alcohol fuels pptx

For example, ethanol fuel blends are ‘currently exempt from 6 cents of the @-cent per gallon federal tax on motor fuels, ‘Congressional proposals to encourage greater use of alternative

Alcohol Fuels:

Impacts from Increased Use

of Ethanol Blended Fuels

Alcohol Fuels:

Impacts from Increased Use of Ethanol Blended Fuels

GAO hited Siates General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C 20548 Resources, Community, and Beonomie Development Division

218480 July 16, 1900

‘The Honorable Philip R Sharp Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy

‘and Power Comrnittee on Bnergy and Convneree House of Representatives

Deer Mr Chairman:

As you requested, this report presents information on the ethanol industry’ capability to

‘expand its production capacity, the effects that expanded ethanol production could have on

‘the agricultural sector and consumer food prices, and how the increased production could affect certain aspects of the federal budget The preliminary results of aur work were

‘resented in our Statement forthe Record (Ga077-3cep023) submitted for the February 1,

1980, House Coruittee on Ways and Means hearings on certain alcohol fuel tax and trade Inlddives

As arranged with your office, we plan no further distribution of thủ report until 90 days

‘rom the date ofthis the Secretary of Energy and other interested partes We will also make copies available letter At that time, we will send copies to the Secretary of Agriculture, to

‘others upon request Should you need further information, please contact me on (202) 275-

1441 Other major contributors to this report are listed in appendix I

Sincerely yours,

Victor S Rezendes Director, Energy Issues

‘leaner then gasoline, they also reduce harmful auto emissions Ethanol blends currently account for about 8 percent of the gasoline sold in the

US Since most ethanol is made from corn its production provides

‘valuable market for American farmers, Although ethanal costs more to

‘produce than gasoline, federal and state tax incentives make ethanol

‘lends competitive with gasoline For example, ethanol fuel blends are

‘currently exempt from 6 cents of the @-cent per gallon federal tax on motor fuels,

‘Congressional proposals to encourage greater use of alternative motor fuels could increase the demand for ethandl In view of such proposals, the Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy and Power, House Committee on Energy and Commerce, requested G0 to determine (1) ifthe domestic ethanol industry could expand to meet the increased demand that such legislation could create (2) the effects that expanded ethanol produc- tion could have on the agricultural sector and eansumer food prices, and (3) how the inereased production and use of ethanol could affect the federal budget

[Ethanol is widely used in the US asa gasoline additive generally in a

10 percent ethanol-20 percent gasoline blend called gasohol The US

‘ethanol industry has the capacity to produce about I billion gallons per

‘year About 95 pereent of the ethanol is made from corn—representing,

‘on average, about 4 percent of domestic corn production ina typical growing year

‘sao developed two scenarios depicting an approximate doubling and tripling of current annual ethanol production capacity (to 2.2 billion and

39 billion gallons) over an 8-year period to allow a realistic time frame {or indusery to expand GAo's growth scenarios were compared with a

‘baseline scenario that assumed normal crop production, a continuation

of current agricultural trends and policies, and ltde expansion in eth-

‘anol production 040 used the Wharton Econometric Forecasting Assoc:

‘ates (wera) model of US agriculture in estimating the effect ofthese production inereases on the agricultural sctor, federal farm program costs, and consumer food prices

Page? ‘©AO/MCED 50186 Increased Un of hao ended Pets

Results in Brief “The ethanol industry is capable of doubling or tripling domestic ethanol

‘production to 2.2 or 3 billion gallons per year during the next 8 years, and American farmers could supply the corn needed for this production increase However, industry officals caution that continued government incentives and/or a legislative requirement forthe use of alternative fuels, such as ethanol, would be needed to maintain such growth

‘cao's modeling showed that the expanded use of ethanol fuels would

‘nave mixed effects on various sectors af American agriculture, Cora,

‘producers would benefit the most because ofthe increased demand for

‘com to make ethanol and the resulting higher com prices However,

‘through a complex system of economic relationships, some other sectors

‘would not fare as well For example, soybean processors and producers,

‘would face lowered demand and prices for their products because the

‘conversion of corn into ethanol generates protein-rich feed and corn oil by-products that compete with soybean meal and soybean oll Increased

‘com prices would rase feed costs and hurt catle producers, but the lower cost of high-protein feeds could benefit poultry producers Overall,

‘et farm cash income would increase, and there would be a slight increase in consumers food prices

