Consequences of maize cultivation intended for biogas production

DOI:10.17221/209/2016-AGRICECONCitation:Zuzana Lajdova, Jan Lajda, Jaroslav Kapusta, Peter Bielik (2016): Consequences of maize cultivation intended for biogas production. Agric. Econ. – Czech, 62: 543-549.
download PDF

A standard concept of biogas plants – strong maize silage concept is due to its high economic advantage as the maize silage is one of the most effective substrate for anaerobic digestion in matter of biogas yield. Increasing demand for maize silage, reflected in a rise of its price, endangers the economic effectiveness and therefore economic sustainability of the biogas sector. This situation also creates negative externalities related to upward pressure on food prices and lower livestock production. Moreover, biogas plants focused primarily on maize silage could increase the area of arable land for growing maize for energy purposes and decline the production of crops for human nutrition. The paper focuses on examination of consequences of maize cultivation intended for biogas production in case of Slovakia. The results show the impact of biogas production via anaerobic digestion on area of land used for maize production and live bovine animal production.

References:
Belloumi Mounir (2009): Energy consumption and GDP in Tunisia: Cointegration and causality analysis. Energy Policy, 37, 2745-2753 doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2009.03.027
 
Britz Wolfgang, Delzeit Ruth (2013): The impact of German biogas production on European and global agricultural markets, land use and the environment. Energy Policy, 62, 1268-1275 doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.06.123
 
Bruns B.S., Gross Ch. (2013): What if energy time series are not independent? Implications for Energy-GDP causality analysis. FCN Working Paper No. 10/2013. Institute for Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behaviour. Available at https://www.rwth-aachen.de/global/show_document.asp?id=aaaaaaaaaagvwal (accessed March 2016).
 
Busse S., Brümmer B., Ihle R. (2010): Interdependences between Fossil Fuels and Renewable Energy Market – The German Biodiesel Market. Discussion Papers No. 1010, Department für Agrarökonomie und Rurale Entwicklung, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen.
 
Carsten H.E., Guenther-Lübbers W., Theuvsen L. (2013): Impacts of Biogas Production on the Production Factors Land and Labour – Current Effects, Possible Consequences and Further Research Needs. International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 4: 26–38.
 
Ciaian Pavel, Kancs d'Artis (): Food, Energy and Environment: Is Bioenergy the Missing Link?. SSRN Electronic Journal, , - doi:10.2139/ssrn.1992924
 
Conference proceedings, Biogas Science 2014; ISBN 978-3-900932-21-3
 
Biogas Science 2014 (2014). Proceedings International Conference on Anaerobic Digestion, Vienna, October 26–30, 2014. University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Vienna.
 
Dogan E. (2014): Energy consumption and economic growth: evidence from low-income countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 4: 154–162.
 
EnergiePortal (2015): Bioplynové stanice v SR. (Biogas plants in SR.) Available at http://www.energie-portal.sk/Dokument/bioplynove-stanice-v-sr-100191.aspx (accessed May 2016).
 
European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development EAFRD (2012): Obnoviteľné zdroje sú príležitosťou pre farmárov pri diverzifikácii výroby. (Renewable energy sources are an opportunity for diversification of farmers’ production.) Agromagazín, 12/2012.
 
European Biomass Association (2013): A Biogas Road Map for Europe. Available at http://www.4biomass.eu/document/news/AEBIOM_Biogas_Roadmap.pdf (accessed April 2016).
 
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. FAOSTAT Statistics division. Avaliable at http://faostat3.fao.org/home/E (accessed March 2016).
 
Geda A., Ndung’u N., Zefru D. (2014): Applied Time Series Econometrics: a practical guide for macroeconomic researchers with a focus on Africa. The University of Nairobi Press and African Economic Research Consortium; ISBN 10-9966-792-11-2.
 
