altfuelsys

Biofuels are hot topics these days, and as with any hot topic there can be a lot of misguided information swirling around. What better way to get to the source of the EPA’s stance on the issue than taking a look at their exact position. The following is taken directly from the EPA website and addresses their position on the background, economic benefits and economic costs of biofuel production (and its resultant use). BackgroundCurrently available biofuels are made from sugar crops (sugarcane, sugarbeet), starch crops (corn, potatoes), oilseed crops (soybean, sunflower, rapeseed), and animal fats. Sugar and starch crops are converted through a fermentation process to form bioalcohols, including ethanol, butanol, and propanol. Oils and animal fats can be processed into biodiesel. Ethanol is the most widely used bioalcohol fuel. Most vehicles can use gasoline-ethanol blends containing up to 10 ethanol (by volume). Flexible fuel vehicles can use gasoline-ethanol blends containing up to 85 ethanol. Currently there are only about 700 fueling stations in the U.S. that offer E-85 fuel, most of which are in the upper Midwest.Second generation biofuels, or cellulosic biofuels, are made from cellulose, which is available from non-food crops and waste biomass such as corn stover, corncobs, straw, wood, and wood byproducts. Third generation biofuels use algae as a feedstock. Second and third generation biofuels are not yet produced commercially.Economic Benefits of Biofuel Production: Replacing fossil fuels with biofuels can generate a number of benefits. In contrast to fossil fuels, which are exhaustible resources, biofuels are produced from renewable feedstocks. Thus, their production and use could, in theory, be sustained indefinitely.Biofuels carbon emissions can be offset by their feedstocks carbon uptake. As plants grow, they absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. In contrast, fossil fuel production and use removes carbon from the Earth’s crust and introduces it to the atmosphere, where it will contribute to global warming for centuries.Biofuels can be produced domestically, which could reduce our dependence on unstable foreign suppliers of fossil fuels. If biofuel production and use reduces our consumption of imported fossil fuels, we may become less vulnerable to the adverse impacts of supply disruptions. Reducing our demand for fossil fuels could also reduce their price, generating economic benefits for American consumers.Biofuels may reduce some pollutant emissions. Ethanol, in particular, can ensure complete combustion, reducing carbon monoxide emissions.It is important to note that biofuel production and consumption, in and of itself, will not reduce GHG or conventional pollutant emissions, lessen imports or consumption of petroleum, or alleviate pressure on exhaustible resources. Biofuel production and use must coincide with reductions in the production and use of fossil fuels for these benefits to accrue. These benefits would be mitigated if biofuel emissions and resource demands augment, rather than displace, those of fossil fuels.Economic Costs of Biofuel ProductionBiofuel feedstocks include many crops that would otherwise be used for human consumption directly, or indirectly as animal feed. Diverting these crops to biofuels may lead to more land area devoted to agriculture, increased use of polluting inputs, and higher food prices. Cellulosic feedstocks can also compete for resources (land, water, fertilizer, etc.) that could otherwise be devoted to food production. As a result, biofuel production may give rise to several undesirable developments:

• Land use patterns may change, resulting in GHG emissions. Biofuel feedstocks grown on land cleared from tropical forests, such as soybeans in the Amazon and oil palm in Southeast Asia, generate particularly high GHG emissions. Even when feedstocks are not directly grown on forests or native ecosystems, higher crop prices can encourage the expansion of agriculture into undeveloped land, leading to GHG emissions and biodiversity losses.
• Biofuel production and processing practices can release GHGs. Fertilizer application releases nitrous oxide, a potent greenhouse gas. Most biorefineries operate using fossil fuels. The magnitude of the total GHG emissions resulting from biofuel production and use, including those from indirect land use change, might even exceed those generated by fossil fuels in some circumstances.
• The quantity of food brought to market might decrease, resulting in higher food prices and possibly more malnutrition.
• Water quality could suffer as rising prices for agricultural commodities induce more intensive agricultural practices (e.g., greater use of inputs such as fertilizer).
• Increases in irrigation could unsustainable deplete aquifers.