‘cao's modeling also showed that expanded ethanol production would

‘decrease federal farm program outlays asthe increase in demand for

‘and the price of grains, primarily corn, would cause fewer farmers to

‘participate in these support programs The estimated decrease in out- lays showed annual fluctuations depending, in general, onthe relation-

‘hip among market prices and projected federal program target prices

‘and loan rates At the same time, the increased use of ethanol fuels

‘would reduce federal motor fuel tax revenues because of ethanol’s par- tial tax exemption Motor fuel tax revenues were projected to decrease

‘with the expansion in the use of ethanol over the simulation period On average, the reductions in farm program outlays would exceed the Increased tax revenue losses over the 8-year period However, in response to the primary interests ofthe Chairman, G40's study was lim-

‘ted tothe impacts of expanded ethanol production on the agricultural

‘program outlays and motor fuel excise tax revenues on the federal

‘budget; it di not explore all the federal budget or consumer impacts

‘that might result from expanded production, such asthe income taxes

‘paid by farmers, ethanol producers, and fuel distributors

“Ethanol production capacity in 1989 was about 1 billion gallons per

‘year Ga0's high-growth scenario assumes that ethanol production

‘capacity would grow by 288 million gallons in each of the 8 expansion

‘Years, which isin line with past industry growth Hostever, because of|

‘the relatively high production costs, the ethanol industry relies heavily

‘on federal and state tax incentives to remain competitive with pro- ducers of gasoline and other fuel additives, and industry officials cau-

‘oned that assurances of continued government incentives and/or a legislative requirement for the use of alternative fuels, such as ethanol, ‘would be needed to sustain such growth

“According to Gao model simulations, corn Tarmers would significantly benefit as additional ethanol production would increase the demand for tnd price of corn By 1997, the expanded ethanol production under

‘Gx0's high-growth scenario woul increase corn demand by nearly 6 per-

‘cent and com prices by about 16 percent The availability of additional high-protein feed by-products from the conversion of cor into ethanol

‘would, however, reduce the price of soybean meals and soybean oils and lower the demand and price of soybeans Corn isthe principal feed used

in livestock operations, and the higher cor prices, caused by increased demand from added ethanol production, would increase cattle pro- {ducers fed costs and lower their profits On the other hand, the lower Drices for soybean meal and other high-protein feed could benefit poultry producers

40's modeling also showed that farmers’ overall net farm cash income

‘would increase by an average of about 1.8 pereent and that consumers

‘would fave slightly higher fond prices The overall food component of the consumer food price index would increase by an average of 0.1 per- cent—an approximate 10-cent increase on a $100 food purchase (Ga0's modeling showed that an expansion of ethanol production would reduce the federal farm program outlays by an annual average of about

‘$930 million and $1.421 bilion under its low and high-growth soens-

‘os, respectively, daring the &-year growth period On the other hand,

Reeve Soma

Recommendation

‘Agency Comments

the increased use of ethanol fuels, if coupled with an extension of the &-

‘cent per gallon tax exemption for ethanol blended fuels (past its sched-

‘led 1998 expiration date) could further reduce annual motor fuel tax revenues by an average of about $442 milion and $813 million, respec- tively, for Gao's two scenarios,

‘Summing-up only the impacts that expanded ethanol production would have on federal farm program outlays and motor fuel tax revenues,

‘Gko's projections indicate that reduetions in farm program outlays

‘would exceed the additional tax revenue lasses, on average, by about

$488 million and 8608 million per year, respectively, under the low- and high-growth scenarios However, G's model simulations showed wide variations in yearly farm program outlays that resulted in net budget impacts varying widely from year to year For example, in one year tax revere losses exceeded farm program outlay reductions by $924 mil- lion In another year, the outlay reductions exceeded the revenue losses

by $2:7 billion As agreed with the Chairman's office, aao's study was not designed to explore all the impacts that expanded ethanol produe- tion could have on the federal budge, such as changes in income tax revenues from farmers, ethanol producers, and the petroleum industry

‘Gio's study, however, indicated that the expanded use of ethanol will

‘cause higher ethanol production costs, and it may be necessary to Increase the level of government subsidies or to pass the costs on to the

‘consumers through higher motor fuel costs

‘6x0 is Rot making recoramendations inthis report

‘cao obtained and incorporated the views of Department of Agriculture and Department of Energy offcils onthe information presented in this report These officials generally agreed with cao's analysis and facts However, as requested, Go did not obtain official agency comments on a

