IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea11/103784.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Which biofuel market does the ethanol tariff protect? Implications for social welfare and GHG emissions

Author

Listed:
  • Crago, Christine Lasco
  • Khanna, Madhu

Abstract

The ethanol tariff is one of the instruments used by the government to encourage domestic ethanol production. Existing literature analyzing the market and welfare effects of the US ethanol tariff has concluded that removing the tariff would increase social surplus and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, due to the replacement of corn ethanol with lower cost and lower GHG intensive sugarcane ethanol. This paper re-examines these findings in the presence of a domestic cellulosic ethanol industry. The current RFS mandate requires 21 billion gallons of advanced biofuel, a portion of which could be met by any non-starch based biofuel that reduces emissions by at least 50% compared to an energy equivalent amount of gasoline. Sugarcane ethanol has been classified as an advanced biofuel, and competes for market share with domestic advanced biofuels such as cellulosic ethanol. In addition, it also competes with corn ethanol for market share in the non-advanced biofuel market. The dual market for sugarcane ethanol raises the question of which domestic biofuel market the tariff protects. Our results show that the effect of removing the tariff on social welfare and GHG emissions is ambiguous and depends on which biofuel market the tariff is protecting. If the tariff protects the corn ethanol market, its removal increases welfare and GHG emissions. However, if the tariff protects the cellulosic ethanol market, removing the tariff could increase emissions. Whether the tariff protects either the corn ethanol or cellulosic ethanol market, or both depends on the relative costs and supply elasticities of the three types of biofuel. In general, the removal of the tariff leads to an increase in social surplus, although in some cases, such as when the excess supply elasticity of sugarcane ethanol is not very elastic, net welfare could decrease when the tariff is removed. Removal of the tariff also reduces the share of domestically produced fuel, and this effect is greater when the tariff is protecting both the cellulosic and corn ethanol markets, i.e. the removal of the tariff causes a reduction in the production of both biofuels.

Suggested Citation

  • Crago, Christine Lasco & Khanna, Madhu, 2011. "Which biofuel market does the ethanol tariff protect? Implications for social welfare and GHG emissions," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103784, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea11:103784
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.103784
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/103784/files/Crago_SelectedPaper_AAEA2011.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.103784?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harry de Gorter & David R. Just, 2010. "The Social Costs and Benefits of Biofuels: The Intersection of Environmental, Energy and Agricultural Policy," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 32(1), pages 4-32.
    2. de Gorter Harry & Just David R, 2008. "The Economics of the U.S. Ethanol Import Tariff with a Blend Mandate and Tax Credit," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-23, December.
    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. Walls, W.D. & Rusco, Frank & Kendix, Michael, 2011. "Biofuels policy and the US market for motor fuels: Empirical analysis of ethanol splashing," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 3999-4006, July.
    2. Schmit, T.M. & J., Luo & Conrad, J.M., 2011. "Estimating the influence of U.S. ethanol policy on plant investment decisions: A real options analysis with two stochastic variables," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1194-1205.
    3. Sunil P. Dhoubhadel & Azzeddine M. Azzam & Matthew C. Stockton, 2017. "Does the USA have market power in importing ethanol from Brazil?," International Journal of Trade and Global Markets, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 10(2/3), pages 251-266.
    4. Bureau, Jean-Christophe & Treguer, David & Valin, Hugo, 2010. "Biofuel Programs And Farm Support: New Tools For Old Policies?," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 188081, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    5. Scott H. Irwin & Dwight R. Sanders, 2011. "Index Funds, Financialization, and Commodity Futures Markets," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 33(1), pages 1-31.
    6. Mercatante, Juan Ignacio, 2024. "What are the costs of rigidity? A general equilibrium study of the fuel market in Argentina," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    7. Mayeres, Inge & Proost, Stef & Delhaye, Eef & Novelli, Philippe & Conijn, Sjaak & Gómez-Jiménez, Inmaculada & Rivas-Brousse, Daniel, 2023. "Climate ambitions for European aviation: Where can sustainable aviation fuels bring us?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    8. Bowser, William & Khanna, Madhu & Onal, Hayri, 2010. "Spatial Equilibrium in the Bio-Fuel Economy: A Multi-Market Analysis of Trade Distortions in the U.S. and Brazilian Ethanol Sector," 2010 Annual Meeting, July 25-27, 2010, Denver, Colorado 61636, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Zhang, Dengjun & Asche, Frank & Oglend, Atle, 2014. "Ethanol and trade: An analysis of price transmission in the US market," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1-8.
    10. Ujjayant Chakravorty & Marie‐Hélène Hubert & Michel Moreaux & Linda Nøstbakken, 2017. "Long‐Run Impact of Biofuels on Food Prices," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 119(3), pages 733-767, July.
    11. Landry, Joel R. & Bento, Antonio M., 2020. "On the trade-offs of regulating multiple unpriced externalities with a single instrument: Evidence from biofuel policies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    12. Rosa, Franco & Vasciaveo, Michela & Weaver, Robert D., 2014. "Agricultural and oil commodities: price transmission and market integration between US and Italy," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 3(2), pages 1-25, August.
    13. Subhayu Bandyopadhyay & Sumon Bhaumik & Howard J. Wall, 2013. "Biofuel Subsidies and International Trade," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 181-199, July.
    14. Stephen P. Holland & Jonathan E. Hughes & Christopher R. Knittel & Nathan C. Parker, 2013. "Unintended Consequences of Transportation Carbon Policies: Land-Use, Emissions, and Innovation," NBER Working Papers 19636, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Mugera, Harriet & Gilbert, Christopher, 2015. "Structural Change in the Relationship Between Energy and Food Prices," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212505, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Eggert, Håkan & Greaker, Mads & Potter, Emily, 2011. "Policies for Second Generation Biofuels: Current status and future challenges," Working Papers in Economics 501, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    17. Debnath, Deepayan & Whistance, Jarrett & Thompson, Wyatt & Binfield, Julian, 2017. "Complement or substitute: Ethanol’s uncertain relationship with gasoline under alternative petroleum price and policy scenarios," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 385-397.
    18. Hoel, Michael, 2020. "The rise and fall of bioenergy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    19. Quentin Grafton, R. & Kompas, Tom & Van Long, Ngo, 2012. "Substitution between biofuels and fossil fuels: Is there a green paradox?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 328-341.
    20. Mads Greaker & Michael Hoel & Knut Einar Rosendahl, 2014. "Does a Renewable Fuel Standard for Biofuels Reduce Climate Costs?," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(3), pages 337-363.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy; Resource/Energy Economics and Policy;

    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:ags:aaea11:103784. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.