Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
production increases greenhouse gas emissions by
%
compared with gasoline. It takes a long time for the small
greenhouse gas gain from ethanol to balance the loss from
land-use change.
There is an increasing amount of research aimed at
understanding the effects of biofuels on land use, water,
and food prices. This is to the good if anyone pays atten-
tion. But there still is no comprehensive integrated analysis
that speci
cally looks at the negatives as well as the posi-
tives, and I therefore remain a skeptic on cellulosic ethanol
until this kind of work is done. We already know that
Phase-
biofuels are losers except for sugarcane, and even
sugarcane will become a loser if the growers convert the
wrong kinds of land to its use. As to food prices, farmers
are business people and they will use the best land to grow
the crops that bring the most income. If that crop is a fuel
crop that is what will be grown. Food prices will adjust to
match those of energy. To say that there are problems
with the US biofuels program is an understatement, and
an alert to other regions thinking about biofuels.
Ethanol production used
% of the US corn crop in
and requiring more corn for fuel will drive up
food prices or require opening more land to crops.
People are driving less. The total amount of fuel used
today is much less than the projections made in
,
and the
% blend of ethanol in gasoline requires less,
not more ethanol. Mandating the use of more ethanol
makes little sense.
Current light vehicles are designed to handle
% per
cent ethanol without problems, and increasing the per-
centage so that the standard can be met is problematic.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search