IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v144y2017i2d10.1007_s10584-017-2032-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Commentary on “carbon balance effects of US biofuel production and use,” by DeCicco et al. (2016)

Author

Listed:
  • Robert D. De Kleine

    (Ford Motor Company)

  • Timothy J. Wallington

    (Ford Motor Company)

  • James E. Anderson

    (Ford Motor Company)

  • Hyung Chul Kim

    (Ford Motor Company)

Abstract

In their recent publication “Carbon balance effects of U.S. biofuel production and use,” DeCicco et al. present an empirical assessment of net CO2 emission effects over the period 2005–2013 after the US renewable fuel standard (RFS) came into existence and conclude that biofuels have resulted in a net increase in CO2 emissions over the period. The analysis presented by DeCicco et al. relies on three key assertions. First, that if biofuel carbon combustion emissions are not completely offset by additional net ecosystem production (NEP), then the biofuel should not receive full biogenic carbon credit. Second, that changes in agricultural NEP related to biofuel production can be accurately estimated from national-level agricultural production statistics. Third, that agricultural NEP is a pertinent measure of biofuel global warming impacts. We show that following the conventional definition of NEP the combustion of biofuel by definition leads to an exactly equal increase in NEP; therefore, the first assertion is not meaningful. Regarding the second assertion, we show that estimation of biofuel-related NEP changes from agricultural production statistics is not a robust methodology. Finally, we argue that agricultural NEP is an important parameter for estimating land-use change effects, but in isolation is an irrelevant GHG metric for current biofuels. We find that the conclusions above from DeCicco et al. are unfounded and do not invalidate the application of biogenic carbon offsets in life cycle assessments of biofuels currently used in national and international regulations.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert D. De Kleine & Timothy J. Wallington & James E. Anderson & Hyung Chul Kim, 2017. "Commentary on “carbon balance effects of US biofuel production and use,” by DeCicco et al. (2016)," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 111-119, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:144:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s10584-017-2032-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-017-2032-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-017-2032-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-017-2032-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Westcott, Paul C. & Jewison, Michael, 2013. "Weather Effects on Expected Corn and Soybean Yields," Agricultural Outlook Forum 2013 146846, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Outlook Forum.
    2. John DeCicco, 2013. "Biofuel’s carbon balance: doubts, certainties and implications," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 121(4), pages 801-814, December.
    3. John M. DeCicco & Danielle Yuqiao Liu & Joonghyeok Heo & Rashmi Krishnan & Angelika Kurthen & Louise Wang, 2016. "Carbon balance effects of U.S. biofuel production and use," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 667-680, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. John M. DeCicco, 2018. "Methodological Issues Regarding Biofuels and Carbon Uptake," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-15, May.
    2. John M. DeCicco, 2017. "Author’s response to commentary on “Carbon balance effects of U.S. biofuel production and use”," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 123-129, September.
    3. Anita Konieczna & Kamila Mazur & Adam Koniuszy & Andrzej Gawlik & Igor Sikorski, 2022. "Thermal Energy and Exhaust Emissions of a Gasifier Stove Feeding Pine and Hemp Pellets," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-17, December.
    4. Eric J Belasco & Joseph Cooper & Vincent H Smith, 2020. "The Development of a Weather‐based Crop Disaster Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(1), pages 240-258, January.
    5. T. Nelson Thompson, 2023. "The market for biofuels: sustainable prospects for international shipping and the advances of the Port of Rotterdam," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 25(1), pages 196-209, March.
    6. Hoekman, S. Kent & Broch, Amber, 2018. "Environmental implications of higher ethanol production and use in the U.S.: A literature review. Part II – Biodiversity, land use change, GHG emissions, and sustainability," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 3159-3177.
    7. Sandy Dall'Erba & Zhangliang Chen & Noé J. Nava, 2021. "U.S. Interstate Trade Will Mitigate the Negative Impact of Climate Change on Crop Profit," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(5), pages 1720-1741, October.
    8. Cao, An N.Q. & Gebrekidan, Bisrat Haile & Heckelei, Thomas & Robe, Michel A., 2022. "County-level USDA Crop Progress and Condition data, machine learning, and commodity market surprises," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322281, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Chamkalani, A. & Zendehboudi, S. & Rezaei, N. & Hawboldt, K., 2020. "A critical review on life cycle analysis of algae biodiesel: current challenges and future prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    10. Roger Cooke & Alexander Golub, 2020. "Market-based methods for monetizing uncertainty reduction," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 3-13, March.
    11. John M. DeCicco, 2015. "The liquid carbon challenge: evolving views on transportation fuels and climate," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 98-114, January.
    12. Fulton, Lew & Morrison, Geoff & Parker, Nathan & Witcover, Julie & Sperling, Dan, 2014. "Three Routes Forward For Biofuels: Incremental, Transitional, and Leapfrog," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt3pp0g4fb, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    13. Dias, Goretty M. & Ayer, Nathan W. & Kariyapperuma, Kumudinie & Thevathasan, Naresh & Gordon, Andrew & Sidders, Derek & Johannesson, Gudmundur H., 2017. "Life cycle assessment of thermal energy production from short-rotation willow biomass in Southern Ontario, Canada," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 343-352.
    14. Irwin, Scott & Hubbs, Todd, 2020. "The Accuracy of Early Season Crop Weather Model Forecasts of the U.S. Average Corn Yield," farmdoc daily, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, vol. 10(131), July.
    15. Irwin, Scott & Good, Darrel, 2015. "Forming Expectations for the 2015 U.S. Average Soybean Yield: What Does History Teach Us?," farmdoc daily, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, vol. 5, March.
    16. Laura C. Bowling & Keith A. Cherkauer & Charlotte I. Lee & Janna L. Beckerman & Sylvie Brouder & Jonathan R. Buzan & Otto C. Doering & Jeffrey S. Dukes & Paul D. Ebner & Jane R. Frankenberger & Benjam, 2020. "Agricultural impacts of climate change in Indiana and potential adaptations," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(4), pages 2005-2027, December.
    17. Li, Ziran & Li, Ding & Zhang, Tengfei & Zhang, Tianyang, 2022. "Climate impact on the USDA ending stocks forecast errors," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    18. Morrison, Geoff M. & Witcover, Julie & Parker, Nathan C. & Fulton, Lew, 2016. "Three routes forward for biofuels: Incremental, leapfrog, and transitional," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 64-73.
    19. Fengxia Dong, 2022. "Cover Crops, Drought, Yield, and Risk: An Analysis of US Soybean Production," NBER Chapters, in: American Agriculture, Water Resources, and Climate Change, pages 241-267, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Sharma, Sankalp & Bairagi, Subir K., 2021. "Role of Producer Risk-preferences on Debt Undertaking: Evidence from Nebraska," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313998, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    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:spr:climat:v:144:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s10584-017-2032-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.