Prairies vanish in the US push for green energy

Nov 13, 2013 by Chet Brokaw And Jack Gillum
Prairies vanish in the US push for green energy
In this Oct. 24, 2013 photo Robert Malsom checks corn in one of his fields near Roscoe, S.D. Malsam nearly went broke in the 1980s when corn was cheap. So now that prices are high and he can finally make a profit, he's not about to apologize for ripping up prairieland to plant corn. (AP Photo/Doug Dreyer)

Robert Malsam nearly went broke in the 1980s when corn was cheap. So now that prices are high and he can finally make a profit, he's not about to apologize for ripping up prairieland to plant corn.

Across the Dakotas and Nebraska, more than 1 million acres of the Great Plains are giving way to cornfields as transform the wild expanse that once served as the backdrop for American pioneers.

This expansion of the Corn Belt is fueled in part by America's green energy policy, which requires oil companies to blend billions of gallons of ethanol into their gasoline. In 2010, fuel became the No. 1 use for corn in America, a title it held in 2011 and 2012 and narrowly lost this year. That helps keep prices high.

"It's not hard to do the math there as to what's profitable to have," Malsam said. "I think an ethanol plant is a farmer's friend."

What the green-energy program has made profitable, however, is far from green. A policy intended to reduce global warming is encouraging a farming practice that actually could worsen it.

That's because plowing into untouched grassland releases carbon dioxide that has been naturally locked in the soil. It also increases erosion and requires farmers to use fertilizers and other industrial chemicals. In turn, that destroys native plants and wipes out wildlife habitats.

It appeared so damaging that scientists warned that America's corn-for-ethanol policy would fail as an anti-global warming strategy if too many farmers plowed over virgin land.

The Obama administration argued that would not happen. But the administration didn't set up a way to monitor whether it actually happened.

It did.

More than 1.2 million acres of grassland have been lost since the federal government required that gasoline be blended with increasing amounts of ethanol, an Associated Press analysis of found. Plots that were wild grass or pastureland seven years ago are now corn and soybean fields.

That's in addition to the 5 million acres of farmland that had been aside for conservation - more than Yellowstone, Everglades and Yosemite National Parks combined - that have vanished since Obama took office.

In South Dakota, more than 370,000 acres of grassland have been uprooted and farmed from since 2006. In Edmunds County, a rural community about two hours north of the capital, Pierre, at least 42,000 acres of grassland have become cropland - one of the largest turnovers in the region.

Malsam runs a 13-square-mile family farm there. He grows corn, soybeans and wheat, then rents out his grassland for grazing. Each year, the family converts another 160 acres from grass to cropland.

Chemicals kill the grass. Machines remove the rocks. Then tractors plow it three times to break up the sod and prepare it for planting.

Scattered among fields of 7-foot tall corn and thigh-high soybeans, some stretches of grassland still exist. Cattle munch on some grass. And "prairie potholes" - natural ponds ranging from small pools to larger lakes - support a smattering of ducks, geese, pelicans and herons.

Yet within a mile of Malsam's farm, federal satellite data show, more than 300 acres of grassland have been converted to soybeans and corn since 2006.

Nebraska has lost at least 830,000 acres of grassland, a total larger than New York City, Los Angeles and Dallas combined.

"It's great to see farmers making money. It hasn't always been that way," said Craig Cox of the Environmental Working Group. He advocates for clean energy but opposes the ethanol mandate. "If we're going to push the land this hard, we really need to intensify conservation in lockstep with production, and that's just not happening," he said.

Jeff Lautt, CEO of Poet, which operates ethanol refineries across the country, including in South Dakota, said it's up to farmers how to use their land.

"The last I checked, it is still an open market. And farmers that own land are free to farm their land to the extent they think they can make money on it or whatever purpose they need," he said.

Yet Chris Wright, a professor at South Dakota State University who has studied land conversion, said: "The conversation about land preservation should start now before it becomes a serious problem." Wright reviewed the AP's methodology for determining land conversion.

The AP's analysis used government satellite data to count how much grassland existed in 2006 in each county, then compare each plot of land to corresponding satellite data from 2012.

The data from the U.S. Geological Survey and the Department of Agriculture identify corn and soybean fields. That allowed the AP to see which plots of grassland became cropland.

To reach its conservative estimate of 1.2 million lost, the AP excluded that had been set aside under the government's Conservation Reserve Program, in which old farmland is allowed to return to a near-natural state. The AP used half-acre sections of earth and excluded tiny tracts that became corn, which experts said were most likely outliers.

Corn prices more than doubled in the years after Congress passed the ethanol mandate in 2007. Now, Malsam said, farmers can make about $500 an acre planting corn.

