Ethanol fuel energy balance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Energy balance ^[1]

Country	Type	Energy balance
US	Corn ethanol	1.3
Brazil	Cane ethanol	8
Germany	Biodiesel	2.5
no current production	Cellulosic ethanol	†2–36

† depending on production method

All biomass needs to go through some of these steps: it needs to be grown, collected, dried, fermented, and burned. All of these steps require resources and an infrastructure. The total amount of energy input into the process compared to the energy released by burning the resulting ethanol fuel is known as the ethanol fuel energy balance and studied as part of the wider field of energy economics. Figures compiled in a 2007 National Geographic Magazine article ^[1] point to modest results for corn ethanol produced in the US: it takes 1 unit of fossil-fuel energy to create 1.3 energy units of corn ethanol energy. The energy balance for cane ethanol produced in Brazil is favorable. Over the years, however, many reports have been produced with contradicting energy balance estimates.

Contents [hide] 1 Energy balance reports 2 Variables 3 Clean production bioethanol 4 References 5 See also

[edit] Energy balance reports

In 1995 the USDA released a report stating that the net energy balance of corn ethanol in the United States was an average of 1.24. It was previously considered to have a negative net energy balance. However, due to increases in corn crop yield and more efficient farming practices corn ethanol had gained energy efficiency ^[2]

Opponents of corn ethanol production in the U.S. often quote the 2005 paper ^[3] of David Pimentel, a retired Entomologist, and Tadeusz Patzek, a Geological Engineer from Berkeley. Both have been exceptionally critical of ethanol and other biofuels. Their studies contend that ethanol, and biofuels in general, are "energy negative", meaning they take more energy to produce than is contained in the final product.

A 2006 article ^[4] in Science offers the consensus opinion that fuels like ethanol are energy positive. Furthermore, it should be pointed out that fossil fuels also require significant energy inputs which have seldom been accounted for in the past.

It is also important to note that ethanol is not the only product created during production, and the energy content of the by-products must also be considered. Corn is typically 66% starch and the remaining 33% is not fermented. This unfermented component is called distillers grain, which is high in fats and proteins, and makes good animal feed. ^[5]

Back in 2000, Dr. Michael Wang, of Argonne National Laboratory, wrote that these ethanol by-products are the most contentious issue in evaluating the energy balance of ethanol. He wrote that Pimentel assumes that corn ethanol entirely replaces gasoline and so the quantity of by-products is too large for the market to absorb, and they become waste. At lower quantities of production, Wang finds it appropriate to credit corn ethanol based on the input energy requirement of the feed product or good that the ethanol by-product displaces.^[6] In 2004, a USDA report found that co-products accounting made the difference between energy ratios of 1.06 and 1.67^[7]. In 2006, MIT researcher Tiffany Groode came to similar conclusions about the co-product issue.^[8]

In Brazil where sugar cane is used, the yield is higher, and conversion to ethanol is somewhat more energy efficient than corn. Recent developments with cellulosic ethanol production may improve yields even further.^[9]

In 2006 a study from the University of Minnesota found that corn-grain ethanol produced 1.25 units of energy per unit put in.^[10]

A 2008 study by the University of Nebraska found a 5.4 energy balance for ethanol derived specifically from switchgrass ^{[11] [12]}. This estimate is better than in previous studies and according to the authors partly due to the larger size of the field trial (3-9 ha) on 10 farms.

[edit] Variables

According to DoE, ^[13] to evaluate the net energy of ethanol four variables must be considered:

1. the amount of energy contained in the final ethanol product
2. the amount of energy directly consumed to make the ethanol (such as the diesel used in tractors)
3. the quality of the resulting ethanol compared to the quality of refined gasoline
4. the energy indirectly consumed (in order to make the ethanol processing plant, etc).

Much of the current academic discussion regarding ethanol currently revolves around issues of system borders. This refers to how complete of a picture is drawn for energy inputs. There is debate on whether to include items like the energy required to feed the people tending and processing the corn, to erect and repair farm fences, even the amount of energy a tractor represents.

