The United States biofuel industry is growing dramatically with over 90 million acres of corn planted in 2007; a 15 percent increase from 2006, with a large share being used to produce corn based ethanol. There are currently at least 127 corn based ethanol refineries with many more scheduled to come on line over the next few years. At the same time, major R&D efforts are underway to develop commercial scale technologies for producing cellulosic biofuels. While nearly half of U.S. gasoline is blended with at least some ethanol, less than 5 percent of the domestic fuel demand is currently met by ethanol.
This growth in the production of biofuels feedstocks and in the construction of refineries has been stimulated in large part by federal policies, most importantly a 51 cent per gallon subsidy. Support for expanding biofuels production and use has been driven by the need for the U.S. to become more energy independent and to improve long term energy security. It is also driven by the desire to stimulate rural economies and support US farm interests. At the same time, biofuels are seen as a possible way to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and thus to address the issue of global climate change.
The current administration has made biofuels a centerpiece of its energy policy. In the 2007 State of the Union Address, President Bush committed to expanding U.S. biofuel production and use by seven times current levels—35 billion gallons per year in 10 years. This would lead to a 15 percent reduction in the amount of gasoline which would otherwise be consumed in 2017. This proposed standard for renewable and alternative fuels was called for as part of the “Twenty in Ten” plan, a goal for this country to reduce our gasoline usage by 20
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 19
3
Biofuels R&D
INTRODUCTION
The United States biofuel industry is growing dramatically with over 90 mil-
lion acres of corn planted in 2007; a 15 percent increase from 2006, with a large
share being used to produce corn based ethanol. There are currently at least 127
corn based ethanol refineries with many more scheduled to come on line over the
next few years. At the same time, major R&D efforts are underway to develop
commercial scale technologies for producing cellulosic biofuels. While nearly
half of U.S. gasoline is blended with at least some ethanol, less than 5 percent of
the domestic fuel demand is currently met by ethanol.
This growth in the production of biofuels feedstocks and in the construction
of refineries has been stimulated in large part by federal policies, most impor-
tantly a 51 cent per gallon subsidy. Support for expanding biofuels production and
use has been driven by the need for the U.S. to become more energy independent
and to improve long term energy security. It is also driven by the desire to stimu-
late rural economies and support US farm interests. At the same time, biofuels
are seen as a possible way to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and thus to
address the issue of global climate change.
The current administration has made biofuels a centerpiece of its energy
policy. In the 2007 State of the Union Address, President Bush committed to
expanding U.S. biofuel production and use by seven times current levels—35
billion gallons per year in 10 years. This would lead to a 15 percent reduction in
the amount of gasoline which would otherwise be consumed in 2017. This pro-
posed standard for renewable and alternative fuels was called for as part of the
“Twenty in Ten” plan, a goal for this country to reduce our gasoline usage by 20
OCR for page 19
0 TRANSITIONING TO SUSTAINABILITY
percent in ten years. At the time of the Forum, other ambitious energy goals were
being debated.1 These quantitative goals are an important force driving not only
research and development expenditures, but also the market for biofuels.
One goal of the Federal Forum was to share information about current R&D
in biofuels, which was accomplished in part through descriptions of state-of-the-
art examples by different agencies, but also through group discussions. In addi-
tion to learning about existing and proposed federal activities, Forum attendees
were encouraged to identify linkages and gaps in biofuels R&D, and to begin the
discussion of how to take advantage of possible synergies.
BIOFUELS: SUSTAINABILITY CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES
Dan Kammen, Director of the Renewable and Appropriate Energy Labora-
tory at the University of California at Berkeley, opened the biofuels session by
describing some of the emerging issues associated with biofuels and the implica-
tions of biofuels production and use for sustainability. He focused on the need
to consider biofuels as part of a broad energy policy, to take a holistic view; to
recognize that corn based ethanol is not likely to be a viable long term solution
to increasing energy independence but a short term transitional fuel. He empha-
sized the need to use a portfolio approach to meeting America’s long term energy
needs recognizing that increasing supplies of conventional and non-conventional
energy and significantly improving energy efficiency must be part of the overall
strategy.
