Article Rating
0 ratings - Sign-in to rate this article
Article Tools
Email This Story Share This Story Add to Bookmarks Printer Friendly Version 9 Comments
Article Tool Sponsor:

Learn More About Online Advertising with RenewableEnergyWorld.com

Biofuels, Fossil Fuels & the Greenhouse Gas Factor

Published: April 11, 2007

Fort Collins, Colorado [RenewableEnergyAccess.com] Researchers at Colorado State University and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service have completed an analysis of greenhouse gas emissions from biofuel production. Study results revealed that when compared with the life cycle of gasoline and diesel, ethanol and biodiesel from corn and soybean rotations reduced greenhouse gas emission by nearly 40 percent, reed canarygrass by 85 percent, and switchgrass and hybrid poplar by 115 percent.

"Although fossil fuel inputs are required to produce and process biofuels, hybrid poplar and switchgrass converted to ethanol compensate for these emissions and actually remove greenhouse gasses from the atmosphere when the benefits of co-products are included. Greenhouse gas savings from biomass gasification for electricity generation are even greater."

-- Stephen Del Grosso, USDA scientist and NREL researcher
Hybrid poplar and switchgrass were found to offset the largest amounts of fossil fuels and therefore reduced emissions the most out of the studied crops.

"Biofuels have a great potential to reduce our dependence on imported gasoline and diesel fuel," said William Parton, researcher from Colorado State's Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory (NREL). "We have performed a unique analysis of the net biofuel greenhouse emissions from major biofuel cropping systems by combining ecosystem computer model data with estimates of the amount fossil fuels used to grow and produce crops for biofuels."

Parton, along with Stephen Del Grosso, USDA scientist and NREL researcher; and Paul Adler from the USDA used the DAYCENT biogeochemistry model, developed by Parton and Del Grosso, to assess soil greenhouse gas fluxes and biomass yields for corn, soybean, alfalfa, hybrid poplar, reed canarygrass and switchgrass.

"Although fossil fuel inputs are required to produce and process biofuels, hybrid poplar and switchgrass converted to ethanol compensate for these emissions and actually remove greenhouse gasses from the atmosphere when the benefits of co-products are included. Greenhouse gas savings from biomass gasification for electricity generation are even greater. This research provides the basis for evaluating net biofuel greenhouse gas emissions and highlights the need to improve the technologies used for large scale conversion of biomass to energy and to more fully exploit agricultural co-products," Del Grosso said.

Ethanol and biodiesel from corn and soybean are currently the main biofuel crops in the U.S., but the perennial crops alfalfa, hybrid poplar, reed canarygrass and switchgrass have been proposed as future dedicated energy crops.

Bioenergy crops are able to offset carbon dioxide emissions by converting atmospheric carbon dioxide into organic carbon in biomass and soil, but the production of biofuels requires fossil fuels and impacts greenhouse gas fluxes.

The primary sources of greenhouse gas emissions associated with crop production are soil nitrous oxide emissions and the CO2 emissions from farm machinery, farm inputs and agricultural processes. Colorado State and USDA scientists quantified all of these factors to determine the net effect of several bioenergy crops on greenhouse gas emissions.

Researchers found that, once the DAYCENT results were combined with estimates of the amounts of fossil fuels used to provide farm inputs and operate agricultural machinery and the amount of fossil fuel offsets from biomass yields, they were able to calculate the net greenhouse gas fluxes for each cropping system.

"We used extensive observed greenhouse gas flux and crop yield data to verify DAYCENT model predictions of crop yields and net greenhouse gas fluxes from all of the biofuel crop rotations. DAYCENT model results were combined with life cycle analyses of crop production, conversion to biofuel, and fossil fuel displaced to estimate net greenhouse gas emissions," said Parton.

This study was a unique and complete analysis of bioenergy cropping for several reasons. Different crops vary with respect to length of plant life cycle, yields, biomass conversion efficiencies, required nutrients, net soil carbon balance, nitrogen losses and other characteristics which in turn impact management operations. Additionally, crops have different requirements for farm machinery inputs from planting, growing, soil tillage, applying fertilizer and pesticide and finally harvesting.

The researchers were able to use life cycle analyses and the DAYCENT model to account for all of these factors as well as integrate climate, soil properties and land use to accurately evaluate the impact of bioenergy cropping systems on crop production, soil organic carbon and greenhouse gas fluxes.

The study was published in the April 2007 issue of Ecological Applications.
Additional Information
Previous Article
Next Article
Add Your Comment 9 Reader Comments
No image available
Comment
1 of 9
April 12, 2007
Conservation of Fossil Fuels

Anything to save our fossil,
Use of it has been colossal,
Companies of oil are thinking it will never end,
Gift to us we have exploited,
Now's the time to get things righted,
Knowing that our carbon fuels have been our daily friend,
What have we to pass along,
Over-use is extra strong,
Thanklessness to God and to ones from us descend,
Now's the time to start the action,
Emphasize renewed impaction,
Funding other sources now of energy to blend,
Cut down rising use of fossil,
Keep the rates sublime and docile,
We must realize how we've been acting and amend,
Boost we now our other presents,
Which from God we find most pleasant,
Ways to save our fossil power to new sources bend.

adrianakau@aol.com
No image available
Comment
2 of 9
April 12, 2007
I have recently come to the conclusion that human activity has less to do with global warming than the solar cycle. This does not mean that pollutant gases cannot hurt us in other ways such as our health. China alone accounts for a minimum of 300,000 deaths from lung damage alone while India has passed laws preventing old diesel motors from operating in their city streets because high clinical lung sicknesses.

