CEMSA Data Does Double Duty

The soybean and biodiesel industries are by nature closely tied. Soybeans are abundant and make a first-rate feedstock for fuel. Biodiesel adds approximately 25 cents per bushel to the price of whole soybeans, according to a recent report from the United Soybean Board (USB), while lowering the cost of protein meal for livestock feed.

Now a program developed by the Iowa Soybean Association (ISA) to help farmers improve efficiency in crop production provides important data that can benefit biodiesel and agriculture in the discussion about sustainability.

The issue came to the forefront in California, where that state’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) calls for a reduction of at least 10 percent in the carbon intensity of transportation fuels by 2020. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) identified the goal of adopting and implementing a LCFS regulation by 2010.

What happens in California is significant because standards adopted across the country will be influenced by the California precedent.

Part of CARB’s process involves calculating the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from biofuels’ production and use. For biodiesel, GHG analysis includes the manufacture of fertilizer for crop production, the emissions used in farming, transportation, crushing and processing of soybean oil for biodiesel production, and distribution to consumer fuel tanks.

Realizing the far-reaching impact of a California decision, National Biodiesel Board (NBB) Director of State Governmental Affairs Shelby Neal and Director of Sustainability Don Scott worked with Don O’Connor, a recognized expert in GHG modeling, to engage in CARB’s rulemaking process. As work proceeded, they realized data included in the models CARB was using were flawed. NBB’s research identified data showing a 40 percent improvement over the CARB figures for soybean processing and a 50 percent improvement over CARB’s figures for biodiesel production, but finding up-to-date data on soybean production was another matter.

“As certification frameworks are developed, there is a need for technical input from the experts who know farming best,” Scott says. “Farmers need to continue to be engaged in these discussions and be armed with data that quantifies the rapid improvements in efficiency and yield technology that make food, feed and fuel production more sustainable.”

Many lifecycle studies use USDA data for fuel use and fertilizer application rates dating as far back as 1985. NBB and ISA staff, who collaborate routinely, considered whether ISA could provide more up-to-date, accurate data.

“USDA’s numbers didn’t reflect modern gains in efficiency, attaining higher yields through biotechnology and using fewer, better managed inputs,” ISA Director of Market Development Grant Kimberley says. “We suspected more relevant data might be available through ISA’s CEMSA project.”

CEMSA (Certified Environmental Management Systems for Agriculture) involves farm planning that combines resource conservation and farm management into a comprehensive, environmental management system.  In 2007, ISA added a planning module with an Energy Efficiency Calculator (created by independent Iowa crop advisers at MGT Envirotec) to help farmers scientifically assess, document and identify paths for improving their energy use efficiency related to crop production.

An added benefit is that CEMSA has made ISA a repository of robust data regarding production practices, outcomes and environmental impacts.

In a project funded by the soybean checkoff, ISA Environmental Programs State Technical Assistance Coordinator Heath Ellison, who manages the CEMSA program, and contractor Doug Johnson of Environmental Intelligence worked with NBB to analyze aggregate data from Iowa soybean producers who participate in CEMSA. The questions they considered: How much fuel is used to grow soybeans? How much fuel is used to transport soybeans from field to farmstead bin and/or co-op? What are the nutrient inputs per bushel?

Using Iowa’s data, NBB could put real numbers on what it takes to grow, handle and manage a soybean crop. As a result, they were able to demonstrate a 37 percent improvement in fuel efficiency over the data CARB is using to score soybean production. In fact, the new data for soybean production could alone improve biodiesel’s carbon overall score by 9 or 10 percentage points compared to petroleum.

“When we met with CARB to discuss this new data, they were intrigued because it shows agriculture to be significantly more efficient than even the most recent, albeit outdated, USDA data does,” Neal said. “CARB staff, however, were concerned that the sample size was too small so they chose not to include the Iowa data in their modeling.”

However, while California is nearing the end of its LCFS process for 2010, there remain opportunities for CARB to accept better data and improve their overall GHG scoring for biodiesel. The same is true for EPA and other states that are also looking for the best available data for lifecycle analysis. An opportunity exists to improve biodiesel’s GHG score with accurate data on modern and efficient crop production, and CEMSA provides a framework for doing so.

“If we can expand the scope of the program to include other leading soy-producing states to further show that these numbers represent current practices, we have a good shot at getting the new data included in the CARB modeling, thus improving biodiesel’s chances of being a fuel of choice under the LCFS policy,” Neal said.

“The bottom line is, not only can we talk about being energy efficient; with CEMSA data, we can document and prove it,” says Ron Heck, a soybean farmer from Perry and ISA director who chairs the ISA Environmental Programs advisory board and has also been an NBB director. “We gather relevant and timely data that not only helps farmers become more efficient, but also allows farmers to have a larger voice when attacked by faulty assumptions of those who are not familiar with agriculture.”

As ISA Environmental Programs Director Roger Wolf says, “The most exciting thing about this project is it impacts both the supply and demand side of the soybean industry with an eye on the environment.”

*Content Funded by the Soybean Checkoff