‘draft ofthis report

apacity Impact of Expansion on Feedstock Suppliers d7

Expanded Ethanol pac onthe ivesock Secor 2

Ethanol Production On jmpacton Farm Support Program Out 2

Federal Programs Impact on Motor Fuel Tax Revenues Sarary of Bgt npc on Farm Program Outlys te Motor Pe Tay Revenues, 2 %

‘Appendixes “Appendix I: Modeling Procedure and Assumptions ‘Abend Fedral Fuse Suppor Progam ‘Appendix II Major Contributors to This Report 4 a 5

Tables ‘Table 4.1; Federal Agriculture Program Outlay 28

‘Reductions Over 8-Year Model Simulation Period Table 4.2: Foregone Motor Fuel Tax Revenues Over ” Baseline Amounts

‘Table 4.3: Budget Impacts on Farm Program Outlays and 30

‘Motor Fuel Tax Reverses

ethyl tertiary-butyl ether United States Department of Agriculture

‘Wharton Econometric Forecasting Associates

§0393758ÿ

i (080A 00156 ices io haa nde Poste

‘maroxide emissions from motor vehicles Most ethanol is made from

‘com, providing a valuable market for America’s farmers Ethanol Dlended fuels also reduce the country's dependence on ol for its trans- portation needs because less oll s needed to produce a gallon of motor fuel

Gasoline/ethanol blends currently account for about 8 percent ofall

‘motor fuel sold in the US., making ethanol one of the mast commonly used alternative fuels Although not marketed inthe U.S, straight eth-

‘anol can also be used as a motor fuel replacement for gasoline—as it's

in Brazil However, compared to gasoline, ethanol costs more to produce and poses additional distribution problems Federal and state tax and financial incentives have been a major factor in the growth and develop- ‘ment of this country’s ethanol industry These incentives enable ethanol fuel blends to compete with gasoline and other blending agents in many

US markets Recent Congressional and Administration proposals would require a greater use of alternative fuels and could increase the demand for eth-

‘anol in this country While the Congress is considering this issue, itis also considering whether to extend federal tax incentives for ethanol production and use

‘Ethanol can be made from almost any raw material containing sugar or

‘carbohydrates As of August 1989, about 95 percent of U.S ethanol was

‘made from corn, a readily available domestic feedstock that stores well

‘and can be converted to ethanol and other valuable products (including

‘sweeteners ils, and starches) Wheat, sorghum, barley, and food

‘processing wastes are among the other feedstocks used in the US to

‘make ethanol Brazil, which uses straight ethanol and gasotine-ethanol blends as motor fuel, produces most of its ethanol from sugar cane Ethanol's use as a motor vehicle fue in the US is generally in a 10 percent ethanol-90 pereent gasoline blend, commonly called gasohol The

‘se of ethanol fuels grew out of concern over our nation's increasing dependence on foreign oil andthe abundant supplies of domestic corn Replacing a portion ofa gallon of gasoline with ethanol helps reduce

‘America’s reliance on petroleum used in producing motor fuels and pro- vides additional markets for domestic corn and other grains In 1988, Pears -GA0/ECEDG8186 ness Uf Ean Ben Poe

‘commonly used oxygenate

‘The cost of ethanol and its handling properties, however, complicate its use 2s a motor fuel For example, it costs between $0.94 to $1.73 to pro- duce a gallon of ethanol with com prices at about $2.40 per bushel) according to 1889 estimates provided by Information Resources, ne

‘The ethanol feedstock used and the type and size ofthe production plant will affect the product cos By comparison, with crude oil prices ator about $20 per barrel (as they were in September 1989), gasoline Production costs range between 45 to 55 cents per gallon, secording to estimates from the American Petroleum Institute, Ethanol also requires special handling because it attracts water Motsture ina motor vehicle's

‘uel system ean lead to poor operating performance Therefore, fuel dis- ribufors must ensure that ther storage tanks and transport facilities are moisture-free when ethanol fuel blends are used, Ethanol fuels are

‘generally transported by truck or rail, rather than by the more econom- {eal ol pipelines, because of their susceptibility to contamination by pipeline moisture While measures can be taken to move ethanol fuels

