SUBMITTED BY HASSAN ABDULAZIZ A ALJAMA
Penn State University

Synopsis

Many problems arise as a result of the U.S. dependence on foreign oil. This reliance could potentially result in devastating effects on the U.S. economy and the public. Ethanol fuel is a domestically produced energy source that has the potential to reduce this dependence and offer extra advantages, reduction in greenhouse gases for example. However, some critics oppose ethanol fuel due to environmental considerations, food versus fuel issue, and production economy. Many of the issues concerning ethanol fuel could be resolved by using cellulosic materials as feedtsocks instead of corn. This would answer most of the concerns made by both sides of the argument. It will eliminate food versus fuel issue and reduce many of the environmental concerns.

Introduction

The United States accounts for more than 25% of the world’s energy consumption, a higher percentage than any other country. According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE, 2009), this number is expected to grow to 30% by 2030. Figure 1 shows that 39% of the U.S. energy demands are met by petroleum, comprising the largest share. The U.S.’s increasing demand for crude oil and insufficient domestic production has led the country to import more oil from outside producers. Nowadays, according to the DOE (2009), approximately 60% of the U.S. crude oil consumption comes from foreign countries.

Oil prices are unpredictable and susceptible to major fluctuations within short time periods. From 1972 to 1974, crude oil prices quadrupled from $3/barrel to $12/barrel. This resulted in one of the worst economic break-downs the U.S. has ever faced. The U.S. is currently importing twice as much crude oil per day as it did in the 1970’s (DOE, 2009), making it more vulnerable to another economic crisis, which could be even more catastrophic. The increase in crude oil prices in 2008 is a good illustration of how crude oil prices can have detrimental consequences on the U.S. economy and the public. Consumers faced a drastic price increase in gasoline, food supplies, and many other commodities that forced many people to change their lifestyle to accommodate their new expenses.

The job market also had its share of the crisis and it became more challenging to many more people to hold onto their jobs or locate ones that suit their qualifications. These factors were major driving forces for the government to initiate a more serious investigation on possible energy alternatives.

One such energy alternative is ethanol; a liquid fuel used as either a gasoline replacement or as a blend with gasoline. Since 2007, the DOE has announced over $1 billion for biofuels research, including ethanol. From a production perspective, the U.S. has the technology and capability to produce significant quantities of ethanol fuel. As a matter of fact, the U.S. is currently the leading producer of ethanol, generating over 9 billion gallons in 2008 (Litch, 2008). If the U.S. manages to rely on ethanol as a major fuel, billions of dollars that are spent outside the country would be allocated toward domestic growth. However, other implications have led many researchers and politicians to oppose the shift toward ethanol fuel. Most of their debate is centered on environmental considerations, fuel versus food issue, and economy of production.

Debates surrounding ethanol fuel are addressed here. It is not intended to advocate for one view over the other but rather to present an informative study and further educate the readers on the arguments made by each side. As mentioned previously, this issue has major implications that affect the public; especially that their living expenses are strongly linked with this issue and their job security could be affected.

Food versus Fuel Debate

Ethanol is produced from three main feedstocks: sugar, starches, and cellulosic materials. The abundance of cellulosic materials, wood and grasses for example, and the fact that their derivatives aren’t used as food commodities make them an attractive feedstock. However, cellulosic ethanol production is more challenging compared to other feedstocks and the U.S is not yet technologically equipped to produce it in significant quantities. Nowadays, the majority of ethanol made in the U.S. is derived from corn.

The main argument here is that a significant amount of land is diverted toward ethanol production to the detriment of food supplies. This places food in competition with fuel in a scarce land source. Also, since the U.S. produces almost half of the corn harvested in the world, ethanol fuel critics argue that this will not only impact food prices in the U.S., but also across the globe.  This will have even greater consequences on developing countries. Critics also point out that corn prices have increased by a factor of three in less than three years, the same time period ethanol production peaked.

On the contrary, ethanol fuel proponents argue that ethanol production has led to only a slight increase in food prices. Ronald Torstle, from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA, 2005), attributed the increase in food prices to a variety of different reasons, mainly:

  • Increasing oil and gas prices increase the costs of fertilizer, harvest, and transportation.
  • Increasing food demand as developing countries grow and people improve their diets.
  • Declining value of the U.S. dollar.

These problems could be overcome by producing cellulosic ethanol, though the technology is still developing. Nonetheless, policy makers should take into account the potential global impact of producing corn ethanol fuel.

Environmental Impacts

Ethanol fuel offers a reduction in pollutant emissions in comparison to gasoline. Gasoline combustion usually results in the emission of various chemicals that contribute to climate change and smog formation.