GEVERS JANA, HØYE TOKE THOMAS, TOPPING CHRIS JOHN, GLEMNITZ MICHAEL, SCHRÖDER BORIS (2011): Biodiversity and the mitigation of climate change through bioenergy: impacts of increased maize cultivation on farmland wildlife. GCB Bioenergy, 3, 472-482 doi:10.1111/j.1757-1707.2011.01104.x
 
Hao Na, Colson Gregory, Seong Byeongchan, Park Cheolwoo, Wetzstein Michael (2015): Drought, ethanol, and livestock. Energy Economics, 49, 301-307 doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2015.02.008
 
Hijazi O., Munro S., Zerhusen B., Effenberger M. (2016): Review of life cycle assessment for biogas production in Europe. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 54, 1291-1300 doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.013
 
Kapusuzoglu Ayhan, Karacaer Ulusoy M. (): The interactions between agricultural commodity and oil prices: an empirical analysis. Agricultural Economics (Zemědělská ekonomika), 61, 410-421 doi:10.17221/231/2014-AGRICECON
 
Lajdova Z., Lajda J., Bielik P. (2016): The impact of the biogas industry on agricultural sector in Germany. Agricultural Economics (Zemědělská ekonomika), 62, 1-8 doi:10.17221/292/2015-AGRICECON
 
Lin Boqiang, Omoju Oluwasola E., Okonkwo Jennifer U. (2016): Factors influencing renewable electricity consumption in China. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 55, 687-696 doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.11.003
 
Ostermeyer A., Schönau F. (2012): Effects of biogas production on inter- and in-farm competition. Paper prepared for presentation at the 131st EAAE Seminar ´Innovation for Agricultural Competitiveness and Sustainability of Rural Areas´. Prague, Czech Republic. Available at http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/135772/2/Ostermeyer.pdf (accessed March 2016).
 
Ouédraogo Idrissa M. (2010): Electricity consumption and economic growth in Burkina Faso: A cointegration analysis. Energy Economics, 32, 524-531 doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2009.08.011
 
Regulatory Office for Network Industries. URSO, Bratislava. Avalaible at http://www.urso.gov.sk (accessed March 2016).
 
Schön M. (2010): Numerical Modelling of Anaerobic Digestion Processes in Agricultural Biogas Plants. Books on Demand, Norderstedt.
 
Searchinger T., Heimlich R., Houghton R. A., Dong F., Elobeid A., Fabiosa J., Tokgoz S., Hayes D., Yu T.-H. (2008): Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change. Science, 319, 1238-1240 doi:10.1126/science.1151861
 
Sebri Maamar, Abid Mehdi (2012): Energy use for economic growth: A trivariate analysis from Tunisian agriculture sector. Energy Policy, 48, 711-716 doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2012.06.006
 
Shirani Bidabadi F., Hashemitabar M. (2009): The induced innovation test (co-integration analysis) of Iranian agriculture. Agric. Econ. – Czech, 55: 126–133.
 
Shiu Alice, Lam Pun-Lee (2004): Electricity consumption and economic growth in China. Energy Policy, 32, 47-54 doi:10.1016/S0301-4215(02)00250-1
 
Torquati Biancamaria, Venanzi Sonia, Ciani Adriano, Diotallevi Francesco, Tamburi Vincenzo (2014): Environmental Sustainability and Economic Benefits of Dairy Farm Biogas Energy Production: A Case Study in Umbria. Sustainability, 6, 6696-6713 doi:10.3390/su6106696
 
Troost Christian, Walter Teresa, Berger Thomas (2015): Climate, energy and environmental policies in agriculture: Simulating likely farmer responses in Southwest Germany. Land Use Policy, 46, 50-64 doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.01.028
 
Wellinger A. (2014): Challenges and Opportunities. Universität für Bodenkultur, Wien, In: Proceedings Biogas Science 2014, Oct 26–30, 2014.
 
Yenice M.Y., Bejleri V. (2013): Testing for Granger Causality Between Renewable Energy Consumptio, GDP, CO2 Emission, and Fossil Fuel Prices in the USA. Available at: https://www.asee.org/documents/sections/middle-atlantic/fall-2013/23-TESTING-FOR-GRANGER-CAUSALITY-IN-THE-USA_Yenice-Bejleri.pdf (accessed April 2016).
 
download PDF

© 2017 Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences