Do lender‐imposed sweeps affect ethanol technology investment?

Jason Fewell and Cole Gustafson

Agricultural Finance Review, 2010, vol. 70, issue 2, 169-183

Abstract: Purpose - New federal legislation proposes to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with biofuel production. To comply, existing corn ethanol plants will have to invest in new more carbon efficient production technology such as dry fractionation. However, this will be challenging for the industry given the present financial environment of surplus production, recent profit declines, numerous bankruptcies, and lender‐imposed covenants. The purpose of this paper is to examine a dry mill ethanol firm's ability to invest in dry fractionation technology in the face of declining profitability and stringent lender cash flow repayment constraints. Firm level risk aversion also is considered when determining a firm's willingness to invest in dry fractionation technology. Design /methodology/approach - A Monte Carlo simulation model is constructed to estimate firm profits, cash flows, and changes in equity following new investment in fractionation to determine an optimal investment strategy. Findings - The addition of a lender‐imposed sweep, whereby a percentage of free cash flow is used to pay off extra debt in high profit years, reduces the firm's ability to build equity and increases bankruptcy risk under investment. However, the sweep increases long‐run equity because total financing costs are reduced with accelerated debt repayment. Practical implications - Results show that while ethanol firm profits are uncertain, imposition of a lender sweep combined with increased profit from dry fractionation technology helps the firm increase long‐run financial resiliency. Originality/value - Examination of ethanol plant financial structures and investment capabilities has received scant research attention to date.

Keywords: Waste management; Production methods; Fuels; United States of America; Legislation; Monte Carlo simulation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2010
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (text/html)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eme:afrpps:v:70:y:2010:i:2:p:169-183

DOI: 10.1108/00021461011064941

Access Statistics for this article

Agricultural Finance Review is currently edited by Valentina Hartarska and Denis Nadolnyak

More articles in Agricultural Finance Review from Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Emerald Support ().