Why ethanol production will drive world food prices even higher in 2008

January 25, 2008 by Lester R. Brown

We are witnessing the beginning of one of the great tragedies of history. The United States, in a misguided effort to reduce its oil insecurity by converting grain into fuel for cars, is generating global food insecurity on a scale never seen before.

The world is facing the most severe food price inflation in history as grain and soybean prices climb to all-time highs. Wheat trading on the Chicago Board of Trade on December 17th breached the $10 per bushel level for the first time ever. In mid-January, corn was trading over $5 per bushel, close to its historic high. And on January 11th, soybeans traded at $13.42 per bushel, the highest price ever recorded. All these prices are double those of a year or two ago.

As a result, prices of food products made directly from these commodities such as bread, pasta, and tortillas, and those made indirectly, such as pork, poultry, beef, milk, and eggs, are everywhere on the rise. In Mexico, corn meal prices are up 60 percent. In Pakistan, flour prices have doubled. China is facing rampant food price inflation, some of the worst in decades.

In industrial countries, the higher processing and marketing share of food costs has softened the blow, but even so, prices of food staples are climbing. By late 2007, the U.S. price of a loaf of whole wheat bread was 12 percent higher than a year earlier, milk was up 29 percent, and eggs were up 36 percent. In Italy, pasta prices were up 20 percent.

World grain prices have increased dramatically on three occasions since World War II, each time as a result of weather-reduced harvests. But now it is a matter of demand simply outpacing supply. In seven of the last eight years world grain production has fallen short of consumption. These annual shortfalls have been covered by drawing down grain stocks, but the carryover stocks—the amount in the bin when the new harvest begins—have now dropped to 54 days of world consumption, the lowest on record. (See data.)

From 1990 to 2005, world grain consumption, driven largely by population growth and rising consumption of grain-based animal products, climbed by an average of 21 million tons per year. Then came the explosion in demand for grain used in U.S. ethanol distilleries, which jumped from 54 million tons in 2006 to 81 million tons in 2007. This 27 million ton jump more than doubled the annual growth in world demand for grain. If 80 percent of the 62 distilleries now under construction are completed by late 2008, grain used to produce fuel for cars will climb to 114 million tons, or 28 percent of the projected 2008 U.S. grain harvest.

Historically the food and energy economies have been largely separate, but now with the construction of so many fuel ethanol distilleries, they are merging. If the food value of grain is less than its fuel value, the market will move the grain into the energy economy. Thus as the price of oil rises, the price of grain follows it upward.

A University of Illinois economics team calculates that with oil at $50 a barrel, it is profitable—with the ethanol subsidy of 51¢ a gallon (equal to $1.43 per bushel of corn)—to convert corn into ethanol as long as the price is below $4 a bushel. But with oil at $100 a barrel, distillers can pay more than $7 a bushel for corn and still break even. If oil climbs to $140, distillers can pay $10 a bushel for corn—double the early 2008 price of $5 per bushel.

The World Bank reports that for each 1 percent rise in food prices, caloric intake among the poor drops 0.5 percent. Millions of those living on the lower rungs of the global economic ladder, people who are barely hanging on, will lose their grip and begin to fall off.

Projections by Professors C. Ford Runge and Benjamin Senauer of the University of Minnesota four years ago showed the number of hungry and malnourished people decreasing from over 800 million to 625 million by 2025. But in early 2007 their update of these projections, taking into account the biofuel effect on world food prices, showed the number of hungry people climbing to 1.2 billion by 2025. That climb is already under way.

Since the budgets of international food aid agencies are set well in advance, a rise in food prices shrinks food assistance. The U.N. World Food Programme (WFP), which is now supplying emergency food aid to 37 countries, is cutting shipments as prices soar. The WFP reports that 18,000 children are dying each day from hunger and related illnesses.

As grain prices climb, a politics of food scarcity is emerging as exporting countries restrict exports to limit the rise in domestic food prices. At the end of January, Russia—one of the top five wheat exporters—will impose a 40-percent export tax on wheat, effectively banning exports. Argentina, another leading wheat exporter, closed export registrations for wheat indefinitely in early December until it could assess the condition of the new crop. And Viet Nam, the number two rice exporter after Thailand, has banned rice exports for several months and will likely not lift this ban until the new crop comes to market.

Rising food prices are translating into social unrest. It began in early 2007 with tortilla demonstrations in Mexico. Then came pasta protests in Italy. More recently, rising bread prices in Pakistan have become a source of unrest. In Jakarta, 10,000 Indonesians gathered in front of the presidential palace on January 14th this year to protest the doubling of soybean prices that has raised the price of tempeh, the national soy-based protein staple. When a supermarket in Chongqing, China, where cooking oil prices have soared, offered this oil at a reduced price, the resulting stampede when doors opened killed three people and injured 31.

As economic stresses translate into political stresses, the number of failing states, such as Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Haiti, which was already increasing before the rise in food prices began, could increase even faster.