In addition, there is no consensus on what sort of value to give the rest of the corn (such as the stalk), commonly known as the 'coproduct.' Some studies leave it on the field to protect the soil from erosion and to add organic matter, while others take and burn the coproduct to power the ethanol plant, but do not address the resulting soil erosion (which would require energy in the form of fertilizer to replace). Depending on the ethanol study you read, net energy returns vary from .7-1.5 units of ethanol per unit of fossil fuel energy consumed. For comparison, that same one unit of fossil fuel invested in oil and gas extraction (in the lower 48 States) will yield 15 units of gasoline, a yield an order of magnitude better than current ethanol production technologies, ignoring the energy quality arguments above and the fact that the gain (14 units) is not carbon neutral. ^[14]

In this regard, geography is the decisive factor. In tropical regions with abundant water and land resources, such as Brazil and Colombia, the viability of production of ethanol from sugarcane is no longer in question; in fact, the burning of sugarcane residues (bagasse) generates far more energy than needed to operate the ethanol plants, and many of them are now selling electric energy to the utilities. However, while there may be a positive net energy return at the moment, recent research suggests that the sugarcane plantations are not sustainable in the long run, as they are depleting the soil of nutrients and carbon matter^{[citation needed]}

The picture is different for other regions, such as most of the United States, where the climate is too cool for sugarcane. In the U.S., agricultural ethanol is generally obtained from grain, chiefly corn. But it can also be obtained from cellulose, more energy balanced bioethanol.

[edit] Clean production bioethanol

Clean production bioethanol^{[citation needed]} is a biofuel obtained using as much as possible non-greenhouse gas renewable energy sources:

• the amount of energy directly consumed to make the ethanol is renewable energy : the tractor uses ethanol engine, biodiesel, air engine or electricity obtained from wind or solar energy.
• the energy indirectly consumed, that can be solar energy.

To transport the biofuel to the fuel-stations can be used truck with ethanol engines or electric motors (that uses energy solar energy stored in the batteries).

[edit] References

1. ^ ^{a b} Green Dreams J.K. Bourne JR, R. Clark National Geographic Magazine October 2007 p. 41 Article
2. ^ Estimating the Net Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol Hosein Shapouri, James A. Duffield, and Michael S. Graboski Agricultural Economics Report No. (AER721) 24 pp, July 1995 www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aer721/
3. ^ Ethanol Production Using Corn, Switchgrass, and Wood; Biodiesel Production Using Soybean and Sunflower David Pimentel and Tad W. Patzek Natural Resources Research, Vol. 14, No. 1, March 2005 doi:10.1007/s11053-005-4679-8 [http://petroleum.berkeley.edu/papers/Biofuels/NRRethanol.2005.pdf
4. ^ Ethanol Can Contribute to Energy and Environmental Goals Alexander E. Farrell, Richard J. Plevin, Brian T. Turner, Andrew D. Jones, Michael O’Hare, Daniel M. Kammen 506 27 January 2006 vol 311 Science http://rael.berkeley.edu/ebamm/FarrellEthanolScience012706.pdf
5. ^ http://www.ddgs.umn.edu/more.htm University of Minnesota
6. ^ Corn-Based Ethanol Does Indeed Achieve Energy Benefits
7. ^ The 2001 Net Energy Balance of Corn-Ethanol
8. ^ Review of Corn Based Ethanol Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
9. ^ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5353118.stm Biofuels look to the next generation
10. ^ Hill, Jason; Nelson, Erik; Tilman, David; Polasky, Stephen; and Tiffany, Douglas (July 25 2006). "Environmental, economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103 (30): 11206-10. doi:10.1073/pnas.0604600103. Retrieved on 2007-01-24. 
11. '^ Grass biofuels 'cut CO2 by 94% Reprted on bbc.co.uk http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7175397.stm
12. ^ M. R. Schmer, K. P. Vogel, R. B. Mitchell, and R. K. Perrin Net energy of cellulosic ethanol from switchgrass PNAS published January 7, 2008, doi:10.1073/pnas.0704767105
13. ^ DoE: Biomass Program: Net Energy Balance for Bioethanol Production and Use Quote: "...The most official study of the issue, which also reviews other studies, concludes that the "net energy balance" of making fuel ethanol from corn grain is 1.34...For cellulosic bioethanol—the focus of the Biomass Program—that study projects an energy balance of 2.62...A Biomass Program life-cycle analysis of producing ethanol from stover, now underway, is expected to show a very impressive net energy ratio of more than 5..."
14. ^ Net Energy From the Extraction of Oil and Gas in the United States Cutler J. Cleveland http://www.bu.edu/cees/people/faculty/cutler/articles/Net_%20Energy_US_Oil_gas.pdf (pdf)