Biofuels and the conundrum of sustainability

Current Opinion in Biotechnology

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 318-324

  Sheehan, John J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CORN-ETHANOL; DEGREE OF SCRUTINY; FOSSIL ENERGY; INDIRECT EFFECTS; LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENTS; NEW INDUSTRY; PETROLEUM FUELS; POLICY MAKERS; PUBLIC HEALTH; SOCIAL JUSTICE; SUSTAINABLE ENERGY;

AIR QUALITY; BIOTECHNOLOGY; ENERGY CONSERVATION; ETHANOL; GLOBAL WARMING; GREENHOUSE GASES; LIFE CYCLE; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; WATER RESOURCES;

FUELS;

ALCOHOL; BIODIESEL; BIOFUEL; PETROLEUM;

AIR QUALITY; ECONOMIC ASPECT; ECOSYSTEM; ENERGY RESOURCE; FOSSIL ENERGY; GREENHOUSE GAS; INDUSTRY; LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HEALTH; REVIEW; SOCIAL JUSTICE; SUGARCANE;

BIOELECTRIC ENERGY SOURCES; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CONSERVATION OF ENERGY RESOURCES; ECOSYSTEM; ETHANOL; GREENHOUSE EFFECT;

ZEA MAYS;

EID: 67649817154     PISSN: 09581669     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.copbio.2009.05.010     Document Type: Review

References (78)

1. CARB. Proposed Regulation to Implement the Low Carbon Fuel Standard Vol. 1 (2009), California Air Resources Board. This report provides a comprehensive review of the analyses done for California's Low Carbon Fuel Standard.
2. Malthus T.R. An Essay on the Principle of Population (1798), Oxford University Press. A must read for anyone trying to understand the fundamental aspects of the sustainability issues we face.
3. Cole H.S.D. Models of Doom: A Critique of the Limits to Growth (1973), Universe Books
4. Meadows D.H., Randers J., and Behrens W.W. The Limits to Growth (1972), Universe Books, New York. Although no longer in print, this book is an eloquently stated case for 'the limits to growth' camp. Although perhaps naïve in its approach (and ahead of its time), it offers a fundamental position on sustainability that must be understood.
5. WCED. Our Common Future: A Report of the United Nations' World Commission on Environment and Development (1987), Oxford University Press. This is a seminal report for the understanding of sustainable development.
6. Wilson E.O. To what end?. Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge (1998), Alfred A. Knopf pp. 266-298. Edward Wilson is a controversial figure. This chapter from his book on the naïve notion of biology as the central glue in human knowledge provides an eloquent statement of the problem of sustainable development.
7. Williams P.R.D., Cushing C.A., and Sheehan P.J. Data available for evaluating the risks and benefits of MTBE and ethanol as alternative fuel oxygenates. Risk Anal 23 (2003) 1085-1115
8. Davis J.M., and Thomas V.M. Systematic approach to evaluating trade-offs among fuel options: the lessons of MTBE. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1076 (2006) 498-515. Michael Davis's perspective on the mistakes of MTBE comes from direct experience. The lessons presented here are paramount.
9. Ekvall T., and Weidema B.P. System boundaries and input data in consequential life cycle inventory analysis. Int J Life Cycle Assess 9 (2004) 161-171. Ekval is a thoughtful researcher in the field of sustainability. It is worth noting that he was focusing on an issue that only recently has gained real currency in the debate over the sustainability of biofuels.
10. Schmidt J.H. System delimitation in agricultural consequential LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13 (2008) 350-364
11. Fargione J., Hill J., Tilman D., Polasky S., and Hawthorne P. Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Science 319 (2008) 1235-1238. This is a seminal publication. Rather than trying to state a definitive understanding of the impact of adopting biofuels, these authors attempted to set the upper bounds on unanticipated consequences for large-scale adoption of biofuels. It is worth noting that it generated little controversy relative to the Searchinger paper listed next.
12. Searchinger T., Heimlich R., Houghton R.A., Dong F., Elobeid A., Fabiosa J., Tokgoz S., Hayes D., and Yu T.H. Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change. Science 319 (2008) 1238-1240. This is a seminal publication. The authors clearly went out on a limb in the use of an economic models that were never intended for the type of analysis conducted. But the audacity of this paper makes it important. It has spurred a discussion that many in the biofuels field have known needed to happen.
13. Gibbs H.K., Johnston M., Foley J.A., Holloway T., Monfreda C., Ramankutty N., and Zaks D. Carbon payback times for crop-based biofuel expansion in the tropics: the effects of changing yield and technology. Environ Res Lett 3 (2008) 034001 (10 pp.)
14. Tyner W.E., Taheripour F., and Baldos U. Land Use Change Carbon Emissions due to US Ethanol Production: Revision 3 Draft (2009), Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University
15. Hertel T.W., Tyner W.E., and Birur D.K. Biofuels for All? Understanding The Global Impacts of Multinational Mandates (2008), Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University
16. Johnson E. Goodbye to carbon neutral: getting biomass footprints right. Environ Impact Assess Rev 29 (2009) 165-168
17. Sperling D., and Yeh S. Low carbon fuel standards. Issues Sci Technol 25 (2009) 57-66. This is a well-stated view of the real time problems and solutions that face policy makers. It emphasizes the importance of truly performance-based policies, while acknowledging the weaknesses in the science of LCA to address global impacts of different fuels.
18. Kim H., Kim S., and Dale B.E. Biofuels, land use change, and greenhouse gas emissions: some unexplored variables. Environ Sci Technol 43 (2009) 961-967. This paper raises important aspects of biofuels that deserve consideration. Current regulations for direct and indirect land use change fail to acknowledge the importance of the details of how these land use changes occur. But the overall conclusions are misleading because the main driver in reducing carbon payback is the key assumption of zero land clearing debt.
19. Peters C.J., Bills N.L., Wilkins J.L., and Fick G.W. Foodshed analysis and its relevance to sustainability. Renew Agric Food Syst 24 (2009) 1-7
20. Sawyer D. Climate change, biofuels and eco-social impacts in the Brazilian Amazon and Cerrado. Philos Trans Roy Soc: B Biol Sci 363 (2008) 1747-1752
21. Sylvester-Bradley R. Critique of Searchinger (2008) & Related Papers Assessing Indirect Effects of Biofuels on Land-use Change (2008), Renewable Fuels Agency
22. Gnansounou E., Panichelli L., Dauriat A., and Villegas J.D. Accounting for Indirect Land-use Changes in GHG Balances of Biofuels (2008), Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne
23. Kløverpris J., Wenzel H., Banse M., Milà i Canals L., and Reenberg A. Conference and workshop on modelling global land use implications in the environmental assessment of biofuels. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13 (2008) 178-183
24. Searchinger T.D., and Houghton R.A. Response to biofuels: clarifying assumptions. Science 322 (2008) 371
25. Searchinger T.D. Response to biofuels: effects on land and fire. Science 321 (2008) 199
26. Kline K.L., and Dale V.H. Biofuels: effects on land and fire. Science 321 (2008) 199
27. Fargione J., Hill J., Tilman D., Polasky S., and Hawthorne P. Response to biofuels: effects on land and fire. Science 321 (2008) 199
28. Spatari S., Zhang Y.M., and MacLean H.L. Life cycle assessment of switchgrass- and corn stover-derived ethanol-fueled automobiles. Environ Sci Technol 39 (2005) 9750-9758
29. Wu M., Wu Y., and Wang M. Energy and emission benefits of alternative transportation liquid fuels derived from switchgrass: a fuel life cycle assessment. Biotechnol Progr 22 (2006) 1012-1024
30. Malca J., and Freire F. Renewability and life-cycle energy efficiency of bioethanol and bio-ethyl tertiary butyl ether (bioETBE): assessing the implications of allocation. Energy 31 (2006) 3362-3380
31. Botha T., and von Blottnitz H. A comparison of the environmental benefits of bagasse-derived electricity and fuel ethanol on a life-cycle basis. Energy Policy 34 (2006) 2654-2661
32. Kim S., and Dale B.E. Ethanol fuels: E10 or E85 - life cycle perspectives. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11 (2006) 117-121
33. Hill J., Nelson E., Tilman D., Polasky S., and Tiffany D. Environmental, economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103 (2006) 11206-11210. This is an important new contribution to the existing body of life cycle assessments for corn ethanol and biodiesel. It refutes the long held claim by some modelers that, by using a broader system definition that includes facility and equipment cost and sustaining labor, the net energy benefits of biofuels go away or become negative.
34. Fleming J.S., Habibi S., and MacLean H.L. Investigating the sustainability of lignocellulose-derived fuels for light-duty vehicles. Transport Res D: Transport Environ 11 (2006) 146-159
35. Adler P.R., Del Grosso S.J., and Parton W.J. Life-cycle assessment of net greenhouse-gas flux for bioenergy cropping systems. Ecol Appl 17 (2007) 675-691. Well done analysis of the soil carbon effects of collecting corn stover as a feedstock for biofuels production. It builds on my own earlier work, which was the first LCA to explicitly link soil agroecosystem modeling to the life cycle model (see Ref. [75]).
36. Wang M., Hong M.W., and Huo H. Life-cycle energy and greenhouse gas emission impacts of different corn ethanol plant types. Environ Res Lett 2 (2007) 024001 (13 pp.)
37. Wang M., Wu M., Huo H., and Liu J.H. Life-cycle energy use and greenhouse gas emission implications of Brazilian sugarcane ethanol simulated with the GREET model. Int Sugar J 110 1317 (2008) 527
38. von Blottnitz H., and Curran M.A. A review of assessments conducted on bio-ethanol as a transportation fuel from a net energy, greenhouse gas, and environmental life cycle perspective. J Clean Prod 15 (2007) 607-619
39. Grant T., and Beer T. Life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from irrigated maize and their significance in the value chain. Aust J Exp Agric 48 (2008) 375-381
40. Gabrielle B., and Gagnaire N. Life-cycle assessment of straw use in bio-ethanol production: a case study based on biophysical modelling. Biomass Bioenergy 32 (2008) 431-441
41. Kim S., and Dale B.E. Life cycle assessment of fuel ethanol derived from corn grain via dry milling. Bioresour Technol 99 (2008) 5250-5260
42. Wu M., Wang M., Liu J.H., and Huo H. Assessment of potential life-cycle energy and greenhouse gas emission effects from using corn-based butanol as a transportation fuel. Biotechnol Progr 24 (2008) 1204-1214
43. Halleux H., Lassaux S., Renzoni R., and Germain A. Comparative life cycle assessment of two biofuels ethanol from sugar beet and rapeseed methyl ester. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13 (2008) 184-190
44. Nguyen T.L.T., Gheewala S.H., and Bonnet S. Life cycle cost analysis of fuel ethanol produced from cassava in Thailand. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13 (2008) 564-573
45. Liska A.J., and Cassman K.G. Towards standardization of life-cycle metrics for biofuels: greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and net energy yield. J Biobased Mater Bioenergy 2 (2008) 187-203
46. Gnansounou E., Dauriat A., Panichelli L., and Villegas J. Energy and greenhouse gas balances of biofuels: biases induced by LCA modelling choices. J Sci Ind Res 67 (2008) 885-897
47. Pradhan A., Shrestha D.S., Van Gerpen J., and Duffield J. The energy balance of soybean oil biodiesel production: a review of past studies. Trans ASABE 51 (2008) 185-194
48. Huo H., Wu Y., and Wang M. Total versus urban: well-to-wheels assessment of criteria pollutant emissions from various vehicle/fuel systems. Atmos Environ 43 (2009) 1796-1804
49. Laser M., Larson E., Dale B., Wang M., Greene N., and Lynd L.R. Comparative analysis of efficiency, environmental impact, and process economics for mature biomass refining scenarios. Biofuels Bioproducts Biorefineries Biofpr 3 (2009) 247-270. This paper reflects the most comprehensive technoeconomic analysis of biomass to fuels technologies done in the past 10 years in both breadth and depth. It is the basis of much of the GREET results presented by Wu et al. in Ref. [29].
50. Kikuchi R., Gerardo R., and Santos S.M. Energy lifecycle assessment and environmental impacts of ethanol biofuel. Int J Energy Res 33 (2009) 186-193
51. Panichelli L., Dauriat A., and Gnansounou E. Life cycle assessment of soybean-based biodiesel in Argentina for export. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14 (2009) 144-159
52. Kim S., Dale B.E., and Jenkins R. Life cycle assessment of corn grain and corn stover in the United States. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14 (2009) 160-174
53. Yu S.R., and Tao J. Simulation based life cycle assessment of airborne emissions of biomass-based ethanol products from different feedstock planting areas in China. J Clean Prod 17 (2009) 501-506
54. Hill J., Polasky S., Nelson E., Tilman D., Huo H., Ludwig L., Neumann J., Zheng H.C., and Bonta D. Climate change and health costs of air emissions from biofuels and gasoline. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106 (2009) 2077-2082. This paper does a good job of exploring new territory for life cycle assessment by looking at the impacts of biofuels with regional air quality and public health data.
55. Farrell A.E., Plevin R.J., Turner B.T., Jones A.D., O'Hare M., and Kammen D.M. Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals. Science 311 (2006) 506-508. This paper moved the dialogue forward on the multidecade debate about corn ethanol's net energy balance by providing a consistent framework for understanding the differences in assumptions made among the apparently conflicting findings published in the past.
56. de Carvalho Macedo I. Greenhouse gas emissions and energy balances in bio-ethanol production and utilization in Brazil (1996). Biomass Bioenergy 14 (1998) 77-81
57. Sheehan J., Camobreceo V., Duffield J., Graboski M., and Shapouri H. Life Cycle Inventory of Biodiesel and Petroleum Diesel for Use in an Urban Bus (1998), National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Though dated, this study still represents the most transparent and rigorously documented life cycle study of biodiesel. Its transparency has allowed it to serve as a foundation for more recent and refined analyses.
58. Fu G.Z., Chan A.W., and Minns D.E. Life cycle assessment of bio-ethanol derived from cellulose. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8 (2003) 137-141
59. Maclean H.L. Alternative transport fuels for the future. Int J Vehicle Des 35 (2004) 27-49
60. Schmer M.R., Vogel K.P., Mitchell R.B., and Perrin R.K. Net energy of cellulosic ethanol from switchgrass. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105 (2008) 464-469. One of the first published analyses of switchgrass to ethanol based on real data for on-farm production of switchgrass.
61. Huang H.J., Ramaswamy S., Al-Dajani W., Tschirner U., and Cairncross R.A. Effect of biomass species and plant size on cellulosic ethanol: a comparative process and economic analysis. Biomass Bioenergy 33 (2009) 234-246
62. Wakeley H.L., Hendrickson C.T., Griffin W.M., and Matthews H.S. Economic and environmental transportation effects of large-scale ethanol production and distribution in the United States. Environ Sci Technol 43 (2009) 2228-2233
63. 2O release from agro-biofuel production negates global warming reduction by replacing fossil fuels. Atmos Chem Phys 8 (2008) 389-395
64. 2O to the greenhouse gas balance of first-generation biofuels. Global Change Biol 15 (2009) 1-23
65. McCornick P.G., Awulachew S.B., and Abebe M. Water-food-energy-environment synergies and tradeoffs: major issues and case studies. Water Policy 10 (2008) 23-36
66. de Fraiture C., Giordano M., and Liao Y.S. Biofuels and implications for agricultural water use: blue impacts of green energy. Water Policy 10 (2008) 67-81
67. Muller A., Schmidhuber J., Hoogeveen J., and Steduto P. Some insights in the effect of growing bio-energy demand on global food security and natural resources. Water Policy 10 (2008) 83-94
68. Mubako S., and Lant C. Water resource requirements of corn-based ethanol. Water Resour Res 44 (2008) W00A02
69. Powers S.E. Nutrient loads to surface water from row crop production. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12 (2007) 399-407
70. Donner S.D., and Kucharik C.J. Corn-based ethanol production compromises goal of reducing nitrogen export by the Mississippi River. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105 (2008) 4513-4518
71. Raghu S., Anderson R.C., Daehler C.C., Davis A.S., Wiedenmann R.N., Simberloff D., and Mack R.N. Adding biofuels to the invasive species fire?. Science 313 (2006) 1742-11742
72. Barney J.N., and Ditomaso J.M. Nonnative species and bioenergy: are we cultivating the next invader?. BioScience 58 (2008) 64-70
73. Pyke C.R., Thomas R., Porter R.D., Hellmann J.J., Dukes J.S., Lodge D.M., and Chavarria G. Current practices and future opportunities for policy on climate change and invasive species. Conserv Biol 22 (2008) 585-592
74. Simberloff D. Invasion biologists and the biofuels boom: cassandras or colleagues?. Weed Sci 56 (2008) 867-872
75. Sheehan J., Aden A., Paustian K., Killian K., Brenner J., Walsh M., and Nelson R. Energy and environmental aspects of using corn stover for fuel ethanol. J Ind Ecol 7 (2003) 117-146
76. ISO. ISO 14040: Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Principles and Framework (1997), International Organization for Standardization
77. ISO. ISO 14041: Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Goal and Scope Definition and Inventory analysis (1998), International Organization for Standardization
78. Adler M.J., and Van Doren G. Reforming Education: The Opening of the American Mind (1988), Macmillan Publishing Co.