Ann Swanson

Executive Director

Chesapeake Bay Commission

March 25, 2009

National Advisory Council for 

Environmental Policy and Technology

BIOFUELS & THE BAY
Who is the Chesapeake Bay Commission?

 Created in 1980

 Legislative Authority

 21 members 

 MD – VA – PA 

 Helped to establish 

EPA Bay Program 

 Signatory and 

Legislative Leader

Policy for the Bay
Who is the 

Chesapeake Bay Program Leadership?

Governor of MD

EPA Administrator

Governor of VA Governor of PA

Executive Council

Mayor of DC

Chair of 

Chesapeake 

Bay 

Commission
Point #1: The Bay

watershed is big 

and well used.

Watershed area 

= 116,000 km2

Water surface area 

= 11,500 km2

90% tidal waters impaired

Susquehanna R.

(55 % of flow)

Agriculture

Barren

Developed

Forest

Water

Wetland
Point #2: We are not alone.

Nutrient Impacts in USA
2007 Bay Habitat 

Health Report Card

 Measure of overall Bay habitat health: 

- water quality

- habitat

- supporting food web

Data gathered from more than 150 

monitoring sites throughout the Bay.

 University of Maryland’s Center of 

Environmental Science publishes the 

report card.

Source: University of Maryland, Center for Environmental Science

Point #3: Overall Score: C-
We cannot save the Bay without 

funding, market-based incentives 

and/or regulation...

IMPLEMENTING C2K (FY 2003-2010) 

Projected Costs: $18.7 B

Projected Income: 5.9 B

Funding Gap: $ 12.8 B

Point #4:
8

Biofuels & 

the Chesapeake Bay
9

First Report of the

Chesapeake Bay 

Commission

issued 

September 2007
10

What are the Feedstocks of 

Biofuels?

 Natural Oils: animal fat, yellow grease, 

restaurant waste, algae, and oilseed crops 

like soy and palm oil.

 Sugars/Starches: corn, sorghum, sugar 

cane and beets, hulless barley.

 Cellulosic Biomass: perennial grasses, 

woody biomass, corn stover, wheat and 

rice straw.
11

What is the “Bottom-line” for 

Biofuels and Water Quality?

 Handled right, biofuels can be a source of 

substantial permanent new income for farmers and 

foresters, can help reduce greenhouse gases, and can 

reduce nutrient pollution to the Bay.

 Handled wrong, biofuels can bring economic 

uncertainty, do little for greenhouse gasses, increase 

the cost of animal feed, and exacerbate nutrient 

pollution.
12

Impacts of Alternative Biofuels Scenarios

Watershed Delivered Load, Million lbs. N per year

5.0

2.6

-8.3

-17.1

-25.4

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

Corn Soybeans 300K Switchgrass Corn w/ CC 1M Switchgrass

(millio

n lbs/y

e

ar)
13

Impacts of Alternative Biofuels Scenarios

Watershed Delivered Load, Million lbs. N per year

5.0

2.6

-8.3

-17.1

-25.4

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

Corn Soybeans 300K Switchgrass Corn w/ CC 1M Switchgrass

(millio

n lbs/y

e

ar)

What if you were to combine 

switchgrass with corn with BMPs?
14

Cellulosic 

Biofuels Advisory 

Panel

Baseline 

Assumptions

Biofuels Project: Part II
15

Current Generation 

Biofuels 

 The future of corn-based ethanol in the region 

is uncertain;

 Current U.S. energy policy calls for a doubling 

of corn-based ethanol production by 2015;

 Regional corn acreage will likely max out at 

only 300,000 new acres, double the change 

from 2006-2007 while yields will rise; & 

 Any regional biofuel refineries will use 

feedstocks imported or from the Corn Belt. 