I think it is time that we look at fossil fuels in a different perspective. They have been a gift from God to be used for the benefit of mankind. Once this gift is used up, where do we stand. We should be developing renewable energy to slow down the rapid depletion of our fossil sources, to protect and to save them.

adrianakau@aol.com
No image available
Comment
3 of 9
April 13, 2007
Back on topic. I think there's a lot of "fuzzy" logic in this study, which makes me wonder "qui bono?" In addition, I saw no mention of the nearly pound-for-pound carbon dioxide emissions from the fermentation process, nor any figures from the "dirty coal" used in the hydrolization process. There didn't seem to be any consideration for the immense land mass that would be required to produce the ethanol (2 states wide from Canada to the Gulf Coast = 50% imported petroleum replacement). I'm also concerned at the tranfer of land from ag to fuel, which could imperil 3 billion people around the world. The answer is solar (not PV), wind, geothermal, tides, etc. and "clean coal" - and most of all, conservation.
No image available
Comment
4 of 9
April 13, 2007
Poems and divergent thinking re: cause/effect are great tools of synthesis. Thinking "outside the box" is a benchmark of genius. However, it is reasonable to direct this expression into the most appropriate medium, and a topic-oriented forums would not seem to meet that criteria.

The question apparently answered by the research goes to the heart of alternative energy. It seems to answer the kind of question that can be used to block progress and forward motion. The assertion that alternatives create more greenhouse gases than they eliminate can echo through every discussion for years.

It is not terribly paranoid to suggest that the whole idea of net energy cost to alternative fuels is a question posed by the same forces that said "Global Warming? It's just a theory." That argument blocked progress for decades. This data would seem to refute that kind of "gotcha" assertion. As such it deserves attention, and the focus of these threads are elsewhere.
No image available
Comment
5 of 9
April 13, 2007
Adrian makes a good point: whether or not we believe global warming is caused by human actions, we should save a little oil for the grandkids. Despite our commitments to renewable energy, it's unlikely we'll completely divorce ourselves from oil anytime soon. If we step back and view the earth as a giant oil tank with a blue paint job, it becomes obvious that if we keep draining the tank, one day it will be empty. It might be good to slow down a bit.

That said, I think we ARE contributing to global warming. The correlation between the recent spike in CO2 concentration, and our adoption of fossil fuels is awfully compelling. Likewise, there is strong correlation between greater CO2 concentration and rising temperatures. I agree that the evidence is not conclusive, but consider this: What do we have to lose by *assuming* we are the cause? If we cut back on CO2 emmissions, everybody wins.

I think the poems are okay too.

Mike
Blog: http://mypowerchoices.wordpress.com
No image available
Comment
6 of 9
April 13, 2007
Roger,
If Adrian's poetry is a problem for you it is a small matter for you to skip over it and move on. It isn't like he is flaming here or being unreasonably argumentative.
Whether he has anything else [to do] besides write poetry on renewableenergyaccess is his business, and if not, I say more power to him. Lest we forget this renewable energy business is not just about dollars it is also about "sense" (pun intended). Our sense of our place in this world which is our home and yes, its beauty. Isn't our loss of balance and the separation of ourselves from this world what got us in this mess to begin with? All art is politics, but isn't all politics art to some degree?

Matthew
No image available
Comment
7 of 9
April 13, 2007
Adrian,
Do you do anything else besides write poetry on renewableenergyaccess? Perhaps you could be a little more discriminating on your comments and poems (like your own blog, sparing us who aren't poetry lovers...), or at least staying on-topic? For example, this one has nothing to do with the article above.

For example, pointing out that combining carbon sequestration with ethanol production from hybrid poplar would suck large amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere (like %200)?
No image available
Comment
8 of 9
April 15, 2007
Suppose we are in a vehicle driving fast along the highway, some mist about, so visibility ahead (the future) isn't too great. We notice something not-mist in the gloom ahead. Now, is it sensible to brake, to be on the safe side, or set up countless committees? The image analysis committee says the shape is consistent with a large tree fallen across the road, but we are too far away to be sure. The tree committee want to know the sort of tree, the impact strength of the tree, size of its branches. The vehicle committee extol the strength of our vehicle and how it will resist such an impact. Now we are closer to the object. The image processing committee's now confident it is a tree, but can't tell the type. The tree and vehicle committees are busy discussing the effect of an impact, but without knowing the type can't produce definitive answers. And all the time we are getting closer. Now it is certain it's a tree, a large solid cedar, and we are going way too fast. Too late, folks.
No image available
Comment
9 of 9
April 16, 2007
Good day,
Ah yes, the impending cataclysmic climate crisis.
Poetry and Metaphors will certainly serve to obfuscate.
There certainly would be a huge impact on world food supplies if biofuels were to become the replacement for carbon based fuels.
Solar and wind etc. energy sources to produce agri-based biofuels would certainly make sense if the food crisis was solved.
The economies of countries like Mexico would rebound after U.S. dumping of subsidized competing crops such as corn is ended to supply biofuel needs.
Using renewables to produce hydrogen for fuel makes fiscal sense.
Clean coal doesn't address the environmental impact of mining black gold.
Certainly carbon sequestering is way past due.
So is ocean water desalination on a massive scale to help our rapidly diminishing aquifiers and surface fresh water reserves.
Desertification is occuring at alarming rates because of shoddy irrigation practices and' yes, Global Warming.
Kendall
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
 
Poet Clayton Power Earthscan SolarEdge Technologies American Wire Group Valentin Software Interstate Renewable Energy Council
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters