NCGA’s Corn Strategy Pivots from Defending Demand to Creating It
The report frames maritime fuel, sustainable aviation fuel and biobased manufacturing as the next structural demand engines for U.S. corn, but the path depends on carbon accounting, trade policy, regulatory certainty and major private-sector investment
The National Corn Growers Association’s (NCGA) new demand strategy is best read as a long-range response to a near-term farm income squeeze. NCGA says U.S. corn farmers produced a record 17-billion-bushel crop in 2025, while farmers are expected to face a fourth consecutive year of losses in 2026. That combination — rising productivity and weak margins — is the central tension behind the report: corn growers are producing more efficiently, but traditional demand channels are not expanding fast enough to absorb future supplies at profitable prices. The attached report says production gains have “enabled production to outpace demand growth,” making new structural demand NCGA’s top priority. Link to report.
The headline numbers are ambitious. NCGA says capturing just 10% of the global maritime fuel market with corn-based ethanol could create 3 billion bushels of annual demand. A 10% share of the global sustainable aviation fuel market through ethanol-to-jet technologies would represent another 1.7 billion bushels. The largest theoretical opportunity is biobased products and biomanufacturing, where NCGA says replacing petroleum in 10% of the world’s plastics with corn-based feedstocks could total 6.6 billion bushels of potential demand. Added together, those figures are transformational — but they are not near-term demand guarantees. They are market-access targets that require technology adoption, regulatory recognition, infrastructure buildout and policy support.
The attachment adds important context by placing these opportunities on a timeline. NCGA treats E15 as the near-term priority, while marine fuels, on-road fuels and trade expansion sit in the mid-term window, and sustainable aviation fuel and biobased products are framed as longer-term demand engines. That distinction matters. Year-round nationwide E15 access remains the most actionable legislative item because it could immediately lift the ethanol blend baseline from 10% toward 15%. By contrast, maritime ethanol, SAF and biomanufacturing are bigger but more complex markets that require international standards, new fuel infrastructure, commercial-scale production and customer acceptance.
The maritime fuel section is one of the report’s most notable additions. NCGA argues ethanol can help decarbonize shipping, which the report says accounts for roughly 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions. The group points to early testing showing ethanol/methanol blends and even 100% ethanol can operate in methanol-designed engines, and it says one equipment manufacturer has announced production of an ethanol-powered engine. The opportunity is significant because global shipping is a liquid-fuel-intensive sector looking for lower-carbon options, but NCGA also acknowledges that the market is shaped by International Maritime Organization rules, lifecycle models and competing fuel narratives. Without technology-neutral standards and lifecycle accounting that recognizes modern U.S. corn production, ethanol could be disadvantaged before the market fully develops.
SAF offers a similar opportunity and a similar obstacle. Ethanol-to-jet technology gives corn ethanol a plausible path into aviation, a sector where electrification is far less practical than in cars and trucks. But NCGA’s strategy depends heavily on federal tax-credit implementation, especially workable 45Z guidance, and on international carbon rules through ICAO and CORSIA. The report warns that EU SAF mandates currently exclude food and feed crops as defined by RED III, effectively blocking U.S. crop-based ethanol from qualifying under that framework. That makes SAF not just an energy story but a trade and standards-setting fight.
The biobased products section may be the biggest long-term upside, but also the hardest to commercialize. NCGA sees corn as a replacement for petroleum-derived chemicals and plastics, with benefits for domestic manufacturing, supply-chain security and lower-carbon consumer products. But the attachment is candid about barriers: higher costs, limited scale-up infrastructure, uneven regulatory treatment and the “Valley of Death” between proof of concept and commercial production. NCGA is backing policy tools such as production and investment tax credits, stronger USDA BioPreferred funding, loan guarantees and public-private investment, while also using initiatives like the Consider Corn Challenge and Radicle Corn Challenge to support commercialization.
Trade remains a major part of the demand strategy, not a side issue. The report says one-third of corn farmers’ income is driven by export opportunities and estimates that increasing exports of corn and ethanol by 10% would represent an additional 400 million bushels of demand. NCGA specifically emphasizes renewing USMCA, noting Mexico is the top export market for U.S. corn and Canada is the top export market for ethanol. It also calls for new market-access efforts in India, Vietnam, broader Southeast Asia and Africa, along with action against barriers such as Brazil’s ethanol tariff and China’s biotech approval delays.
The political significance is that NCGA is trying to move the corn debate beyond the traditional defensive posture around ethanol, RFS, exports and farm safety nets. Those remain critical, but the new report argues they are not enough if yield growth continues and acreage remains large. The strategy is a bid to reposition corn as a feedstock for energy security, industrial policy, decarbonization and biomanufacturing. That message is aimed at lawmakers, regulators, fuel companies, airlines, shippers, consumer-product companies and investors — not just farmers.
The risk is that the strategy’s largest numbers could invite skepticism because they assume corn-based ethanol and corn-based feedstocks can win meaningful shares of markets that are still forming and highly contested. Maritime fuel buyers may choose ammonia, methanol, LNG, biofuels or other alternatives. Aviation fuel markets may favor waste oils, fats, residues or synthetic fuels depending on policy scoring. Biobased products face entrenched petroleum economics and scaling challenges. NCGA’s strongest argument is not that corn automatically captures these markets, but that U.S. policy should not exclude corn through outdated lifecycle assumptions, food-versus-fuel narratives or foreign-influenced standards before the market has a chance to compete.
Bottom line: NCGA’s report is a demand roadmap built around a simple premise — U.S. corn productivity is likely to keep rising, so growers need new markets large enough to matter. E15 and exports remain the bridge. Maritime fuels, SAF and biobased products are the long-term prize. The challenge will be turning theoretical billion-bushel markets into bankable demand before another cycle of large crops and weak margins deepens the financial strain across corn country.
