Ag Groups Oppose Biofuel Plants in Counties with Ag Restrictions

22 January 2006

The Missouri Soybean Association (MSA) and Corn Growers Association (MCGA) jointly announced their opposition to building biodiesel and ethanol facilities in counties that have adopted health ordinances to restrict livestock and poultry production.

According to MSA and MCGA leadership, soybean and corn farmers cannot afford to invest in biodiesel and ethanol production facilities in counties that refuse to support animal agriculture.

Limiting livestock and poultry production also limits marketing potential for the high protein co-products that are created while processing corn and soybeans into biodiesel and ethanol. Without animal agriculture in close proximity to biodiesel and ethanol plants, the ability to utilize these co-products is diminished and the plants themselves become less viable.

When corn is produced from ethanol, only the starch portion is used. An excellent high protein feedstock for livestock and poultry remains. If a county restricts the ability for an ethanol plant to access local markets for distillers grain co-products, then they lose an inherent advantage over ethanol plants located in other counties and states which do not limit animal agriculture.

—MCGA CEO Gary Marshall

We have grave concerns about locating a biofuel facility in a county which has adopted a health ordinance for the purpose of limiting animal agriculture. It is our intent to partner with progressive counties where economic development including crop and livestock production is a primary focus.

—MSA CEO/executive director Dale Ludwig

According to the National Biodiesel Board, Missouri currently has only one biodiesel plant in operation, with a capacity of 3,000,000 gallons per year. According to the Renewable Fuels Association, Missouri has only two ethanol plants in operation, with a third being built, for a total of 135 million gallons per year.