‘rough ol pipelines, cis method is more costly

Ethanol ean also be used to produce Erae (ethyl tertiary-butyl ether),

‘which has recently received considerable attention asa potential high-

"ring tran zo be, Wage, DE

ser Weer kag Nw eae Pert sa Dagar

[hc rban seas tro rer cf hgh one ern he oa

‘arr nrg ether punt aetna ——— Wh een pc F11111

man GA0/ÄCTDS91861ucmseed wf bal Blended Pale

Government Support

of Ethanol

‘oxygen motor fuel additive Although not yet commercially availabe,

‘supporters contend that cree blends will outperform ethanol and «Te

‘asa gasoline additive without the distribution problems associated with

‘ethanol and ethanol blends While ETEE provides promise for reaching

‘additional fuel markets, its commercial use may also depend on the Availablity of government incentives for its production and use,

‘Federal and state incentives continue to play an important role in the

‘development and use of ethanol blended fuels Since 1978, the federal

‘government has provided research funds to encourage the development

‘of ethanol fuels, loans and loan guarantees to encourage construction of

‘ethanol production facilities, and tax credits and exemptions to make

‘ethanol blended fuels more cost competitive with unblended gasoline

‘Also, surplus federal grain was, on occasion, distributed to ethanol pro-

‘ducers In addition to the federal support, 23 states—as of August 1989—provided tax incentives on ethanol fuel blends andor direct pay-

‘ents to ethanol producers This federal and state support reduces the effective cost of producing ethanol and enables ethane! to compete with

‘gasoline and other fuels and additives

‘The principal federal incentive to promote the use of alcohol fuels isa 6-

‘cent exemption from the 8-cent per gallon federal motor fuel excise tax

‘The 8-cent tax, which i levied on each gallo of gasoline sold, helps

‘build and maintain roads and bridges inthe US Each gallon of gasoline Dlended with atleast 10 percent ethanol produced from renewable resources, uch as corn is eligible for the exemption * Using a 10 peroent

‘blend, each gallon of ethanol could be blended with nine galions of gaso- line to make 10 gallons of an ethanol blended motor fuel All 10 gallons

‘would be eligible forthe G-oent per gallon exemption, which equates to a

‘total exemption of 60 cents on each gallon of ethanal Also, an equivalent 60-cent per gallon federal blenders’ income tax

‘redit or refund is available to fuel distributors that blend ethanol with

‘gasoline for use as a motor fuel; the tax creditor refund can be taken in lieu of the excise tax exermption Because of the tax exemption and

‘eredit, ethanol can be offered to the retall market ata lower price

‘Changes in the federal fue-tax exemption and tax credit coverage could significantly affect domestic ethanol production Current and previous

1n nghe Page 10 ‘6A0/RCD40188 ncn Us of Ethan Blended Pls

‘Congresses have considered extending, amending, or eliminating eth- snol's tax exemption and blenders’ tax credit provisions —currently Scheduled to expire in September 1993 and December 1992, respec- tively in addition, in March 1990, the Treasury Department issued regu- lations extending the blenders’ tax credit to Ersz blended fuels

Several proposals introduced in the 100th Congress would have affected the use of ethanol fuels Two bills would have required that, by 1992, on, the average, at least 8 percent ofall motor fuel sold in the US (oy volume) contain ethanol—which would require ethanol production of over 5 billion gallons per year" Another bill would have required that, beginning in 1988, all gasoline sol in the U.S be blended with alcohol — half inthe 10 percent ethanol blend, and half in a8 percent methanol/

2 percent ethanol blend This would have required ethanol production

of over 6 billion gallons per year Neither of these bills was enacted Proposals to amend the Clean Air Act from the Administration and Con- gressional sponsors could also expand the use of clear-burning alterna- tive Fuels, such as ethanol The Administration's July 1989 proposal, among other things, would have required the manufacture, sale, and dis- tribution of over 9 maillion vehicles capable of using clean alternative fuels-—from model years 1985 through 2004—for use in urban areas

‘with populations of 250,000 or more, which are not n compliance with national ozone abatement mandates * The Senate and the House of Rep- resentatives passed their versions of the Clean Air Act Amendments on April 8, 1990" and May 23, 1990" , respectively, without this production requirement While the Senate and House have not reached agreement fon the clean alternative fuels section ofthe Clean Air Act Amendments, teach of the proposals contains provisions requiring the use of clean Duming automotive fuels

