Photo Credit: University of Nebraska-Lincoln
article tools
Increase Text Size Increase Text Size Decreate Text Size Decrease Text Size
Share Email This Story Share Share This Story Reader comments Reader Comments (24) View image gallery Image Gallery (1) Add to favorites Add to Bookmarks Printer friendly version Printer Friendly Version
Article Tool Sponsor:

Advertise with us

More Jobs
0 ratings - Sign-in to rate this article
January 15, 2008

Study Shows Great Potential of Switchgrass as Biofuel Feedstock

Linclon, Nebraska [RenewableEnergyAccess.com]

Switchgrass grown for biofuel production produced 540 percent more energy than needed to grow, harvest and process it into cellulosic ethanol, according to estimates from a large on-farm study by researchers at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL).

Results from the five-year study involving fields on farms in three states highlights the prairie grass' potential as a biomass fuel source that yields significantly more energy than is consumed in production and conversion into cellulosic ethanol, said Ken Vogel, a U.S. Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service geneticist in UNL's agronomy and horticulture department.

The study involved switchgrass fields on farms in Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota. It is the largest study to date examining the net energy output, greenhouse gas emissions, biomass yields, agricultural inputs and estimated cellulosic ethanol production from switchgrass grown and managed for biomass fuel.

"This clearly demonstrates that switchgrass is not only energy efficient, but can be used in a renewable biofuel economy to reduce reliance of fossil fuels, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance rural economies," Vogel said.

The joint USDA-ARS and Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources study also found greenhouse gas emissions from cellulosic ethanol made from switchgrass were 94 percent lower than estimated greenhouse gas emissions from gasoline production.

In a biorefinery, switchgrass biomass can be broken down into sugars including glucose and xylose that can be fermented into ethanol similar to corn. Grain from corn and other annual cereal grains, such as sorghum, are now primary sources for U.S. ethanol production.

In the future, perennial crops, such as switchgrass, as well as crop residues and forestry biomass could be developed as major cellulosic ethanol sources that could potentially displace 30 percent of current U.S. petroleum consumption, Vogel said. Technology to convert biomass into cellulosic ethanol is being developed and is now at the development stage where small commercial scale biorefineries are beginning to be built with scale-up support from the U.S. Department of Energy.

This study involved 10 fields of 15- to 20-acres each. Trials began in 2000 and 2001 and continued for five years. Farmers were paid for their work under contract with UNL and documented all production operations, agricultural inputs and biomass yields. The researchers used this information to determine the net energy estimates.

Switchgrass grown in this study yielded 93 percent more biomass per acre and an estimated 93 percent more net energy yield than previously estimated in a study done elsewhere of planted prairies in Minnesota that received low agricultural inputs, Vogel said. The study demonstrates that biomass energy from perennial bioenergy crops such as switchgrass can produce significantly more energy per acre than low input systems. Less land will be needed for energy crops if higher yields can be obtained.

Researchers point out in their study that plant biomass remaining after ethanol production could be used to provide the energy needed for the distilling process and other power requirements of the biorefinery. This results in a high net energy value for ethanol produced from switchgrass biomass. In contrast, corn grain ethanol biorefineries need to use natural gas or other sources of energy for the conversion process.

In this study, switchgrass managed as a bioenergy crop produced estimated ethanol yields per acre similar to those from corn grown in the same states and years based on statewide average grain yields.

"However, caution should be used in making direct ethanol yield comparisons with cellulosic sources and corn grains because corn grain conversion technology is mature, whereas cellulosic conversion efficiency technology is based on an estimated value," Vogel said.

Vogel said that he does not expect switchgrass to replace corn or other crops on Class 1 farm land. He and his colleagues are developing it for use on marginal, highly erodible lands similar to that currently in the Conservation Reserve Programs. All the fields in this study met the criteria that would have qualified for this program. Using a conservation cellulosic conversion value, researchers found that switchgrass grown on the marginal fields produced an average of 300 gallons of ethanol per acre compared to average ethanol yields of 350 gallons per acre for corn for the same three states.

The researchers point out that this was a base-line study. The switchgrass cultivars used in this study were developed for use in pastures. New higher yielding cultivars are under development for specific use in bioenergy production systems.

Switchgrass yields continue to improve, Vogel said. Recent yield trials of new experimental stains in the three states produced 50 percent higher yields than achieved in this study.

"Now, we really need to use an Extension effort to let farmers know about this new crop," Vogel said.

Future research will include further studies of improving management practices including work on improving establishment and harvesting methods, improving biomass yield, and improving conversion efficiency and net and total energy yields, Vogel said.

Switchgrass in this study employed UNL's best management practices for switchgrass, including no-till seeding, herbicides, weed control and adaptive cultivars. This study was also based on farm fields up to 20 acres instead of smaller research-scale plots typically less than about 100 square feet.

Six cellulosic biorefineries that are being co-funded by the U.S. Department of Energy also are in the works across the U.S. that should be completed over the next few years. These plants are expected to produce more than 130 million gallons of cellulosic ethanol per year, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.