Kammen talked about a number of different approaches that could be used
to assess the costs and benefits of biofuels and to guide future energy policies
and energy investments. He noted that one tool is the current federal renewable
fuel standard. However, he suggested that a low carbon fuel standard or a sustain-
able fuels standard based on expanded life cycle assessment tools is likely to be
a better means of assessing alternative energy choices. He discussed the need to
address the effects of biofuels production on land use changes as well as a broad
range of environmental effects beyond any potential reduction in greenhouse gas
emissions such as water quality and quantity, air pollution, soil erosion and sedi-
mentation, and biodiversity loss. In addition, Kammen highlighted some of the
social and economic effects both domestically and internationally. For example,
the shift of corn-based biofuels has led to increases in prices of food such as corn-
based products and meat and diary products. Diversion of land from soybeans to
corn has shifted production to other countries where production practices may be
damaging to the environment. Kammen suggested that any assessment of biofuels
must take a holistic view, looking at all benefits and costs. For example, we need
1The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) was passed in December 2007, setting a goal
of 36 billion gallons of biofuel by 2022.
OCR for page 19
BIOFUELS R&D
to study the direct and indirect land use effects. To fully understand such effects,
we need metrics (indicators) to assess these factors.
While much attention has been focused on growing feedstocks, less attention
has been paid to the production, distribution, and use. Current refinery processes
are not particularly efficient and can have serious and wide ranging negative
environmental effects. For example, some processing facilities are fueled by
coal. These facilities can operate much more sustainably if they are be fueled by
alternative energy sources such as wood wastes or other agricultural wastes.
As Kammen discussed, corn-based ethanol is currently at the center of the
US biofuel industry, but it is not considered the best long term biofuel. The
estimated net energy benefits of corn-based ethanol are minimal and the associ-
ated environmental costs are high. Cellulosic-based fuels seem more promising
but facilities do not yet exist for large-scale commercial production. Many of
the potential cellulosic feedstocks are not expected to require large amounts of
new agricultural land and will not affect prices for food and fiber. Some sources
could even use zero agricultural land, including algae, off-season crops, or prairie
grasses. The wide variety of potential biomass feedstocks was a recurring theme
throughout the forum and is discussed more below.
Kammen discussed an important benchmark for consideration—How much
land would be needed to meet the U.S. energy demand with biofuels? Standard
corn grain ethanol requires a great deal of agricultural land, and to meet the entire
U.S. demand for liquid fuels would require more than the country’s entire land
area. Even with improvements in yields and processing efficiency, corn-based
ethanol would still require a substantial share of the country’s cropland.
Kammen emphasized the need to supplement increases in biofuel production
with increases in vehicle efficiency, in many cases using existing technologies.
For example, existing technologies could increase vehicle efficiency by 2.5 times
reducing transportation fuel needs by more than half. Recognizing trade-offs and
options is an important part of any energy strategy. For example, if the entire U.S.
corn crop were used to make ethanol, it would displace less gasoline than would
raising fleet fuel economy by five miles per gallon. In light of this, discussants
suggested that improved fuel efficiency must be part of any long term energy
strategy.
FEDERAL POLICIES AND RESEARCH
PRIORITIES RELATED TO BIOFUELS
John Mizroch, the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Office of En-
ergy Efficiency and Renewable Energy at the Department of Energy, discussed
the current federal landscape for biofuels. He discussed the new federal mandate
for biofuels, DOE’s R&D biofuels’ priorities and the federal Biomass R&D
Board. He also noted the importance of recognizing the international dimension
of biofuel production.
OCR for page 19
TRANSITIONING TO SUSTAINABILITY
The administration’s “Twenty in Ten” initiative has set of goal of reducing
U.S. gasoline consumption by 20 percent in 10 years, increasing ethanol produc-
tion to 35 billion gallons by 2017, and by 2030 increase production to 60 billion
gallons a year. In order to meet these goals, DOE’s R&D programs focus on
increasing the range of feedstocks available for fuels and reducing the costs of
converting feedstocks to fuels. Recognizing that cellulosic feedstocks will likely
be the primary source of ethanol in the future, DOE has committed about $1 bil-
lion to cellulosic ethanol production and R&D, which it expects to be matched by
private sector funding. DOE expects to support the construction of 16 cellulosic
ethanol plants with a least six built at commercial scales.
Much of the federal research on biofuels is coordinated through the Biomass
R&D Board chaired by DOE and USDA, which also includes members from the
Department of Interior, DOT, and the EPA. The USGS and EPA fund specific
R&D programs looking at some of the sustainability aspects of biofuel production
and use. For example, the USGS is assessing the impacts of biofuel production
on biota, water and land including the effects of returning fallow lands to agri-
cultural production on water quality, native plants, migratory birds, and wildlife.
Complementary work is being done by the EPA looking at the effects of the entire
biofuel system on natural and manmade systems.
Alternative fuels are an international issue, though much of the discussion in
the United States tends to focus on the domestic aspects. The world is becoming
rapidly urbanized with increasing demands for energy and increased requirements
for petroleum and other liquid fuels. Much of this demand is driven by the dra-
matic increase in car ownership in countries such as China. Many countries are
beginning to develop or expand their own biofuels production capacity.