‘gta ‘Sex ae ar Fo eo 157, RHE 100 Gg Be BET Ta 10H Co,

8 tn, 00m Can (1857, cian i ct Annie of 192 00,11 Cong, te 185,

eu ie ct Armen 1.1698, 10s Cg, es G070)

ea A Ae Arner of 108, 0,1 Cong 2a 1909

Objectives, Scope, and

‘Methodology ‘could significantly affect the agricultural and other sectors of the ‘Because proposals to increase the use of ethanol as a fuel or fuel blend ‘economy, the Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy and Power, House

‘Committee on Energy and Commerce, requested that Gao determine

‘whether the domestic ethanol industry eould expand to meet an increased demand for ethanol that legislation could create,

‘the impacts that expanded ethanol production could have on the agricul- tural sector and consumer food prices, and

how the increased production and use would affect the federal budget

In conducting this review, we drew upon various studies on ethanol recently conducted by the Departments of Agriculture and Energy, the Congressional Research Service, the American Petroleum Institute, end

‘a special panel established by the Congress in 1987 We also met with officials from the Departments of Agriculture and Energy, the Congres- sional Research Serviee, and the American Petroleum Institute,

‘To assess the current capacity and expansion potential of America's th-

‘anol industry, we interviewed and obtained documentation from ethanol Industry officials and ethanol and motor fuel trade associations—prima- rly the Renewable Fuels Association and Information Resources, inc.—

‘who provided information onthe current makeup, eapacty, and opera- tons of the industry We discussed the potential for industry expansion with current ethanol producers, a potential producer, and other affected

‘parties—including oil companies, chemical industries, and the cam

‘ling and com processing industries

‘We then developed and modeled two growth scenarios; alow-growth

‘projection with ethanol production increasing to 2.2 billion gallons annu- ally (about double the current 1 bilion gallon per year capacity) and a higher growth projection with production inereasing to 3.3 billion gal Jons annually (about triple current capacity)

‘To capture the widest range of impacts our ethanol growth soenarios could have on American agriculture, consumer food prices, and federal

‘arm program outlays, we used a large scale econometric model of United States agriculture maintained by Wer We selected the WEA model because it could capture the interactions between major crops and livestock sectors and it could estimate the impact on key variables such

as domand and prices for crops and livestock, farm income, consumer Drives, and federal agricultural budget outlays We used three scenarios for our analyses Our starting point was WETA's baseline scenario, which Paget GA0/BCED4Đlaðieereeed of Phun e4 ướt

‘Gunier —

‘provides long-term projections for US agriculture and assumes normal

‘crop production, a continuation of current agricultural trends and pol-

‘es, and little expansion in ethanol production To the extent possible,

‘our analyses captured all major and quantifiable impacts of an expan- sion of ethanol production on agriculture sectors However, we made

‘some necessary simplifying assumptions to reduce the seale of the

‘problem to a more manageable size The major assumptions underlying

‘oar modeling procedure and the baseline scenario are discussed in appendix 1

We then compared the projections from the two growth scenarios with the baseline scenario to measure the results of changes due to incressed

‘ethanol production We chose an 8-year period for our analyses to allow

‘a realistic and reasonable time frame for ethanal Industry expansion to the deseribed production levels Our choice of 8 years was based on the

‘time frames used in analyses on this subject by others—usually 5 to 8 _years-—and discussions with government and industry officals The

‘growth in ethanol production required under our soenarios is less ambi-

‘Hous than that required under legislative proposals introduced in the previous Congress—5 billion gallons per year within 5 years (H.R 2052, 'S.1304) or 6.25 billion gallons per year within 1 year (H.R 2031) Our

‘analyses of these earlier proposals showed that they seemed to call for

‘ethanol production levels that would be beyond shat would be reason- able for the industry to accomplish in these periods of time We also assumed that legislation requiring the greater use of alternative fuels

‘would probably provide additional market opportunities for ethanol We

‘estimated that our high-groveth scenario would provide about one-third

of the alternative fuel needed to meet the requirements of the adminis- tration’s July 1989 Clean Air Act proposal (F.R.3090), Given the unoer- tainty ofthe Clean Air Act provisions that the Senate and House will

‘enact, we could not determine the potential impact of these provisions

‘on the use of ethanol fuels

that current market conditions and government incentives are not likely to stimulate sich growth, we assumed thatthe added eth- anol production would (1) increase to the levels used in our scenarios for

‘the purpose of analyzing impacts and (2) actually occur only if man- ated by legislation, regulations or other means Furthermore, We ree: ognize that efforts to stimulate any large scale expansion coud raise

‘ethanol feedstock prices (namely corn) toa point that ethanol could not compete with other fuels under current conditions However, we did nat

<etermine the level of ethanol subsidy that would be needed or the Jncrease in fuel prices that sould result under our scenarios

Pages GA0/8GED49l89 rand oe of Bhan! ended Pele

—

‘We assumed that provisions of the current (1086) farm program legisla

ton remained in place over our -year simulation period While market

‘adjustments due to ethanol expansion would continue after 1997, our estimates didnot consider changes beyond 1997 Our modeling effort

‘ulized 1988-1989 agricultural information, including result ofthe

<drought-sricken 1988 crop year We discussed and obtained agreement

‘9n our modeling approach and procedures with VEPA analysts and Department of Agriculture official faruliar with agriculuiral modeling and the importance of underlying model assumptions

{In assessing the federal budget impacts of expanded ethanol production

‘and use under our seenarios, we assured thatthe current federal tax inoentives—the fuel excise tax exemption and blenders'tax credit — were the only federal incentives n place and were extended through

41997 While the expansion of ethanol production and use could influence

‘other federal revenues andor outlays, this report does not identify or

‘evaluate those other impacts

‘This report doesnot assess the market place economics of ethanol fuel blends or compare ethano's attributes with those of gasoline or other fuel additives Furthermore, this report does not assess the impact of

‘ethanol imports on the development ofthe domestic ethanol industry or

‘the impact on air quality of ethanol fuel blends

‘Our review work was performed from May 1988 through January 1990

‘We discussed the factual information in this report with officals from

‘the Renewable Fuels Association, Information Resources in, the Amer- ican Petroleum Institute, the Department of Energy (Office of Alcohol Fuels), and the Department of Agriculture (Office of Energy, Kconomic Research Service and Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Ser- vice) These officials generally agreed with our analyses and with the information contained inthis report On the basis ofthese discussions,

‘we made clarifications in the report, where appropriate However, a5, requested, we did not obtain official ageney comments on this report

Paget ‘©A0/ACED#184 arsed Uo f Ethane! Bonded Pole

‘was 812 millon gallons Our analysis showed that itis feasibie ro

‘increase production tothe amounts used in our grovtth scenarios —2.2 (or 83 billion gallons annually The industry has the capability and expe-

‘lence to design, build, and operate ethanol plants, andthe feedstock

‘supplies needed to produce 2.3 billion gallons per year are available, However, an expansion of this scale would be @ major financial under: taking and, according to industry officials, would be contingent onthe

‘continued availability of government incentives for ethanol fuels and/or legislative requirement to use ethanol fuels

‘Gurrent ethanol production capacity is concentrated among a few large

‘Producers, The largest producer operates four ethanol plants with a

‘combined anmual eapacity of 600 milion gallons—about 60 peroent of|

US production capacity The 43 ethanol plants in operation as of December 1988 had production capabilities ranging from 0.5 to 275 mit-

‘ion gallons per year—their combined annual capacity totalled about S74 milion gals In 1988, actual production was 812 milion gallons ethanol

Faced with uncertain market conditions, some ethanol plants have is: continued operations In addition to the 48 producing plants, there were

70 ide ethanol plants—with combined production capacity of about 340 nllion gallons per year—as of December 1988, according to Informa tion Resources, Inc These included old, smal, or technically obsolete plants that have stopped operating or extended periods of time, Itis luncertain, according to industry officials, whether these ide plants,

‘would reopen

‘While the largest ethanol producers are located in or near large corm producing states, small ethanol producers can be found throughout the country, Large ethanol plants generally operate more efficiently than

‘smaller units because of the operating economies of seale, according to {industry officals anda recent Department of Energy (bot) study! -One industry offical said that the most efficient plants are those capable of

‘producing at least 60 milion gallons of ethanol per year Small plants,

—— rt ng

‘that will permit ethanol production at sites with access to low cost grain

‘supplies, such as locations distant from major grain market centers;

‘unconventional ethanol feedstocks, such as cheese or other industrial Processing wastes; and local ethanol by-product markets, suchas adja-

‘ent feedlots that wil buy the ethanol feed by-products

‘There are no technological reasons why damestie producers could not

‘supply the ethanol required for ether of our growth scenarios,

‘according to industry and government officials familiar with the ethanol industry These officals said that an expansion of annual ethanol pro-

‘duction to 3.3 biion gallons within 8 years was achievable, the logistics

‘of such an expansion are reasonable, and the timeframes are realistic Furthermore, some industry officals sald that with appropriate govern-