His farm has just become profitable in the past five years, allowing him and his wife, Theresa, to build a new house on the farmstead.

Four miles south, signs at each end of the town of Roscoe announce a population of only 324. But the town, which relies in part on incomes like Malsam's, supports a school, a restaurant, a bank, a grocery store and a large farm machinery store.

The manager of the equipment dealership, Kaleb Rodgers, said the booming farm economy has helped the town and the dealership prosper. The business with 28 employees last year sold a dozen combines at about $300,000 apiece, plus more than 60 tractors worth between $100,000 and $300,000, he said.

"If we didn't have any farmers we wouldn't have a community here. We wouldn't have a business. I wouldn't be sitting here. I wouldn't be able to feed my family," Rodgers said. "I think ethanol is a very good thing."

Jim Faulstich, president of the South Dakota Grasslands Coalition, said the nation's ethanol and crop insurance policies have encouraged the transformation of the land.

Faulstich, who farms and ranches in central South Dakota near Highmore, said much of the land being converted is not suited to crop production, and South Dakota's strong winds and rains will erode the topsoil.

"I guess a good motto would be to farm the best and leave the rest," he said.

Explore further: Nesting habitat key to pheasant numbers

5 /5 (4 votes)
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Changes in crops acres since freedom to farm

Apr 12, 2010

The 1996 U.S. Farm Bill eliminated many acreage restrictions, thereby allowing farmers to plant what they believe to be their most competitive crops. A study conducted by University of Illinois agricultural ...

In search of wildlife-friendly biofuels

Oct 01, 2009

When society jumps on a bandwagon, even for a good cause, there may be unintended consequences. The unintended consequence of crop-based biofuels may be the loss of wildlife habitat, particularly that of ...

Nesting habitat key to pheasant numbers

Oct 11, 2013

(Phys.org) —With record low pheasant numbers, hunters are looking at a tough season, but South Dakota State University wildlife researchers predict the birds can rebound, with proper management.

Recommended for you

World greenhouse emissions threaten warming goal

11 hours ago

Emissions of greenhouse gases are rising so fast that within one generation the world will have used up its margin of safety for limiting global warming to 2°C (3.6°F), an international team of scientists ...

Tens of thousands join London climate march

12 hours ago

Tens of thousands of people in London joined a global day of protest Sunday to demand action on climate change, among them British actress Emma Thompson who said the challenge to save the planet was like ...

UN summit to test commitment to climate fund

12 hours ago

A global fund created to spearhead climate change financing faces a key test at a UN summit this week when it looks to the leaders of the industrialised world to stump up billions of dollars to fill its underflowing ...

User comments : 7

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Shakescene21
2 / 5 (11) Nov 13, 2013
Ethanol-from-grain is not "Green Energy". It is a subsidy to agri-business which destroys food, damages cars, damages the environment, and probably is not a net oil substitute. Most environmentalists oppose this misguided policy, which would not be happening if it were not for not for Federal mandates and subsidies.
Modernmystic
1.9 / 5 (9) Nov 13, 2013
Don't forget to mention it causes even MORE starvation in third world countries. It's an "awesome" policy....
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (12) Nov 13, 2013
Most environmentalists oppose this misguided policy, which would not be happening if it were not for not for Federal mandates and subsidies.


Live by the sword...
Maybe environmentalists should stop using state power to force their agenda?
One of the big pushes for ethanol was to replace MBTE that was contaminating water supplies in the west.
MBTE and ethanol are oxygenates purportedly to make gasoline burn more cleanly.
kochevnik
1.6 / 5 (7) Nov 13, 2013
Ethanol is not "green" it requires more oil energy than it produces. It is only green for corporate farmers and ethanol plants, in green dollars
Jonseer
1.3 / 5 (9) Nov 13, 2013
what utter insanity. This is just agribusiness WELFARE. If people are going to conserve fuel it'd be a good idea to allow the full price of production of this garbage fuel predict its use.
The Alchemist
1 / 5 (9) Nov 14, 2013
And someone explain why we can't use cellulose? It is not a complicated conversion, althought it would need to be massive.

These pages are full of more efficient solar cells, and tiny wind generators on the tops of our houses no higher than a flag pole pay for themselves rapidly and greatly slow the use of fossil fuels.

It is amazing how stupid decision makers are: and because revenue started coming in from oil before others. If only we were imaginative enough to generate a profit from green energy. I am all for taxing it, as counter-intuitive and un-just as this sounds.

Just another sign the US has gone from world leader to world ashtray.

Pretty soon Africa is going to be burying its waste here because it's cheaper than burying it there.
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (11) Nov 14, 2013
Ethanol IS 'green'.
It was mandated by the EPA to replace MBTE in gasoline.