Image Gallery (1)
 
Reader Comments (24)
 
No image available
January 15, 2008
Forget corn husking, I'd be quite proud if my native state became known as the Nebraska Grass Burners instead....
Comment 1 of 24
No image available
January 16, 2008

One could also say that, assuming this study is right
It's EROEI is 1/3rd less than SugarCane.

So the primary question is, where is all this supposed biomass going to come from?

http://greyfalcon.net/biolimits.png
http://greyfalcon.net/perlack

 

Magic? 


Comment 2 of 24
No image available
January 16, 2008
There is a more positive and recognisable  proof that Mr. Mosmans premise and maybe the Second Law is incorrect. It takes very little energy for me to eat something and digest it; but when I fart, all hell breaks loose.
Comment 3 of 24
No image available
January 16, 2008
How many years away is production though? I've heard as many as 10; and how much cellulase enzyme is available. I wonder if this process won't be materials limited like thin-film technology? I guess I question this type of research, which is mostly on paper. And I wonder most about water!!! It takes thousands of gallons of water to make one gallon of ethanol from corn. Where's all that extra water coming from? There are still lots of questions to be answered about biofuels, but anything would probably be better than ethanol from grains and biodiesel from soy beans.
Comment 4 of 24
No image available
January 16, 2008
I believe that the cellulosic refineries are using cellulase enzyme from fungi or bacteria as the first step before fermentation by yeast and this is a costly and time consuming process.  Earlier, the Q microbe was shown to be a more compact process with improved efficiency and cost.  Anyone know what has happened to this research? TIA    Wes
Comment 5 of 24
No image available
January 16, 2008
This study contradicts the U. of MN study(Tilman, et al) which said switch grass didn't cut it.
Also I don't think any of these studies made one gallon of ethanol.
Comment 6 of 24
No image available
January 16, 2008

The Gov't likes to say switch grass can grow on poor soil, which is true. IF it can produce 540x the amount of energy that corn does, then we will we no longer be growing corn anywhere in the Great Plains. That will cause significant inflation in food prices world wide which will cause massive human starvation.

Using our food producing lands for the production of fuel has some very cruel consequences. How many dead people is gasoline independence worth? 5 million people? 20 million people? per year? What will the skin color of those people be? 


Comment 7 of 24
No image available
January 16, 2008
Mr. Mosman –The energy value not included in the input side of the equation is that obtained from photosynthesis.  As all solar advocates readily point out, this energy is free.  If you add this free energy to the input side of the equation, then you are correct; the first and second laws of thermodynamics hold true, as always.
Comment 8 of 24
No image available
January 16, 2008

EPM: While there is no ref to the original article, I assume this is an EROEI calculation, based on the FOSSIL inputs and equivalent energy outputs. In this case the 540% would merely show that with perennial switchgrass you actually capture a lot of solar energy, whereas with corn you are largely turning fossil fuel into slightly more fossil fuel replacement with little gain from the solar inputs.The difference is usually  the reduction in fertiliser and other inputs with a perennial ( where a lot of the palnt is retained) rather than an annual ( where all the plant is discarded each year)

 

So the Laws of Thermodynamics are safe!

 

However I havent seen the original paper , nor who funded it ( which often affects the reported results) so they may be blowing smoke. 


Comment 9 of 24
January 16, 2008
Mr. Mosman's caveat regarding cellulosic energy production, that the laws of thermodynamics prevent a net energy gain, does not apply. The sun clearly is the main input source of the energy bounty via the photosynthetic process. All combustible fuel energy, even gasoline, ultimately comes from the sun.

The statistic in the article that switchgrass-derived ethanol burns 94% cleaner is as significant as the touted 540% energy gain.
Comment 10 of 24
January 16, 2008

Mr. Mosman-

Your comment is not slated to be deleted. As part of upgrades to our site, users now have the option of deleting their own comments. Thanks for noticing and I hope that explains things.

Graham Jesmer
News Editor


Comment 11 of 24
No image available
January 16, 2008
Who places the Delete this comment on my postings and why?
Comment 12 of 24
No image available
January 16, 2008
For those who support the idea that there is a positive energy balance for ethanol from switchgrass or any other source perhaps one will sit down and calculate the energy balance in a non-hydrocarbon world using only ethanol as the energy source to produce ethanol, no hydrocarbon based natural gas, gasoline, diesel fuel, lubricants, petrochemicals for rubber, plastics, fertilizer for the transportation of seeds, planting, growing, fertilizing, harvesting, transporting the raw material, corn for instance, the production, special storage/transportation, blending and losses due to solubility in water.
Comment 13 of 24
No image available
January 16, 2008

The claim that witchgrass grown for biofuel production produced 540 percent more energy than needed to grow is in conflict with the two basic laws of thermodynamics which control all processes.

First Law- Energy is neither created or destroyed, it changes from one form to another.

Second Law- The energy available after a chemical reaction is less than that at the beginning of a reaction; energy conversions are not 100%

Have the researchers at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL) actually developed a perpetual motion process, one that creates the more energy that it takes to produce? If any process produces more energy than the process uses there would be no need for government subsidies of research, development and production, the private sector would fund all future developments.