Most of the environmental argument is centered on greenhouse gas emissions. The term “greenhouse gases” refers to gases that trap heat in the atmosphere. Methane, carbon dioxide, and ozone are examples of greenhouse gases. These gases are strongly linked with increasing climate temperature.  Ethanol proponents argue that gasoline combustion leads to an imbalance in CO2 as a result of burning carbon formed millions of years ago. On the other hand, in the case of fuel ethanol, the CO2 emissions are offset by the next year’s crops growing to make feedstocks to make ethanol. This point is illustrated in Figure 2, which shows the percentage reduction in greenhouse gases resulting from using ethanol fuel compared to gasoline.

The percentage reduction can reach up to 80%.

However, opponents to ethanol fuel downplay these environmental improvements. They argue that although in certain aspects ethanol fuel presents a potential reduction in pollutants, this improvement is offset by generating other pollutants. A joint study by Professor Pimentel, from Cornell University, and Professor Patzek, from UC Berkeley (2005), state that corn ethanol is not an environmentally friendly fuel due to the following reasons:

  • U.S. corn production causes more total soil erosion than any other U.S. crop.
  • Corn production requires more nitrogen fertilization than any other crop produced and therefore is a major contributor to groundwater and river water pollution. Also, fertilizers are made from natural gas which is also associated with greenhouse gas emissions.

They also point out that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued warnings to ethanol plants in 2002 to reduce their air pollution emissions or be shut down.

Although some of these claims are valid, the disparity in greenhouse gas emissions is very clear. The problem associated with growing corn crops could be reduced by producing cellulosic ethanol, although as mentioned previously, more research is needed to make this process more economical.

Production economy

Some arguments exist on whether ethanol fuel production is economical or not. That is, is more energy liberated from burning ethanol fuel than is needed to produce ethanol? In one of the studies made by Pimentel and Patzek (presented earlier), the two researchers claim that ethanol fuel requires 29% more energy to produce it than it contains. If that is the case, then the shift toward ethanol fuel would be, to say the least, impractical. However, most of the studies indicate that ethanol fuel has more energy than is needed to produce it. In one of the studies, Lorenz and Morris from the Institute of Local Self Reliance (ILSR, 1995) indicated that ethanol production from corn has 39% more energy than needed to produce it. They go further and argue that corn ethanol energy gain could go over 100% if farmers use state-of-the-art techniques.

Conclusion

Many problems arise as a result of the U.S. dependence on foreign oil. This reliance could end up with devastating results on the U.S. economy and the public. Ethanol fuel is a domestically produced energy source that has the potential to reduce this dependence and offer extra advantages, reduction in greenhouse gases for example. However, some critics oppose ethanol fuel due to environmental considerations, food versus fuel issue, and production economy. Many of the issues concerning ethanol fuel could be resolved by using cellulosic materials as feedtsocks instead of corn. This would answer most of the concerns made by both sides of the argument. It will eliminate food versus fuel issue and reduce many of the environmental concerns. Hence, the focus should be on developing the technology to produce cellulosic ethanol in an economical process.

About Hassan Abdulaziz A Aljama

Hassan is a senior at Penn State Univeristy double majoring in chemical engineering and energy and mineral engineering. He’s a member of the Shreyer Honors College and will be graduating in May. Hassan’s plan is to work for a couple of years, gain industry experience, then enter graduate school.

References

Licht, F. (2008). World Fuel Ethanol Production. Renewable Fuels Association. Retrieved from http://www.ethanolrfa.org/industry/statistics/#E. 

Lorenz, D, & Morris, D. (1995). How much Energy does it take to make a gallon of ethanol? Institute for Local Self-Reliance, Retrieved from
http://www.carbohydrateeconomy.org/library/admin/uploadedfiles/How_Much_Energy_Does_it_Take_to_Make_a_Gallon_.html

Pimentel, D, & Patzek, T. W. (2005). Ethanol production using corn, switchgrass, and wood; biodiesel production using soybean and sunflower. Natural Resources Research, v. 14, no. 1, p. 65-76 

Trostle, R. (2005). Global Agricultural Supply and Demand: Factors Contributing to the Recent Increase in Food Commodity Prices. United States Department of Agriculture, Retrieved from http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/WRS0801/WRS0801.pdf

United States Department of Energy (2009). Ethanol Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Retrieved from http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/ethanol/emissions.html

United States Department of Energy (2009). Ethanol Myths and Facts. Retrieved from http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/ethanol_myths_facts.html

United States Department of Energy (2009). Biomass as feedstock for a bioenergy and bioproducts industry. Retrieved from http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/pdfs/final_billionton_vision_report2.pdf

United States Department of Energy (2009). Ethanol Myths and Facts. Retrieved from http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/ethanol_myths_facts.html