RFS Waiver May Not Ease Corn Prices

A Purdue University report finds corn prices might not cool down if an RFS waiver comes into play.

Published on: Aug 17, 2012

Continuing drought conditions have livestock and corn producers facing extreme marketing challenges, one of them being a way to find consensus regarding rising prices and growing competition for corn.

Much of the controversy is centered on the Renewable Fuels Standard, a government mandate on ethanol production. Livestock producers say the drought is causing short corn supply and the RFS is driving their feed prices up. Corn growers say it's too early to tell if corn yields will satisfy both the ethanol market and the livestock sector—but who is right?

A new report, "Potential Impacts of a Partial Waiver of the Ethanol Blending Rules," by Purdue University, examined the issue and found that even if the Environmental Protection Agency were to institute a partial waiver of the RFS, corn prices may not necessarily ease.

WAIT-AND-SEE: Some economists say its important to wait for more yield information to be filed before an RFS decision is made.
WAIT-AND-SEE: Some economists say it's important to wait for more yield information to be filed before an RFS decision is made.

Many factors surrounding the issue were examined when preparing the report, including ethanol stocks, drought conditions, consumer impacts, market reaction and unintended consequences of an RFS waiver.

Paper authors Wally Tyner, Farzad Taheripour and Christopher Hurt, all professors at Purdue, say corn price has gone up nearly 60% since June 15, causing price shifts for key food staples such as milk and eggs.

During a webinar Thursday, sponsored by Farm Foundation, Tyner said conditions would need to be just right for a waiver to work in favor of the livestock sector. The key will be flexibility with ethanol producers through the use of RINs, or renewable fuel identification numbers, also referred to as "credits."

The RINs come into play because refiners have built up credits over the last few years. This means that there are "leftovers" from previous years to use toward 2013 blending requirements.

Hurt says RINs are important because they could be turned in, rather than producing ethanol. He estimated that there is about 2.6 billion gallons of ethanol that could displace ethanol scheduled for future production.

"If refiners and blenders do not have or choose not to use ethanol blending flexibility, a waiver has very limited impact. To the extent that there is flexibility, even the use of prior RINS or a waiver, could reduce the corn price," Tyner said.

Tyner estimated that the price of corn could be reduced by 67 cents a bushel if the credits are used—and that is without an EPA waiver.

Popular Stories:

    Comments:
    Add Comment
    1. Anonymous says:

      To the first comment below, you need to read www.growthenergy.org and you won't be able to say that "burning feed and food" causes such higher food prices. If you look at the amount of corn in a box of corn flakes, it would take $70 corn to even make $1.50 increase in a box of corn flakes. But, we have seen about $1.50 increase in corn flakes over the last few years due to OTHER input costs from the food manufactureres. Look at the study from Texas in the web site also. It is very comprehensive. I agree however, that subsidies for ethanol need to be eliminated because in the long run it is bad for everyone INCLUDING the farmers because PUBLIC PERCEPTION is just what we read from the first comment. Let ethanol stand on its own to live or die. Most of the early ethanol plants started, were profitable, and continue to make profits not even counting the subsidy. Some plants lost money later, and those SHOULD SHUT DOWN. -- western Kansas Farmer (dryland corn is mostly not going to be cut on my farm)

    2. Anonymous says:

      "Would not affect corn prices this year" I was not aware that the law of supply and demand had been repealed. ANYTHING that tends to decrease supply would tend to increase price. ANYTHING that reduces demand would tend to DECREASE price. The fact remains, we subsidize the burning of feed and food, and it DOES increase the price that consumers pay in the grocery store. Moreover, the entire ethanol industry is based on a scam. It is neither good for the economy (unless you are a corn farmer) or good for the environment. If ethanol makes sense, no subsidies, no artificial standards are needed.

    Please provide the answer to the following question:

     =