 


Comment 14 of 24
No image available
January 16, 2008
What about cannabis and its seeds as a fuel source, I heard it was a particularly energy rich source of fuel?What is the best plant to use in terms of overall efficiency ,particularly in regards to amount of water required in the cultivation stage?
Comment 15 of 24
No image available
January 17, 2008
First, I would like to thank Mr. Jesmer for clarifying 'delete this comment'. Secondly a quick check with several science and engineering organzations indicates that the Laws of Thermodynamics have not been repealed or discredited by any recent studies even if claims are made that energy is created. Thirdly, Senator Schumer, a staunch supporter of energy independence from imported oil and supporter of ethanol production, is now demanding the removal of the import tariff on foreign produced ethanol since the rapid increasing cost of corn is feeding(pun intended) the inflationary increases in the costs of, not only, corn based products, but also, meat, milk,etc. Senator Schumer , while demanding energy independence for imported petroleum products is pushing the US energy market into dependence on imported ethanol. 
Comment 16 of 24
No image available
January 17, 2008
We hear much from those who vaunt or oppose the growing of different bio fuel plants such as switchgrass, corn, etc, but what also interests me is what happens to the waste products from these plants after they have been converted from A to B:  I am sure that we have a double edged sword here if it could be exploited: Waste not, Want not.
Comment 17 of 24
No image available
January 17, 2008
In using the laws of thermodynamics to discount this, remember the sun is providing energy input and is ultimately the source of most forms of energy.
Comment 18 of 24
No image available
January 17, 2008
History shows we cannot support our voracious energy appetite by strictly agrarian means. This was proved during the late 1800's when most of the Northeast was clear cut of vegetation for food and energy.  Re-forestation did not begin until oil came on the scene.  Bioenergy can help offset a small percentage of petroleum but cannot replace it at this time, and the food vs. energy debate has ethical concerns.  We need a breakthrough technology, akin to the invention of the transistor, that can effectively and safely harness other prime and virtually inexhaustable energy sources such as the sun, the earth's magma, and the atom. 
Comment 19 of 24
No image available
January 17, 2008

If countries shifted there food-producing land to fuel-producing ones i think great problems regarding food availability and quantity will occure thus millions of persons will suffer. Look nowadays for corn and its prices which may proceed rising in the next years as we will produce more and more ethanol, many countries especially at Africa will suffer since they depend on such crop. So the solutions i think either producing such crops for fuel in non-cultivated areas under high plant density or shifting to othre alternatives such as Algae or other crops that don't occupy large areas.


Comment 20 of 24
No image available
January 18, 2008

The only solution is drastic demand reduction.  Only then can we consider alternatives to meet our much reduced demands.  We have designed a very wasteful system that becomes more wasteful every day.  We've become dependent on ever increasing use of many finite resources - land, water, oil, etc.  Read the Meadows report to the club of rome on the limits of growth.

One more thing.  The vast majority of grain and soy grown in the US goes to feed livestock.  We could achieve great increases in food system efficiency if we switched to a mostly vegetarian diet, and especially if we all had backyard gardens.


Comment 21 of 24
No image available
January 18, 2008

The article estimates that 30% of current gasoline demand can be met with switchgrass.  If we ignore the impacts of using that much land to grow switchgrass, and current technological lackings in refinement... By the time they get the system up and running, demand increase for gasoline will have exceeded that 30% - so it leaves us no better than where we were before, only we won't actually have the same amount of gasoline we do now, because global production will be in decline due to oil field depletion.


Comment 22 of 24
No image available
January 19, 2008

 When the author's write that "major cellulosic ethanol sources that could potentially displace 30 percent of current U.S. petroleum consumption," it is assumed that the reference is to gasoline, not the total of petroleum products , which is approximately 20,000,000 BBLs/DAY(42USG/BBL) Gasoline consumption in the US today is approximately 9,000,000 BBLs or 378,000,000 USG per DAY.  The study reports the ethanol yield as 300USG per acre and a yield from six proposed plants of 130,000,000USG per YEAR,  less than one-third of one day's consumption since ethanol has only two-thirds of the energy content of gasoline in BTUs/USG. 


Comment 23 of 24
No image available
January 23, 2008
Another consideration with the use of switchgrass for energy is soil sustainability.  Since all that is been extracted from the switchgrass is C, H and O, it should be possible to return the nutrients (N, P etc) back to the land and with the enzyme system (as opposed to the pyrolysis system) in an organic form that would enhance the soil ecosystem.  Likely this would be more expensive in the short term than simply using chemical fertilizers but in the long term would make this system completely sustainable.
Comment 24 of 24
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In
Featured Total Access Partners
Click company logos to learn more
BP Solar PennEnergy Magnum Energy Inc. National Semiconductor OPEL Solar, Inc. Applied Materials
WORLD'S #1 RENEWABLE ENERGY NETWORK
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network Logo