Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Supply and Social Cost Estimates for Biomass from Crop Residues in the United States

  • Published:
Environmental and Resource Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The components of social costsincluded in the supply analysis are cashoutlays and opportunity costs associated withharvest and alternative residue uses, potentialenvironmental damage that is avoided byexcluding unsuitable land, and costs in movingresidues from farms to processing plants. Regional estimates account for the growingconditions and crops of the main agriculturalareas of the United States. Estimates includethe main U.S. field crops with potential forresidue harvest: corn, wheat, sorghum, oats,barley, rice and cane sugar. The potentialcontribution of residues to U.S. energy needsis discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aldrich, S. R., W. O. Scott and E. R. Leng (1978), Modern Crop Production. Champaign, IL: A&L Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bath, D., J. Dunbar, J. King, S. Berry and S. Olbrich (1998), ‘Byproducts and Unusual Feedstuffs’, Feedstuffs 70, 32-38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bressler, R. and R. King (1970), Markets, Prices and Interregional Trade. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • California Energy Commission (1999), Evaluation of Biomass-to-Ethanol Fuel Potential in California: A Report to the Governor and California Environmental Protection Agency (P500-99-022). State of California.

  • Committee on Beef Cattle Nutrition (1996), Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle. National Academy Press.

  • Committee on Biobased Industrial Products (2000), Biobased Industrial Products: Priorities for Research and Commercialization. Washington, D.C.: National Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross, T. and G. Perry (1995), ‘Depreciation Patterns for Agricultural Machinery’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 77, 194-204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, M. and D. Judd (1994), Estimated Costs of Crop Production in Iowa 1994, FM1712. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Extension.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gale, W. J. and C. A. Cambardella (2000), ‘Carbon Dynamics of Surface Residue-and Root-Derived Organic Matter Under Simulated No-Till’, Soil Science Society of America Journal 64, 190-195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, P. and D. Johnson (1999), ‘Some New Ethanol Technology: Cost Competition and Adoption Effects in the Petroleum Market’, The Energy Journal 89, 89-120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, R. et al. (1995), PLANETOR Users Manual. University of Minnesota, St. Paul: Center for Farm Financial Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, W. A. (1975), Estimating Wind Erosion in the Field, Proceedings of the Soil Conservation Society of America. San Antonio, Texas.

  • Hoag, D. L. and H. A. Holloway (1991), ‘Farm Production Decisions under Cross and Conservation Compliance’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 73, 184-193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hotelling, H. (1929), ‘Stability in Competition’, Economic Journal 39, 41-57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jurgens, M. H. (1993), Animal Feeding and Nutrition. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khush, G. (1993), ‘Breaking the Yield Frontier in Rice’, Geojouranal, 331-333.

  • Klingebiel, A. A. and P. H. Montgomery (1961), Land-Capability Classification. Soil Conservation Service, Agriculture Handbook No. 210. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, J. B. (1997), ‘Firing Straw for the Production of Electricity with and without Producing District Heating’, in R. P. Overend and E. Chornel, eds., Making a Business From Biomass. Proceedings of a Conference in Montreal. Pergammon Press.

  • Lazarus, W. (1997), Minnesota Farm Machinery Economic Cost Estimates for 1997. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota Extension Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipinski, E. S., T. A. McClure, J. L. Otis, D. A. Scantland and W. J. Sheppard (1977), Systems Study of Fuels from Sugarcane, Sweet Sorghum, Sugar Beets and Corn, Vol IV. Corn Agriculture. Report No. BMI-1957a(4). Columbus, OH: Battelle Columbus Laboratories.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, Y. (1996), Costs of Producing Biomass Crops in Iowa. Ph.D. Dissertation. Ames: Iowa State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paturau, J. M. (1982), By-Products of the Cane Sugar Industry. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, G., B. McCarl, M. Rister and J. Richardson (1989), ‘Modeling Government Program Participation Decisions at the Farm Level,’ American Journal of Agricultural Economics 71, 1011-1020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plaster, E. J. (1992), Soil Science & Management. Albany: Delmar Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reicosky, D. C., S. D. Evans, C. A. Cambardella, R. R. Allmaras, A. R. Wilts and D. R. Huggins (2001), ‘Continuous Corn with Moldboard Tillage: Silage and Fertility Effects on Soil Carbon’, Journal of the Soil and Tillage Research (in review).

  • Renard, K. G., G. R. Forster, D. K. McCool, G. A. Wessies and D. C. Yoder (1993), RUSLE User's Guide. Ankeny, IA: Soil and Water Conservation Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, J. R., M. Brasche and A. M. Cowen (1993), ‘Effects of Grazing Allowance and System on the Use of Corn Crop Residues by Gestating Beef Cows’, Journal of Animal Science 71, 1256-1265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shimojo, T. (1979), Economic Analysis of Shipping Freights. Kobe, Japan: Research Institute for Economics and Business Administration, Kobe University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skidmore, E. L. and N. P. Woodruff (1968), Wind Erosion Forces in the United States and Their Use in Predicting Soil Loss. Agriculture Handbook No. 346. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soil Conservation Service, Kansas (1982), Technical Guide Notice KS-93. Dodge City, KS: U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soil Conservation Service, Iowa (1987), ‘The Wind Erosion Equation’, Technical Guide Section I-C-2. Des Moines, IA: U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soil Conservation Service (1991), Conservation Catalog for the 1990's. Des Moines, IA: U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soil Survey Staff (1996), National Soil Survey Handbook. U.S. Dept. of Agr.-Natural Resources Conservation Service Title 430-VI. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spelman, C. A. (1994), Nonfood Uses of Agricultural Raw Materials: Economics, Biotechnology and Politics. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stohbehn, D. and G. E. Ayres (1976), Pricing Machine-Harvested Corn Residue. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Extension Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Dept. of Energy (1993), Assessment of Costs and Benefits of Flexible and Alternative Fuel Use in the U.S. Transportation Sector: Technical Report No.11: Evaluation of a Potential Wood-to-Ethanol Process. Washington D.C.: Office of Domestic and International Energy Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wailes, E. (1999), Farmer Survey of On-Farm Reservoir Investment Study. Fayetteville, AR: Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Arkansas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wischmeier, W. H. and D. D. Smith (1978), Predicting Rainfall Erosion Losses-A Guide to Conservation Planning. Agriculture Handbook No. 537. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, M. (1999), ‘Duck Gumbo’, Ducks Unlimited 63, 54-58.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Economics Department, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, 50011-1070, U.S.A.

    Paul W. Gallagher

  2. Animal Science Department, Iowa State University, USA

    Mark Dikeman

  3. Agronomy Department Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas, U.S.A

    John Fritz

  4. Agricultural Economics Department, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas, U.S.A

    Eric Wailes

  5. Agricultural Economics Department, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, U.S.A

    Wayne Gauthier

  6. Office of Energy Policy, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., U.S.A

    Hosein Shapouri

Authors
  1. Paul W. Gallagher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark Dikeman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John Fritz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Eric Wailes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wayne Gauthier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hosein Shapouri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gallagher, P.W., Dikeman, M., Fritz, J. et al. Supply and Social Cost Estimates for Biomass from Crop Residues in the United States. Environ Resource Econ 24, 335–358 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023630823210

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023630823210

Search

Navigation