STATE-OF-THE-ART ExAMPLES OF SUSTAINABLITY R&D
The following forum participants described examples of the biofuels R&D
being supported by federal agencies:
• Jeff Steiner, US Department of Agriculture (USDA), REAP: Renewable
Energy Assessment Project
• Richard Alexander, US Geological Survey (USGS), USGS Research on
Biofuels Sustainability
• Randy Bruins, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Future Mid-
western Landscapes
• Marcia Patton-Mallory, US Forest Service (USFS), Bioenergy from
Forests-Moving Science to Practice Issues of Sustainability
• William Chernicoff, US Department of Transportation (USDOT), Inte-
grated Mapping of Biofuels Feedstock Production and Transportation
for Systems Visualization and Optimization
OCR for page 19
BIOFUELS R&D
• Jacques Beaudry-Losique, Department of Energy (DOE), Sustainability
and Biofuels Production: A DOE Perspective
Summary descriptions of the projects presented are included in Appendix D
of this workshop report. The efforts are dominated by the programs in DOE and
USDA but other agencies also have R&D programs focused on sustainability and
biofuels. Some of the common issues addressed in agency R&D efforts included:
evaluations of alternative feedstocks, the effects of production on ecosystem
services, transportation requirements, and developing methodologies to assess
the economic, environmental, social, and technical aspects associated with fuel
choices.
An increasing variety of feedstocks are now being considered for biofuel
production. Corn-based ethanol has received the most attention because it com-
mands the majority of the current biofuels market and additional opportunities
to improve cropping practices and conversion efficiencies. However, many other
sources of biomass can be used. These options range from agricultural crops (in-
cluding sorghum, soybeans, and sugar) to agricultural residues (e.g., corn stover
or wheat straw) to energy crops (such as switchgrass) to forest residues (e.g., tree
thinnings, logging scraps, sawdust) to wastes (including recycled grease, garbage,
and manure), to algae. These are not mutually exclusive categories. For example,
Marcia Patton-Mallory (USFS) described a feedstock that is both a forest residue
and a waste—the wood that builds up on the forest floor because natural forest
fires are often suppressed. This wood buildup raises the likelihood and severity of
future forest fires. If it can be collected and used as fuel, it is basically a win-win
situation. Since finding ways to dispose of waste is also a sustainability challenge,
turning waste into an energy source is an attractive option. At the same time, corn
production can continue to provide a feedstock for ethanol and the wastes, corn
stover, can provide a feedstock for cellulosic ethanol.
While there are currently no commercial scale cellulosic plants, some 16
cellulosic ethanol production facilities are expected to be operable in the U.S. by
2010. Jacques Beaudry-Losique (DOE) described DOE’s new research activities
focused on the commercialization of cellulosic ethanol. He described some of the
advantages of cellulosic biomass over corn as an ethanol feedstock. He noted that
cellulosic feedstocks do not compete with food crops and require less fertilizer.
Furthermore, cellulosic-based ethanol releases substantially lower carbon dioxide
(CO2) than corn-based ethanol.
There are additional forest resources that are available or underutilized that
could be used to create biofuels. Marcia-Patton Mallory (USFS) talked about the
potential role of forest resources as a source of bioenergy. She noted that almost
50 percent of US renewable energy supplies are from biomass, mostly used for
heat and power. Many of these forest resources are wastes and need to be cleared
as part of a sustainable forest management strategy reducing the potential for for-
est fires and creating healthier forests. Dr. Patton Mallory emphasized the need
OCR for page 19
TRANSITIONING TO SUSTAINABILITY
for an integrated or holistic approach to looking at a variety of bioenergy feed-
stocks and for evaluating the sustainability implications of different approaches.
Several participants stressed the need to understand the effects of growing
various feedstocks on water, land, air, and soil. Randy Bruins (EPA) discussed
a new study being conducted by the EPA which examines how changes in land
use and the development of biofuel production facilities will potentially influence
ecosystem services. The project is expected to create a decision tool kit which can
assist producers and policy makers in understanding the implications of biofuel
investments on critical ecosystem services including air and water quality, local
hydrology, natural areas, and wildlife.
Corn stover is a crucial natural fertilizer that helps maintain the soil’s organic
carbon content as well as other nutrients such as nitrogen, phosphorous, and po-
tassium. Jeff Steiner (USDA) focused on potential changes in soil quality from
the use of corn stover as a biofuel feedstock He noted that the stover is usually
left on the soil to maintain soil productivity and reduce erosion. If the stover is
harvested, soil quality will suffer reducing subsequent crop yields. Determining
the amount of stover that must be retained on the soil and that which can be used
as a fuel is a big research challenge.
