Downside of the ethanol boom

Some warn that raising more corn to make fuel will further deplete water supply.

Whenever the subject of Nebraska's exponential ethanol expansion comes up, it's easy to picture Gov. Dave Heineman and the state's economic development officials bounding onto a stage with big E's on their chests.

Veteran Seward City Councilman Robert Fiala isn't nearly as enthusiastic about the recent announcement of a proposed ethanol plant a few miles west of Seward.

"Most ethanol plants use a lot of water," Fiala said, "and our wells have gone down about 14 feet in the last 10 years, I think."

Raising more corn in the area will require more water and more agricultural chemicals, said the retired Concordia University professor. "I guess I personally think we should put a lot more money into raising our mileage possibilities for cars and trucks."

Although ethanol's cheerleaders might be much more visible and vocal, Fiala isn't alone with his concerns about the downside of the ethanol boom.

Chuck Francis, longtime sustainable agriculture advocate at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, readily confirms that at least half a dozen possible negative effects could result from a multibillion-dollar series of pending ethanol projects.

Among them:

* More farmers abandoning crop rotations to raise corn in the same fields year after year. That would likely require more irrigation, greater use of pesticides and more risk of weeds and insects becoming resistant to the chemicals meant to contain them.

* More water demand for the ethanol plants themselves. The one under construction at Fairmont is expected to use about 2,420 acre-feet of water per year. According to numbers provided by the Upper Big Blue Natural Resources District in York, that's equivalent to the average annual output of at least 20 center-pivot irrigation units.

* More farmers pulling erodible acres out of the federal government's Conservation Reserve Program to cash in on rising corn prices. Nebraska has about 1.35 million acres in the CRP.

* More pressure on university researchers to support farming practices that focus on short-term gain with less attention to long-term pain.

Is Francis worried that raising these caution flags will get him in trouble with the state's farm leadership?

"No, not at this stage in my career," he said.

It might be different if he were 32 and pushing for tenure. But he's 66 and he already has it. Furthermore, he said, "We're hired to speak our minds and teach our classes and get our students to think as broadly as possible."

While it would be hard to find anybody who would dispute Nebraska's opportunity to capitalize on an energy crunch - or condemn less dependence on imported oil, more jobs in the ethanol industry or higher income for corn farmers - there are other, less obvious costs to count in accommodating an all-out expansion blitz.

Some are already asserting themselves.

For example, pork producers who can't readily replace corn with corn byproducts left over from ethanol production in their feeding rations are struggling with rapidly increasing corn prices.

The average corn price at Lincoln area elevators on Aug. 1 was $1.96 per bushel. Last week, it was $3.28.

Other looming impacts are harder to measure.

For example, even though cattle feeders are in a much better position to replace corn with ethanol byproducts, doing so would add to the phosphorous content in manure and threaten to overload the soil nutrient mix.

And as ethanol production evolves toward using cornstalks and other crop residue, implementing that cutting-edge idea could expose fields to more wind and water erosion and reduce soil fertility.

That could be another price of the rush toward easing the energy crisis with grain-based fuel.

"I think it's symptomatic of our culture," Francis said, "that we want a quick fix to everything and we don't take the long-term view of much of anything."

Many of the pitfalls and potential pitfalls of ethanol production need to be measured in relation to mitigating factors.

For example, the risk of overloading soil with phosphorous from cattle manure can be diminished by spreading the manure over more acres.

In addressing another area of concern, promoters of ethanol plants say they will recapture much of the water they use in holding ponds and return it to the aquifer.

Even when mitigating factors might be harder to grasp, risk does not convey certainty.

Steve Chick, who heads the Nebraska office of the federal Natural Resources Conservation Service, said there's no indication so far of the state's farmers pulling highly erodible land out of the Conservation Reserve Program and planting it to corn.

The Farm Service Agency, another arm of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is monitoring those possibilities, Chick said.

"They have not seen any increase yet in people asking to get out of their CRP contracts."

One reason might be that there are heavy financial penalties for bailing out early on contracts that are in place for 10 to 15 years.

Nevertheless, Chick is mindful of the conflicting goals of future ethanol production and future idling of acres in conservation programs.

"I do wonder if people will be more reluctant to get into CRP contracts because they're waiting to see if they can increase their production and get more money by raising corn for ethanol."

John Turnbull, general manager of the Upper Big Blue Natural Resources District in York, said his board of directors is already trying to adjust to an explosion in the number of ethanol plants by requiring their owners to conduct groundwater hydrology studies before they build.

"What we say is, if you're a water user, a groundwater user who's going to use 500 acre-feet of water a year or more, prior to that happening, they need to get a supplemental permit from the NRD."

In the ongoing series of ethanol announcements in Nebraska, much is made of the dollar investment, the corn usage and the arrival of new employment payrolls in rural areas that desperately need them.

Not addressed in the publicity packets is the depletion of rivers, streams and aquifers that has already led to moratoriums in drilling new irrigation wells over much of the western half of the state.

Even farther east, at York, drought and heavier irrigation pumping has the nine-county area of the Upper Big Blue within 2.5 feet of the first groundwater allocation in history.

More ethanol plants and more corn production are an obvious influence on attempts to conserve the water supply.

"The more water use that happens," said Turnbull, "the faster we get into allocation."

Reach Art Hovey at 523-4949 or at ahovey@alltel.net.