Union of Concerned Scientists, Biofuels: An Important Part of a Low-Carbon Diet

[Fledermaus]

Biofuels can quickly become a staple of a low-carbon fuel diet because they integrate well with our existing fuel distribution infrastructure and offer potentially abundant domestic supplies with significant opportunities for growth. But not all biofuels are the same. There is a wide range in the estimated heat-trapping emissions and other environmental impacts from each biofuel over its life cycle (i.e., from farm to finished fuel to use in the vehicle), depending on the feedstock, production process, and model inputs and assumptions. There are also concerns about emissions and impacts from land conversion and land use associated with biofuel production.

New rules are being developed that will require fuel providers to account for and reduce the heat-trapping emissions associated with the production and use of transportation fuels. For example, both the U.S. Congress and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are considering strategies to promote low-carbon and renewable transportation fuels (including biofuels). California, the nation's largest market for transportation fuel, is developing a Low Carbon Fuel Standard that will require fuel providers to demonstrate reductions in global warming pollution per unit of energy delivered, regardless of fuel source. More state, regional, and federal rules will undoubtedly follow.

The purposes of this report are two-fold:

1. To ensure that we “count carbs” accurately, by explaining why we need a comprehensive accounting system for carbon emissions—one that measures global warming emissions over a transportation fuel's entire life cycle. An effective accounting system will not only need to be robust enough to encompass the fuel life cycle, but also address uncertainties and allow for changes over time as better assessment tools and methods become available.

2. To “make carbs count” by describing performance-based policies that will reward low-carbon transportation fuels for their performance and help them compete against highly polluting fuels such as liquid coal (gasoline or diesel made from coal). For example, low-carbon fuel standards require a reduction in the average amount of global warming pollution per gallon of fuel.

A market for low-carbon fuels can produce a rare convergence of business, agricultural, and environmental interests that, if pursued wisely, could represent a “win-win-win” opportunity. But the promise of a lower-carbon transportation future can only be realized through federal and state policies that “count carbs and make carbs count.”

http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/technologies_and_fuels/biofuels/biofuels-an-important-part.html

[kristopher]

1. Good post.

It goes well with this one:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x194814

[JohnWxy]

2. Good post. I liked that chart. They do need to update GHG number for ethanol to 51% lessthan gas

as an industry average as shown in latest research. THe number for the industry average they are using is from FArrell and Kammens meta-analysis published Jan 2006 based on data as old as mid - 1990's.

Here's a link, for those interested in such things, to the latest peer reviewed research (published in Yale's Journal of Industrial Ecology, Volume 13, Issue 1 (p 58-74):


http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/121647166/PDFSTART

Direct effect GHG emissions were estimated to be equivalent to a 48% to 59% reduction compared to gasoline, a twofold to threefold greater reduction than reported in previous studies. Ethanol-to-petroleum output/input ratios ranged from 10:1 to 13:1 but could be increased to 19:1 if farmers adopted high-yield progressive crop and soil management practices. An advanced closed-loop biorefinery with anaerobic digestion reduced GHG emissions by 67% and increased the net energy ratio to 2.2, from 1.5 to 1.8 for the ost common systems. Such improved technologies have the potential to move corn-ethanol closer to the hypothetical performance of cellulosic biofuels {empahisis my own_JW}.

Based on findings of the study at link they can update "Corn ethanol, Low" to 67% less than gasoline.

I wonder if Calif is going to do as this article seems to think they will:

"California, the nation's largest market for transportation fuel, is developing a Low Carbon Fuel Standard that will require fuel providers to demonstrate reductions in global warming pollution per unit of energy delivered, regardless of fuel source."

In other words evaluate all the effects of gasoline direct AND INDIRECT. THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE and consistent.

good stuff. (especially if California does evaluate all fuels as to direct and indirect effects).