Biofuels Advisory Panel Baseline Assumptions
Corn Production (Bushels)

Not estimated

1,000,000–4,999,999

5,000,000–9,999,999

10,000,000–14,999,999

15,000,000–19,999,999

More than 20,000,000

Choosing Our Future

The Chesapeake region is the least invested in ethanol of any corn-growing region in the nation.

Choosing Our Future

The Chesapeake Region is the least invested in ethanol of any 

corn-growing region in the nation.
17

Next-Generation 

Biofuels 

 After 2015, next-generation biofuels will make up the 

remaining RFS increase to 36 billion by 2022 (20% of U.S. 

Transportation fuel).

Feedstock mix for the region is unclear but could include 

corn stover, other crop residues, cover crops, switchgrass 

and other perennial grasses, forest slash, wood residues, 

fast growing trees, municipal wastes or algae. 

 Key is to make choices that improve environmental 

conditions while remaining flexible to market and other 

forces. 

Biofuels Advisory Panel Baseline Assumptions
18

Environmental Issues

 The emphasis on regional environmental 

improvement from biofuel development is on 

nutrient and sediment reductions to the rivers and 

the Chesapeake. 

 Other issues include water supply and use, 

wildlife habitat, invasive plant species, 

greenhouse gas reductions and net energy 

benefits. 

Biofuels Advisory Panel Baseline Assumptions
19

Land Use Changes 

 The potential scale of cellulosic ethanol and 

other next-generation biofuel development provide 

challenges and opportunities for: 

 Mined area reclamation;

 Soil conservation and erosion control;

 Forest cover;

 Wildlife management; 

 Use of pasture and underutilized lands; &

 Reduction of urban sprawl.

Biofuels Advisory Panel Baseline Assumptions
To help protect your privacy, PowerPoint has blocked automatic download of this picture.

The 

Policy 

Recommendations

Report #2
21

Three major subject areas where action is to 

be focused:

I. Feedstocks: Assuring a reliable and accessible 

supply of large amounts of biomass grown in the 

Chesapeake region.

II. Natural Resource Protection: Determining the 

types of biomass used, where they are grown, and 

the best management practices needed.

III. Marketing and Infrastructure: Harnessing the 

region’s opportunities for production capacity, 

distribution of feedstocks and biofuels, and 

marketing of biofuels and their co-products.

Policy Recommendations
22

I. Feedstocks

Coordinate regional input on U.S. Department of 

Agriculture conservation programs to promote 

sustainable feedstock production and harvest

(Regional).

Encourage local or on-farm use of biomass

(Regional).

Encourage winter biofuel crops as first-generation 

feedstocks (State).

Ensure the nursery and seed industry has 

adequate supplies of feedstocks (State).

Policy Recommendations
23

II. Natural Resource Protection

Discourage use of invasive non-native 

feedstocks (Regional).

Establish regional research priorities

(Regional).

Assure broad and effective use of best 

management practices (State).

Policy Recommendations
24

II. Natural Resource Protection

Establish or update state removal guidelines 

for crop residues and forest slash and provide 

incentives for their adoption (State).

Provide incentives for forest management plan 

development and implementation (State).

Encourage sustainable biofuels production on 

abandoned or underutilized land (State).

Policy Recommendations
25

III. Marketing And Infrastructure

Coordinate regional action to secure funding from the 

2008 Farm Bill, 2007 Energy Act, and 2005 Energy Act

(Regional).

Develop a regional carbon trading strategy (Regional).

Establish biofuel market purchase requirements and 

incentives (State).

Utilize state economic development programs (State).

Focus facility support on small-scale, first-stage 

operations (State).

Establish a regional strategy to encourage greater use 

of higher blends of biofuels (Regional).

Policy Recommendations
2009: A Work in Progress

1) Review State Action Plans

2) Develop a Regional Production Goal

a. Necessary BMPs

b. Infrastructure and Marketing

3) Examine nexus between biofuels and 

carbon markets/carbon sequestration. 
27

For more information: 

aswanson@chesbay.us

410-263-3420