrass production. The OLS results show that Oklahoma hay price is fairly stable, and hay is shipped across adjoining states. The LP results show that switchgrass production would be more profitable than hay and that switchgrass for biofuel production likely will bid land away from hay if biofuel production becomes fully operational.

Suggested Citation

  • Acheampong, Kwame & Dicks, Michael R. & Adam, Brian D., 2011. "The Impact of Biofuel Mandates and Switchgrass Production on Hay Markets," 2011 Annual Meeting, February 5-8, 2011, Corpus Christi, Texas 98797, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:saea11:98797

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Haque, Mohua & Epplin, Francis M. & Aravindhakshan, Sijesh C. & Taliaferro, Charles M., 2008. "Cost to Produce Cellulosic Biomass Feedstock: Four Perennial Grass Species Compared," 2008 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2008, Dallas, Texas 6817, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Agricultural and Food Policy; Environmental Economics and Policy; Production Economics; Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:saea11:98797. 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: .

    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.