Marginal yield, technological advances, and emissions timing in corn ethanol’s carbon payback time

International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 226-232

  Yang, Yi ^a   Suh, Sangwon ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Biofuels; Carbon payback time; Corn ethanol; Dynamic characterization; Marginal yield; Prospective LCA; Technological change

Indexed keywords

BIOFUEL; CORN ETHANOL; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ARTICLE; BIOMASS CONVERSION; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CARBON FOOTPRINT; CARBON PAYBACK TIME; CLIMATE CHANGE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROP PRODUCTION; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PARAMETERS; FIELD CORN; GREENHOUSE GAS; LAND USE; LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT; MARGINAL YIELD; PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRODUCTIVITY;

EID: 84922105147     PISSN: 09483349     EISSN: 16147502     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11367-014-0827-x     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Babcock B (2009) Measuring unmeasurable land-use changes from biofuels. Iowa Ag Rev 15:3
2. Chum HL, Zhang Y, Hill J et al (2013) Understanding the evolution of environmental and energy performance of the US corn ethanol industry: evaluation of selected metrics. Biofuels Bioprod Bioref 8(2):224–240
3. Delucchi M (2011) A conceptual framework for estimating the climate impacts of land-use change due to energy crop programs. Biomass Bioenergy 35:2337–2360
4. EPA (2010) Renewable fuel standard program (RFS2) regulatory impact analysis. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington
5. Fargione J, Hill J, Tilman D et al (2008) Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Science 319:1235–1238
6. Farrell A, Plevin R, Turner B et al (2006) Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals. Science 311:506–508
7. Forster P, Ramaswamy V, Artaxo P et al. (2007) Changes in atmospheric constituents and in radiative forcing. Clim. Change 2007 Phys. Sci. Basis Contrib. Work. Group Fourth Assess. Rep. Intergov. Panel Clim. Change
8. Gavankar S, Suh S, Keller A (2014) The role of scale and technology maturity in life cycle assessment of emerging technologies: a case study on carbon nanotubes. J Ind Ecol. doi:10.1111/jiec.12175
9. Gelfand I, Zenone T, Jasrotia P et al (2011) Carbon debt of conservation reserve program (CRP) grasslands converted to bioenergy production. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108:13864–13869
10. Hellweg S, Hofstetter TB, Hungerbuhler K (2003) Discounting and the environment—should current impacts be weighted differently than impacts harming future generations? Int J Life Cycle Assess 8:8–18
11. Hertel TW, Golub AA, Jones AD et al (2010) Effects of US maize ethanol on global land use and greenhouse gas emissions: estimating market-mediated responses. Bioscience 60:223–231
12. Hill J, Nelson E, Tilman D et al (2006) Environmental, economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels. Proc Natl Acad Sci 103:11206–11210
13. Keeney D (2008) Ethanol USA. Environ Sci Technol 43:8–11
14. Keeney R (2010) Yield response and biofuels: issues and evidence on the extensive margin. World Congr. Environ. Resour. Econ. 28
15. Kendall A (2012) Time-adjusted global warming potentials for LCA and carbon footprints. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17:1042–1049
16. Kendall A, Chang B, Sharpe B (2009) Accounting for time-dependent effects in biofuel life cycle greenhouse gas emissions calculations. Environ Sci Technol 43:7142–7147
17. Levasseur A, Lesage P, Margni M et al (2010) Considering time in LCA: dynamic LCA and its application to global warming impact assessments. Environ Sci Technol 44:3169–3174
18. Liska A, Yang H, Bremer V et al (2009) Improvements in life cycle energy efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions of corn ethanol. J Ind Ecol 13:58–74
19. Lubowski RN, Bucholtz S, Claassen R et al (2006) Environmental effects of agricultural land-use change. US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Washington
20. Mueller S (2010) 2008 National dry mill corn ethanol survey. Biotechnol Lett 32:1261–1264
21. Mueller S, Kwik J (2013) 2012 Corn ethanol: emerging plant energy and environmental technologies. Energy Resources Center, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago
22. O’Hare M, Plevin R, Martin J et al (2009) Proper accounting for time increases crop-based biofuels’ greenhouse gas deficit versus petroleum. Environ Res Lett 4:024001
23. Piñeiro G, Jobbágy EG, Baker J et al (2009) Set-asides can be better climate investment than corn ethanol. Ecol Appl 19:277–282
24. Plevin R, Jones A, Torn M, Gibbs H (2010) Greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels’ indirect land use change are uncertain but may be much greater than previously estimated. Environ Sci Technol 44:8015–8021
25. Reisinger A, Meinshausen M, Manning M (2011) Future changes in global warming potentials under representative concentration pathways. Environ Res Lett 6:024020
26. Runge F, Johnson R (2008) The browning of biofuels: environment and food security at risk. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington
27. Sandén BA, Karlström M (2007) Positive and negative feedback in consequential life-cycle assessment. J Clean Prod 15:1469–1481
28. Schnoor JL (2011) Cellulosic biofuels disappoint. Environ Sci Technol 45:7099–7099
29. Schwietzke S, Griffin WM, Matthews HS (2011) Relevance of emissions timing in biofuel greenhouse gases and climate impacts. Environ Sci Technol 45:8197–8203
30. Searchinger T, Heimlich R, Houghton R et al (2008) Use of US croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change. Science 319:1238–1240
31. Shapouri H, Duffield J, McAloon A, Wang M (2004) The 2001 net energy balance of corn-ethanol. US Department of Agriculture, Washington
32. Shapouri H, Gallagher PW, Nefstead W et al (2010) 2008 Energy balance for the corn-ethanol industry. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington
33. Suh S, Yang Y (2014) On the uncanny capabilities of consequential LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:1179–1184
34. Sullivan P, Hellerstein D, Hansen L et al (2004) The conservation reserve program: economic implications for rural America. US Department of Agriculture, Washington
35. Taheripour F, Zhuang Q, Tyner WE, Lu X (2012) Biofuels, cropland expansion, and the extensive margin. Energy Sustain Soc 2:1–11
36. Tilman D, Socolow R, Foley J et al (2009) Beneficial biofuels—the food, energy, and environment trilemma. Science 325:270
37. Varvel GE, Vogel KP, Mitchell RB et al (2008) Comparison of corn and switchgrass on marginal soils for bioenergy. Biomass Bioenergy 32:18–21
38. Wallander S, Claassen R, Nickerson C (2011) The ethanol decade: an expansion of US corn production, 2000–09. US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Washington
39. Wang M (2013) The greenhouse gases, regulated emissions, and energy use in transportation (GREET) model, 2012
40. Wang M, Wu M, Huo H (2007) Life-cycle energy and greenhouse gas emission impacts of different corn ethanol plant types. Environ Res Lett 2:024001–024013
41. Wang MQ, Han J, Haq Z et al (2011) Energy and greenhouse gas emission effects of corn and cellulosic ethanol with technology improvements and land use changes. Biomass Bioenergy 35:1885–1896
42. Wang M, Han J, Dunn JB et al (2012) Well-to-wheels energy use and greenhouse gas emissions of ethanol from corn, sugarcane and cellulosic biomass for US use. Environ Res Lett 7:045905
43. Wright CK, Wimberly MC (2013) Recent land use change in the Western Corn Belt threatens grasslands and wetlands. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110:4134–4139
44. Yang Y, Bae J, Kim J, Suh S (2012) Replacing gasoline with corn ethanol results in significant environmental problem-shifting. Environ Sci Technol 46:3671–3678