‘ment incentives —such as an extension of the ethanol fuelax exemp-

‘tion—annual ethanol production could potentially double within 4 or 5 Years and might eventually reach 5 bilio gallons per year However,

‘according toa LSnA 1988 report, large scale ethanol production growth

‘becomes self-limiting once it raises feedstock prices s0 high that ethanol

‘cannot compete with other alternative energy sources such as liquid fuet {rom coal or shale ofl” usa said that doubling or tripling current eth-

‘anol production would begin to place strong upward pressure on agricul-

‘ural feedstocks According to industry officials and information regarding past industry

‘growth that we analyzed, the ethanol industry seems to have the capa bility, the experience, and the resources to build and operate additional

‘production facilities Our low- and high-growth seenarios assume that

‘ethanol production capacity would grow by 160 milion and 288 million gallons in each of the 8 years, which isin lin with past industry

{rowth, Some ofthe added capacity would likely come from expanding

‘existing plants or adding ethano! production to other com processing plants, Which, according to industry officials, ae less costly options

‘than building new facilities,

Page 6 {640/RCEDOC 86 ined eof thane ide Pasa

SEE Protein capcom BeBapanded

an undeveloped site According to industry officials, the cost of con- structing an ethanol plant could range from 80.50 per gallon of added

‘annual capacity at an existing grain processing facility to $3.00 per gallon ata new undeveloped site Therefore, expanding current capacity

by 23 billion gallons—enough to reach our high-growth target—could

‘ost from $1.2 billion to nearly 87 billion, depending on development patterns,

‘According tothe 1989 vs report mentioned above, the ethan!

Industry would need to see a reasonable likelihood of favorable condi- tions over the next 10 to 15 years to justify significant expansion The ethanol industry has relied heavily on government incentives, and, according to industry officials, ethanol fuels are likely to require contin-

‘ung government incentives to remain competitive with the price of gas- line Industry officals told us that special incentives, such as tax credits, an extension of motor fuel tax exemptions, or Fuel taxes based

‘on vehicle tailpipe emissions, might be required to encourage industry

‘expansion A potential producer said that reliance on governurent incen- tives could ental sk for producers because there is no assurance of the

‘continuity of these incentives in the fusure Some industry officials,

‘however, indicate that i ethanol fuel use were mandated, other govern

‘mental incentives may not be necessary

“An expansion of ethanol production would place new demands on

“America’s farmers Expanding annual ethanol production to 33 billion {gallons per year—our high-growth scenario—would represent an

‘approximate one bllion-bushel inereae inthe demand for corn as eth anol feedstock* bushel of corn converts to about 2.5 gallons of eth-

‘anol Assuming that all ethanol is made from corn, the 812 milion {allons of ethanol produced in 1988 would represent about 325 million bushels of eom The production of 33 billion gallons per year would represent about 13 billion bushels of com Producing 2.2 bilion gallons

‘of ethanol per year under our low-growth seenario would represent About 880 million bushels of corn

TH ‘re donmed lomnaent spans tom come oer ars seh ens roan, fre ncupaes

Paget ¢x0/MCEDO0 5 tna Un of Pena! ended Pols

Conclusions

‘While an additional billion bushels i a significant requirement, recent

‘com production levels would indicate that America’s farmers, under the Fight market and weather conditions, could meet this demand During

‘the 1980s, normal corn harvests ranged from about 7 to 8 bilion bushels, and wera forecasts they will exceed 9 billion bushels by 1907

Jn 1988 the drought-teduoed harvest was about 4.9 bilion bushels The

‘325 million bushels of corn needed to meet 1988 ethanol production levels (812 million gallons) represents about 4 percent of a typical 1980s harvest

‘The National Corn Growers Association supports the expanded use of

‘com for ethanol production and estimates that ethanol based demand {for corn could increase to 1.2 bllon bushels by 1906, Furthermore, its unlikely that all the additional ethanol wil be made from corn

Although corn currently accounts for 95 pereent of ethanol feedstock

‘usage tis likely that some wheat, sorghum, food processing wastes, and other feedstocks will continue tobe used,

‘No technical barriers preclude an expansion of annual ethanol produc- tion to 3.3 billion gallons over the next 8 years The ethanol industry has shown that expansion of production capacity is possible While drought and other weather conditions can disrupt ethanol's corn feedstock supply and price, production levels in the 1980s indicate that America’s