Growing feedstocks for biofuels requires a lot of water input, but the water
output also significantly affects the surrounding aquatic ecosystems. Richard
Alexander (USGS) focused on the relationship between water and biofuels.
When considering the role of water in an ecosystem, both quantity and quality
are important properties. Runoff from agricultural land delivers nutrients from
fertilizers into streams which in turn impact downstream areas. For example, ag-
riculture is the main source of nitrogen and phosphorous in the Mississippi River
Basin and in the Gulf of Mexico waters. This excessive buildup of nutrients has
contributed to the high dissolved oxygen levels killing many aquatic organisms.
Steve Parker (National Academies) similarly highlighted the important role
of water in his description of a recent study by the NRC’s Water Science and
Technology Board on Water Implications of Biofuels Production in the United
States (NRC, 2007). He discussed the effects of the expanding biofuels indus-
try on water, including both crop production needs—also mentioned by Mr.
Alexander—and ethanol processing, which is water-intensive. He described ir-
rigating corn crops as the dominant “worst case” in water resource use for crop
production. Secondary, but not insignificant, are the water requirements and
impacts from the production facilities themselves.
Transportation of fuels between where they are produced and used is an
important ingredient in the calculus of their sustainability. If biofuel production
is significantly increased, how will we meet the extra transportation need? It is
important to consider the method and the distance of transport. The method is
a key question for ethanol, for example, which typically must travel by truck,
waterway, or rail. Ethanol is miscible with water and thus subject to mixing with
OCR for page 19
BIOFUELS R&D
pipeline impurities which do not mix with petroleum or natural gas fuels, and thus
cannot easily be transported through existing petroleum pipelines.
In addition to transport method, distance is also a key consideration. Wil-
liam Chernicoff (DOT) pointed out that the further a fuel has to be transported,
the higher its final cost, and the less sustainable it is. Emphasizing the important
role his organization plays in energy sustainability, he added that two-thirds of
energy in the United States currently moves through the DOT’s transportation
system. Furthermore, there may not be sufficient capacity in the locations where
it is needed. If the additional biofuel load on the existing transportation system
increases overall traffic congestion, this resulting loss of efficiency increases the
waste of all fuels and again decreases the sustainability of a fuel.
Optimizing biofuel feedstocks to a regional climate and soil condition and
then using that fuel locally would minimize the costs of transport required and
often improve sustainability. Moreover, maintaining a diverse portfolio of fuel
sources could make the market more robust, insulating it from potentially devas-
tating effects of occasional crop failures, for example. The importance of such a
holistic, big-picture perspective of the problem was echoed by many participants
in a variety of contexts throughout the forum.
Many participants discussed using a holistic approach to examine biofuels
and sustainability. A holistic approach also requires considering the lifecycle of
a fuel. This includes the broad ecosystem perspective discussed above, which
means taking into account a feedstock’s effects on all of the resources of an eco-
system. A lifecycle analysis adds a temporal component, considering the energy
and resource requirements and impact on the environment for every step that
occurs in production and use of a fuel. For example, this might include planting,
growing, harvesting, and processing a raw feedstock, then delivery to and use by
the consumer, then return of the byproducts to the environment.
BIOFUELS AND SUSTAINABILITY R&D:
GAPS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR INTEGRATION,
COORDINATION, AND PARTNERSHIPS
John Carberry (DuPont), Mike Bertolucci (Interface Research Corporation,
retired), Emmy Simmons (USAID, retired) and James Fisher (USDA) led the
roundtable discussions by suggesting that participants consider the following
issues, detailed in Box 1.
Biofuels and Sustainability R&D:
Summary of Roundtable Panel Discussions
As each Roundtable group presented the summary of its discussion, several
themes emerged. A number of participants emphasized the need for a systems
approach to assess biofuels and taking a holistic perspective on the costs and
OCR for page 19
TRANSITIONING TO SUSTAINABILITY
BOX 1
Gaps and Opportunities for Collaboration in Biofuels R&D
Related to Sustainability
• What are the drawbacks of various biofuels, including possible unintended
and potentially harmful consequences? What are the potential barriers to ex-
panded use of biofuels as a replacement for gasoline?
• How can socioeconomic and political factors be integrated with our bio-
logical and physical knowledge on biofuels? Biofuel production has tended to be
viewed as a physical problem of production, efficiency, and delivery. But it’s actu-
ally much bigger and more complex than that. It’s also a business requiring a clear
understanding of the market for biofuels. Biofuels are also an international issue,
affecting both industrialized and developing countries. The markets overseas may
have different pressures and needs. For example, europe has a higher demand
for biodiesel, while domestically the focus is on ethanol.
