Biofuels like ethanol could be worse than gasoline for the environment

[enzo1]

Biofuels like ethanol could be worse than gasoline for the environment - Autoblog


A new study released by the University of Michigan on Thursday found the assumption that biofuels are better for the environment than gasoline is just that – an assumption. The new research shows that plant-based fuels might actually be worse polluters than traditional fuels. According to a new study, the problem started with the apparently incorrect assumption that biofuels are carbon neutral.

When comparing the carbon footprint of biofuels and traditional fuels, researchers looked at the overall lifecycle of the fuel. Gasoline isn't only judged on the pollutants caused by cars running on petrol; the extraction, refining and transportation processes are taken into account. The same is true for biofuels, only emissions from the tailpipe were left out of the equation because the number was assumed to be zero. That carbon dioxide was offset when the corn or plant matter was growing, right? That assumption, which the regulatory bodies of the US have been operating under for the last 11 years, is incorrect, University of Michigan Energy Institute research professor John DeCicco found. Professor DeCicco uncovered the problem four years ago.

"To verify the extent to which that assumption is true, you really need to analyze what's going on on the farmland, where the biofuels are being grown," DeCicco said. "People haven't done that in the past — they felt like they didn't need to."

DeCicco used data from the Department of Agriculture to come up with what he calls the "harvest carbon" factor. He found that while corn and soybean production has tripled since 2005, when federal mandates for biofuels went into effect, carbon has only been offset by 37 percent.

"When it comes to the emissions that cause global warming, it turns out that biofuels are worse than gasoline," he said.

Naturally, this assertion is getting a lot of push back. DeCicco's work was funded by the American Petroleum Institute, which corn farmers and ethanol producers point out has an interest in fighting biofuels. However DeCicco counters that his work is peer reviewed, like any other scientific study. He told the Free Press that API was the only group willing to fund the study.

DeCicco's findings come on the heels of a report that the Environmental Protection Agency has not submitted any studies on biofuels impact on air quality or the environment in nearly six years. The Renewable Fuel Standard, which mandates the minimum amount of biofuel in US vehicles, requires such reports be submitted every three years. The last time a report was submitted was 2011. The EPA Inspector General admitted to Congress the agency doesn't even have a way of measuring whether the law is improving or worsening air quality or how long biofuel greenhouse gas emissions linger.

[GH85Carrera]

Ethanol is BAD news for everybody except the farmers and the producers of the crap. It has cost untold billions in repairs for everything from lawnmowers to cars. It uses as much or more energy than it produces. It is only slightly viable because of massive taxpayer funding.

[ckelly78z]

I know when the farmers around me harvest thier corn in October, there is a steady stream of semis, and older grain trucks lugging the 5 miles to the grain elevators, where the corn can be distributed by train car....none of these are especially clean burning modes of transpotation.

This isn't mentioning the large Combines, and tractors traversing the roads, and fields for a solid month, most of which are running thier diesel engines hard, and smoking a bit. Most of this equipment is older and paid off, therefore, the budget conscious farmer can afford to own rather than renting the newer, clean burning equipment.

I live in a fairly big, somewhat flat, and tillable county in NW Ohio. I think I heard in years past, Hancock county, Ohio produces about 6,000,000 bushels of just corn every year....ironically, the new ethonal plant about 6 miles North of my house uses the same amount of corn to produce it's yearly gasoline, and there are currently 7 plants in Ohio alone.

Let's not even talk about the money spent (and passed on to the consumer) on higher feed costs for farm animals, and every product that uses corn.

Truly, this was a big government idea to produce jobs, and increase farm spending all in the effort to make us all more dependent on big government.

[M.D. Holloway]

Where is the first primary held???

[DanielDudley]

Cornsylvania.

[jcommin]

Another government handout - this time to the agri industry.

Why is anyone surprised at this?

[legion]

If it was such a good idea, it wouldn't need to be subsidized.

[sammyg2]

LOL I was the bad guy when I worked in the refining industry, and now I'm still the bad guy.

Oh well, sure pays good

[GH85Carrera]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

LOL I was the bad guy when I worked in the refining industry, and now I'm still the bad guy.

Oh well, sure pays good

Yea, that evil energy industry. Only surpassed by the chemical industry in how evil they are.

You should go to work at the unicorn farts and rainbows energy company. The government will provide millions of dollars in carbon credits and you can work on magic power sources that cool the planet and bring peace to the middle east.

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

Ethanol is BAD news for everybody except the farmers and the producers of the crap. It has cost untold billions in repairs for everything from lawnmowers to cars. It uses as much or more energy than it produces. It is only slightly viable because of massive taxpayer funding.

yup

ethanol is one of the best scams the farm lobby pulled on the american people.

[Tobra]

Ever since I took organic chemistry, I have thought it a waste to burn petroleum as fuel.

[Hugh R]

Toby, I agree. I'm for nukes and a hydrogen economy.

[LWJ]

Who didn't know this?

[GH85Carrera]

Originally Posted by LWJ

Who didn't know this?

The entire corn states lobby.