‘armers could meet the demand generated by the expansion in ethanol

‘preduetion under our scenarios However, the ethanol industry con- {inaes to be heavily reliant on federal incentives to remain competitive

‘with gasoline and other fuel additives The construction of additional ethanol faciities will likely be based on economic and other factors, including continued federal incentives, that go beyond the technological capability to expand Implementing an ethanoluse mandate would

‘result in domestic capacity expansion only if producers find that pro-

‘duction incentives outweigh the risks of investing in a product that cur- rently depends on long-term government support

Chapter 3

Agricultural Impact of Expanded

Ethanol Production

Impact on the Corn’

and Other Feed-Grain

Sectors

"The expansion of domestic ethanol production would have a marked impact on American agriculture Based on model simulations, the corn sector—which is ethanol’ primary feedstock supplier—would be the sector most affected by expanding ethanol production Corn farmers

‘would benefit as the demand for and price of corn would inerease How- ever, through a complex system of economic relationships, other sectors

of American agriculture would also be affected—some positively and some negatively:

+ Soybean producers would be adversely affected by the lower demand {or and price of soybeans because soybean meal and soybean oll would {ace inereased competition from the feed by-products of ethanol produc: tion in the high-protein animal feed and vegetable oll markets

Cattle producers would face increased corn-feed costs and lower profits, causing them to reduce thelr herds

Poultry producers could benefit from the additional supply and lower price of high-protein feeds

‘Overall net farm cash income would increase as inereased cash income from crops would offset decreased cash income from livestock and Iigher cash expenses

Consumers would face slightly higher food prices because ofthese agri- ceultural impacts

‘Corn is the primary ethanol feedstock and the crop most affected by expanding ethanol production Expanding the production of ethan]

‘would increase both the demand for and price of com The size ofthe Increase depends on the amount of ethanol produced, the amount of acreage farmers would shift into corn production, and the sensitivity of| livestock and export markets to changes in cor prices

‘The initial demand for com to make ethanol would increase (over the projected baseline) under our high-growth scenario by about 970 milion bushels per year at the end of our &-year simulation period.’ However, this increase would be partially offset as higher corn prices trigger a reduction inthe corn demand for livestock feed or for export With

‘these offsets, our model shows thatthe net increased demand for com,

‘would be about 540 million bushels by 1997—about a6-percent increase

‘over the projected baseline demand,

"file ats decal a fr a Hie ear a ar Sp ages ‘A0/CED 18 nema eof thao Blended Pst

En ‘Sore impact of cpnded

‘The model results showed that corn prices would increase over baseline projections by 32 cents a bushel (15 percent) and 19 cents per bushel (9 percent) —under our high-growth and low-growth scenarios—by the end of the simulation period The average annual price increase over the S.year period was 22 cents per bushel forthe high-growth and 12 cents per bushel for the low-growth scenario

{As increased prices make corn a relatively more profitable crop, farmers

‘would respond by planting corn on idle land and by switching other crop acreage (mainly soybean acreage) into com production’ Soybeans are the primary competitor for corn acreage, especially in the Corn Belt states where about 55 peroent ofthe corn is grown Our modeling esti- mates showed that by 1987, about 4.2 million acres of idle acreage or

‘other erop aereage would be placed into corn production The resulting inerased com production and supply would partially offset com price sncreases,

Higher prices would als trigger adjustments in demand for com in live: stock and export markets The higher cor prices raise livestock-feed

‘costs and reduce the amount of carn purchased for animal feed Export

‘markets for corn would also be negatively affected, as higher priees

‘would reduce the foreign demand for American-grown corn Our mod- ling estimates showed that cor exports would decline on average, by

5 peroent and 2 percent forthe high and low growth scenarios, respectively,

‘White corm isthe dominant feed grain inthe United States—accounting {or 83 percent of feed grains used in 1986 and 1987—sorgham, barley, and oats are also used in livestock feeding In our model simulation we assumed that corn would be the only feed stock used in producing eth-

‘nol Other animal-feed grains would be substituted for corn that would

be redirected toward ethanol production, With concurrent changes in

‘demand and supply, the overall price of other feed grains increased by about 2 cents per bushel The net impact of increased ethanol produc- tion on the demand for and price of other feed grains would likely be ifferent if these grains were also used as ethanol feedstock

gal apr pts nd ror dalle ames are AE naar

gets (€xo Rc 60156 areas Us hal end Fle