There is much to be concerned about on the food front. We enter this new crop year with the lowest grain stocks on record, the highest grain prices ever, the prospect of a smaller U.S. grain harvest as several million acres of land that shifted from soybeans to corn last year go back to soybeans, the need to feed an additional 70 million people, and U.S. distillers wanting 33 million more tons of grain to supply the new ethanol distilleries coming online this year. Corn futures prices for December 2008 delivery are higher than those for March, suggesting that market analysts see even tighter supplies after the next harvest.

Whereas previous dramatic rises in world grain prices were weather-induced, this one is policy-induced and can be dealt with by policy adjustments. The crop fuels program that currently satisfies scarcely 3 percent of U.S. gasoline needs is simply not worth the human suffering and political chaos it is causing. If the entire U.S. grain harvest were converted into ethanol, it would satisfy scarcely 18 percent of our automotive fuel needs.

The irony is that U.S. taxpayers, by subsidizing the conversion of grain into ethanol, are in effect financing a rise in their own food prices. It is time to end the subsidy for converting food into fuel and to do it quickly before the deteriorating world food situation spirals out of control.

 

Lester R. Brown is founder and president of Earth Policy Institute, a Washington advocacy group. His principal research areas include food, population, water, climate change, and renewable energy. He is the recipient of scores of awards and honorary degrees. His editorial appears here by special arrangement with the Earth Policy Institute.

Want to contribute a guest editorial to Cleantech.com? We welcome contributions, and would like to hear from you. Guidance and directions here.


Developments making news in the past 24 hours

Submitted by Ben Cloud (not verified) on February 1, 2008 - 7:16am.

Mr. Brown,

Food is always the highest value. You are simply advocating that the entire grain industry should continue in a depressed state to support the poor. I would suggest that the free market set the price and if you want charity, then have the government pay for it.

The bottom line is that the price of oil has driven a major economic shift and you are blaming renewable fuels which is a reasonable economic alternative, but still a lower value than food.

I do agree that the economic shift is rapid and therefore causing hardship for the poor who are less able to adapt to rapid change. That is the result of being poor and why those is a poor state of being often need assistance. In the end, this will spur innovation and benefits for the poor as well who are motivated to deal with issues and politics that have created their problems in the first place.

Submitted by Josh (not verified) on February 15, 2008 - 11:35pm.

I disagree--the price of oil has contributed to an economic shift, but large subisidies for ethanol have made it much more dramatic. They have made biofuels a reasonable economic alternative when they wouln't be otherwise. To ameliorate the hardship for the poor brought on by this shift, the US federal government shouldn't spend MORE money on their aid. Rather, it should roll back subsidies and allow the free market to return the price of food to a reasonable level.

I would prefer to assume future innovation in an oil-constrained market will solve transportation problems rather than hunger problems. I value food over transportation fuel.

Submitted by joe woo (not verified) on February 17, 2008 - 6:36pm.

Mr. Brown, Unfortunately some peoples cannot pick their parents and consequently born both poor and mentally challenged. I'm curious to know what the two lads noted on the page below your article suggest we go in a country like ours, starve them perhaps ?. Chances are from what they've written it may give them some relief. They have my sympathy.

Submitted by Unregistered user (not verified) on March 1, 2008 - 7:49pm.

I do firmly believe we should not use food crops for anything but food (for a large number of reasons), and that the subsidy on ethanol should be ended, but the current hand-wringing over "food vs. fuels" is as hysterical (and wrong) as any other part of the high-pitched nonsense regarding biofuels.
As I lack the resources to mount a major study on economic forces and their effects, I did the following experiment.
The largest box of cornflakes I could find in the local store was a 20 oz box; that's 1.25 lbs of cornflakes.
I am going to assume that it actually takes two pounds of corn to make one pound of cornflakes. So, for that 20 oz. box, 40 ozs. of corn were used; that's 2.5 pounds of corn. (No slight to the producers of cornflakes here; I am sure they are all very, very good at making cornflakes from corn, but since I have no information on that point, I am making a conservative assumption).
A bushel of corn weighs 56 pounds, so at a price $5.60 per bushel, slightly more than today's trading price, a pound of corn will cost 10 cents. So that 2.5 pounds of corn in the box of cornflakes costs 25 cents total. And that price of $5.60 per bushel (yes, price, not cost) is "all in", and includes what was paid for the fertilizer, farm equipment, fuel, etc. needed to make that bushel of corn.
The 20 oz. box of cornflakes was priced at $3.19, or approximately 13 times the price of the corn, using my above assumptions. So if corn doubles in price, from $5.60 to $11.20 per bushel, and the price of that box of cornflakes is driven entirely by that rise in corn prices, then the price of that box of cornflakes should rise another 25 cents.
This is admittedly a simple experiment that does not address all forces in the cereal foods market, and I cannot claim that is directly related to what is happening in China, Mexico, or the other places noted in the article. However, I do note that my experiment uses real world prices (yes, commodity prices are world prices) that are publicly available, and presumably could be done using other foods as the example.
The price of food is rising, but not due to the increase in grain prices. The fuel and energy used to transport the grain, process it into food, and transport the product to the market are the major sources of the price increase, and are all directly related to the price of oil, not corn. Let's see the spreadsheet included in any further comment on this point.

Post new comment

Please solve the math problem above and type in the result. e.g. for 1+1, type 2
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Become a cleantech industry insider - sign up for our free newsletter