May 07, 2010
(Biofuels Journal) Nebraska Corn Board: Indirect Land Use Theory Gets Weaker With Updates to Model
Lincoln, NE—“Indirect land use change theory” are five words that still have ethanol supporters and farmers scratching their heads.
After all, said the Nebraska Corn Board, it seems very arbitrary to assign a land use change penalty involving carbon emissions to renewable ethanol when no such penalty is assigned to oil.
Indirect land use change theory and its accompanying penalty are included in calculations by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) as part of its low carbon fuel standards and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for its Renewable Fuels Standard.
The theory comes from the notion that using corn for ethanol will require soil to be tilled in other parts of the world to plant more corn.
“We have a problem with the indirect land use change theory because it is only a theory, the science is shaky and real-world evidence suggests the theory is off base,” said Kelly Brunkhorst, director of research, for the Nebraska Corn Board.
Brunkhorst explained that a recent update to one of the models used to calculate land use change cut by more than half the original land use change penalty on corn-based ethanol.
“This was one update and the penalty was cut by more than half.
"What happens as the model continues to use more current data? How will regulators keep up?
"How will they justify the use of this theory?” Brunkhorst asked.
The model Brunkhorst referred to is the Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) model developed by Purdue University.
GTAP was used by ...
