IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ias/cpaper/10-sr105.html

Exploration of Certain Aspects of CARB's Approach to Modeling Indirect Land Use from Expanded Biodiesel Production, An

Author

Listed:
  • Bruce A. Babcock
  • Miguel Carriquiry

Abstract

This report provides insight into four aspects of modeling indirect land use caused by expanded biofuels production. The report was motivated by the National Biodiesel Board's interest in better understanding how the California Air Resources Board (CARB) estimated an indirect land-use factor for soybean-based biodiesel of 66 gCO2e/MJ, which is more than three times greater than the direct emissions from the fuel. Four aspects of CARB's modeling approach were examined: (1) why CARB estimates that more U.S. forest than pasture will be converted to cropland; (2) whether CARB's predicted land-use changes are consistent with observed U.S. land-use changes in the past decade; (3) how CARB could account for double cropping; and (4) whether CARB's assumption that land brought into production has lower yields than land that was already in production. Results indicate that (1) much of the predicted U.S. forestland conversion is likely due to restrictions on cross-price elasticities imposed by use of the Constant Elasticity of Transformation supply function; (2) a stock of idled cropland could have accommodated the increase in U.S. cropland in 2007 and 2008; (3) the soybean yield elasticity with respect to price can be adjusted to account for double-cropped acres; and (4) there is no empirical support for the assumption that yields in Brazil on new land are lower than yields on old land. The analysis shows how much work needs to be done in this area if the models used to estimate indirect land use are to become widely accepted.

Suggested Citation

  • Bruce A. Babcock & Miguel Carriquiry, 2010. "Exploration of Certain Aspects of CARB's Approach to Modeling Indirect Land Use from Expanded Biodiesel Production, An," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 10-sr105, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
  • Handle: RePEc:ias:cpaper:10-sr105
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.card.iastate.edu/products/publications/pdf/10sr105.pdf
    File Function: Full Text
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.card.iastate.edu/products/publications/synopsis/?p=1122
    File Function: Online Synopsis
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lubowski, Ruben N. & Plantinga, Andrew J. & Stavins, Robert N., 2006. "Land-use change and carbon sinks: Econometric estimation of the carbon sequestration supply function," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 135-152, March.
    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. Laborde, David & Valin, Hugo, 2010. "Modelling Indirect Land Use Effects Of Biofuels:," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 188100, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    2. Gohin, Alexandre, 2013. "The land use changes of European biodiesel: sensitivity to crop yield evolutions," Working Papers 207857, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    3. David Laborde & Hugo Valin, 2012. "MODELING LAND-USE CHANGES IN A GLOBAL CGE: ASSESSING THE EU BIOFUEL MANDATES WITH THE MIRAGE-BioF MODEL," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(03), pages 1-39.
    4. Gohin, Alexandre, 2016. "Understanding the revised CARB estimates of the land use changes and greenhouse gas emissions induced by biofuels," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 402-412.
    5. Alexandre Gohin, 2013. "The land use changes of European biodiesel: sensitivity to crop yield evolutions," Working Papers SMART 13-13, INRAE UMR SMART.
    6. Carriquiry, Miguel & Elobeid, Amani & Goodrich, Ryan, 2016. "Comparing the trends and strength of determinants to deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon in consideration of biofuel policies in Brazil and the United States," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235888, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    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. Baker, J.S. & Wade, C.M. & Sohngen, B.L. & Ohrel, S. & Fawcett, A.A., 2019. "Potential complementarity between forest carbon sequestration incentives and biomass energy expansion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 391-401.
    2. Sims, Katharine R.E. & Alix-Garcia, Jennifer M., 2017. "Parks versus PES: Evaluating direct and incentive-based land conservation in Mexico," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 8-28.
    3. Monge, Juan J. & Bryant, Henry L. & Gan, Jianbang & Richardson, James W., 2016. "Land use and general equilibrium implications of a forest-based carbon sequestration policy in the United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 102-120.
    4. Erik Nelson & Virginia Matzek, 2016. "Carbon Credits Compete Poorly With Agricultural Commodities In An Optimized Model Of Land Use In Northern California," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(04), pages 1-24, November.
    5. KURKALOVA, Lyubov A. & WADE, Tara R., 2013. "Aggregated Choice Data And Logit Models: Application To Environmental Benign Practices Of Conservation Tillage By Farmers In The State Of Iowa," Applied Econometrics and International Development, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 13(2), pages 119-128.
    6. Ajanaku, B.A. & Collins, A.R., 2021. "Economic growth and deforestation in African countries: Is the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis applicable?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    7. Carpentier, Alain & Letort, Elodie, 2009. "Modeling acreage decisions within the multinomial Logit framework," Working Papers 211011, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    8. John M. Antle & Roberto O. Valdivia, 2006. "Modelling the supply of ecosystem services from agriculture: a minimum‐data approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 50(1), pages 1-15, March.
    9. Wu, Yinyin & Wang, Ping & Liu, Xin & Chen, Jiandong & Song, Malin, 2020. "Analysis of regional carbon allocation and carbon trading based on net primary productivity in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    10. Ji, Yongjie & Rabotyagov, Sergey & Kling, Catherine L., 2014. "Crop Choice and Rotational Effects: A Dynamic Model of Land Use in Iowa in Recent Years," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170366, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Ji, Yongjie & Rabotyagov, sergey & Valcu-Lisman, Adriana, 2015. "Estimating Adoption of Cover Crops Using Preferences Revealed by a Dynamic Crop Choice Model," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205799, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Gren, Ing-Marie & Carlsson, Mattias & Elofsson, Katarina & Munnich, Miriam, 2012. "Stochastic carbon sinks for combating carbon dioxide emissions in the EU," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1523-1531.
    13. Robert N. Stavins, 2008. "Addressing climate change with a comprehensive US cap-and-trade system," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 24(2), pages 298-321, Summer.
    14. Latta, Gregory & Adams, Darius M. & Alig, Ralph J. & White, Eric, 2011. "Simulated effects of mandatory versus voluntary participation in private forest carbon offset markets in the United States," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 127-141, April.
    15. Elena G. Irwin & Andrew M. Isserman & Maureen Kilkenny & Mark D. Partridge, 2010. "A Century of Research on Rural Development and Regional Issues," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(2), pages 522-553.
    16. Araujo, Rafael & Costa, Francisco J M & Sant'Anna, Marcelo, 2020. "Efficient Forestation in the Brazilian Amazon: Evidence from a Dynamic Model," SocArXiv 8yfr7, Center for Open Science.
    17. Favero, Alice & Mendelsohn, Robert & Sohngen, Brent, "undated". "Carbon Storage and Bioenergy: Using Forests for Climate Mitigation," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 232215, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    18. Kovacs, Kent F. & Haight, Robert G. & Jung, Suhyun & Locke, Dexter H. & O'Neil-Dunne, Jarlath, 2013. "The marginal cost of carbon abatement from planting street trees in New York City," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 1-10.
    19. Kerchner, Charles D. & Keeton, William S., 2015. "California's regulatory forest carbon market: Viability for northeast landowners," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 70-81.
    20. Markowski-Lindsay, Marla & Stevens, Thomas & Kittredge, David B. & Butler, Brett J. & Catanzaro, Paul & Dickinson, Brenton J., 2011. "Barriers to Massachusetts forest landowner participation in carbon markets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 180-190.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:ias:cpaper:10-sr105. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caiasus.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.