• How does the demand for biofuel feedstocks affect other markets? For
example, the volume of U.S. food aid has dropped by half in the last 5 years, even
though the budget has stayed the same? This is a direct result of fuel markets:
(1) transport fuels are much more expensive, and (2) grain foods are pricier now
because of the increased demand for energy crops.
• How can government, industry, and academia work together so that faster
progress can be made?
• What is the potential for GMos to increase the supply of biofuel feedstocks
and what are the technical and public acceptances barriers?
• What key opportunities in biofuels R&D could make the greatest contribu-
tion to increasing the availability of alternative transportation fuels? Are there
R&D areas that are overlooked or underfunded?
benefits of various energy supply options. They suggested the importance of
not only looking at the production of biofuel feedstocks but also at refineries,
distribution systems, markets, and consumers. To date, most of the attention has
focused on the production side of the equation with little attention to distribu-
tions systems—integrating biofuels into larger transportation system, markets,
and customers. There is currently no infrastructure in place to make large scale
substitutions of biofuels for conventional gasoline. Participants also noted that
there are only a limited number of flex fuel vehicles and few outlets selling E-85
or other alternative fuels. Furthermore, there seems to be little understanding of
consumer behavior, specifically under what conditions consumers may be willing
to buy flex fueled vehicles or to retrofit existing vehicles in order to use higher
blends of ethanol and gasoline. A holistic approach also requires considering
OCR for page 19
BIOFUELS R&D
the whole lifecycle of a fuel. This includes the broad ecosystem perspective
discussed above, which considers a feedstock’s effects on all of the resources of
an ecosystem. A lifecycle analysis adds a temporal component, considering the
energy and resource requirement and impact on the environment of every step that
occurs in production and use of a fuel. For example, this might include planting,
growing, harvesting, and processing a raw feedstock, then delivery to and use by
the consumer, then return of the byproducts to the environment. Each potential
feedstock and fuel needs to be judged on this basis
A number of participants suggested that it would be useful to develop a
framework for assessing biofuels and other alternative fuels in the context of
other societal concerns in order to understand the associated risks and benefits
and examine the full range of environmental and economic effects. Others empha-
sized the importance of maintaining a diverse portfolio of fuel sources to reduce
the potentially devastating effects of crop failures.
Discussants emphasized the need to take a broad view, looking at a full range
of energy choices that are likely to change over time. They stressed the need to
maintain flexibility and not get locked into promising but unproven approaches.
The development of alternative fuels can be seen as an evolutionary process. It
is gradually developing, but we need to identify and remove barriers to facilitate
this. Diversified supplies are needed to tackle this large problem. There is no one
“silver bullet” that will meet all needs in every region, so we need to pursue a
variety of feedstocks.
Many participants stressed the importance of using place based research
to assess ecosystem effects as well as to measure direct and indirect costs. The
sustainability of biofuel production depends in large measure on the local ge-
ography, current climate patterns as well as the potential impact of climate soil
productivity, farming techniques, transportation systems, distances from refinery
facilities, distances from ultimate customers, costs, and availability of other fuels.
In some places bioenergy crops will require large increases in chemical fertilizers
and water use with important impacts on local water resources and ecosystems.
At the same time there may be impacts outside of the local area. The impacts
of increased nutrient loading on the Gulf of Mexico are a prime example with a
dramatic expansion of the “dead zone.”
Several participants expressed the need for expanded communications be-
tween scientists, policy makers, farmers, businesses, and investors. We have indi-
vidual knowledge that we don’t have collectively. Sharing knowledge is critical to
keeping expectations in check and meeting long term goals for expanded energy
supplies and meeting the transition to sustainability.
Forum participants were also concerned with more fully understanding the
political, economic, and social implications of biofuels both domestically and
internationally. Who benefits from the current expansion of corn-based biofuel?
What changes are likely to occur in the U.S. and internationally? Is production
likely to expand into lands already part of the Conservation Reserve Program?
OCR for page 19
TRANSITIONING TO SUSTAINABILITY
Are the beneficiaries primarily large scale corporate farms or small farms? What
is the effect of expanded demand for agricultural land on the viability of small
farm? What are the international trade implications of expanding biofuels? Most
participants do not view corn-based biofuels as a long term energy solution,
therefore, what will be the implications for local producers, rural communities,
and investors of a shift to cellulosic ethanol of other alternative fuels?