Ag & Energy Links
Ag & Energy || Biofuels
|| Renewable Fuels Standard || Farm Bill || BCO/Pubs || Briefings || links
|
Does ethanol have a
negative net energy balance? (Requiring more energy to produce
than it provides)
The energy balance of ethanol is found by
taking the amount of energy contained in a gallon of ethanol
(roughly 76,000 Btu) and subtracting the amount of energy that
goes into producing a gallon of ethanol. Critics of ethanol have
argued that it has a negative net energy value (
NEV
), meaning that ethanol requires more energy to make than it
actually produces. However,
over the years numerous studies have shown that ethanol does
indeed have a positive NEV.
Most recently, a 2002 study by the US Department of
Agriculture that accounts for gasoline and diesel fuel use,
fertilizers and a variety of other energy inputs in the
production, concluded that the energy balance of ethanol is
1.34:1.[1]
This means that ethanol “yields 34% more energy than it
takes to produce it, including growing the corn, harvesting it,
transporting it and distilling it into ethanol.”
These data are
consistent with a study by Dr. Bruce Dale,
Michigan
State
University
(2002), and a study by Argonne National Laboratory (1999).
The positive ratio is due mostly to technological advances in the ethanol
production process.
Advances in the areas most critical in determining
NEV
: corn yields, changes in
agricultural practices resulting in reduced energy inputs, and
advances in the corn to ethanol conversion process.
According to USDA, “energy requirements for
producing a gallon of ethanol are falling over time,” and that
higher energy costs will provide incentives for industries to
“become more energy efficient, which will continue to push the
NEV
of corn ethanol higher.” Here
are a few specifics as to why:
Corn
yield plays a critical role in determining the energy
balance of starch-based ethanol. In fact, a 1 percent increase
in corn yield raises
NEV
by 0.37 percent. Importantly,
with the exception of a few bad years, corn
yields have been increasing over time since 1975.
This means that farm resources are being used much more
efficiently because less energy (fossil fuel) is being put into
the growing process, while more ethanol is being produced.
|
U.S.
Corn Yield - Bushels/acre
 |
“Thanks
to better corn varieties, improved farming practices, and
farming conservation measures,
U.S.
corn yield per acre has increased over the last 30 years by over
50%, to about 125 bushel (btu) per harvested acre”
- Wang et al.
Argonne
National Laboratory, 1999
|
|
Ethanol
plants are the largest fossil-energy-consuming component in
the corn-to-ethanol fuel cycle.
Today’s ethanol plants use far less energy than in the
past. According to
USDA, the majority of ethanol plants in production today have
been extensively modernized utilizing the latest advances in
ethanol production technology.
In fact, USDA reported that by 1991 changes in production
patterns (larger plants and energy efficiency innovations)
“reduced the processing energy required to produce a gallon of
ethanol from 120,000 Btu in 1981 to 43,000 Btu in 1991.”[2]
This,
combined with substantial electricity conservation efforts
through cogeneration and alcohol dehydration have resulted in
“considerable energy savings.”
All of these factors translate into a higher net energy
balance for ethanol.
According to USDA, fertilizer accounts for about 45% of the energy required to grow
corn. However, the
use of fertilizer in grain production, which includes chemical
inputs such as nitrogen, potash and phosphate,
has been in general decline since the early 1980’s.[3]
In the years from 1985-2000,
nitrogen used per planted acre of corn declined from 140 lbs. to
132 lbs; phosphate from 60 lbs. to 47 lbs. per acre; and potash
from 84 lbs. to 51 lbs. per acre. The most significant of these
decreases is nitrogen, as “it has a much higher average energy
requirement than phosphorous and potash fertilizers.” |
Reduced energy
use intensity of ethanol plants[4]
 |
Ž
New technologies in the ethanol conversion process have
dramatically reduced energy use intensity of ethanol plants over
the last 20 years.
Ž
Corn-based ethanol has a net energy balance of 20,000–25,000
Btu. This
is due to improvements in corn farming and corn-to-ethanol
conversion.
Ž
Cellulosic ethanol has a net energy balance of over 60,000
Btu per gallon, largely due to the fact that little fossil
energy is used in biomass farming and cellulosic ethanol
conversion. It is also assumed that extra electricity generated
in cellulosic ethanol plants will be exported into the electric
grid.
|
|
A
1999 study by Argonne National Laboratory found the energy
balance of cellulosic
ethanol to be in excess of 60,000 Btu per gallon.[5]
Given that feedstocks for cellulosic
ethanol are essentially waste products like corn stover, rice
bagasse, forest
thinnings or even municipal waste, there are relatively
few chemical and energy inputs that go into the farming of
feedstocks for cellulosic ethanol.
A secondary factor, although to a much lesser extent, is
the fact that cellulosic ethanol plants will presumably produce
“extra” energy that can be fed into the power grid.
Doing so will effectively displace the use of electricity
produced in power plants, which for the most part rely upon
fossil fuels.
|
| Then
why do I keep hearing that ethanol has a negative energy
balance? |
|
Controversial
research from Dr. David Pimentel of
Cornell
University
concludes that ethanol has a negative net energy balance.
Several recent studies have challenged the methodology,
transparency, and statistical basis of Dr. Pimentel’s
findings. Here are a
few reasons why[6]:
Ž
Dr. Pimentel’s corn
yield statistics date from 1992, meaning that the study does
not take into account recent advances in the efficiency of corn
growing. Corn yields
have increased by over 10% since then with significantly lower
inputs such as fertilizer, pesticides, etc., per bushel.[7]
Ž
Dr. Pimentel’s figures for energy used in the ethanol conversion process date from 1979.
Today’s ethanol plants use far less energy per gallon
of ethanol produced.
|
|
Ethanol’s Net
Energy Value:
A Summary of Major Studies Since 1995
| Authors
and Date |
NEV
[Btu] |
| Pimentel
(2001) –
Cornell
University
|
-
33,562 |
| Lorenz
and Morris (1995) - Institute
for Local Self-Reliance |
+
30,589 |
| Agri.and
Agri-Food, CAN (1999) |
+
29,826 |
| Wang
et al. (1999) –
Argonne
National Laboratory |
+
22,500 |
| Shapouri
et al. (1995) - USDA |
+
20,436 |
| Kim
and Dale (2002) –
Michigan
State
University
|
+
23,886-35,463 |
|
|
What is biodiesel’s energy balance?
A 1998 joint study by the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
concluded that biodiesel yields 3.2 units of fuel product energy
for every unit of fossil energy consumed in its life cycle.[8]
In
other words, the biodiesel life cycle produces more than three
times as much energy in its final fuel product as it uses in
fossil energy. |
|
 |
Ž
Biodiesel yields 3.2 units of fuel energy for every unit
of fossil fuel consumed in its life cycle.
Ž
Petroleum diesel yields 0.83 units of fuel energy per
unit of fossil energy consumed |
The production
process of biodiesel and diesel is practically the same in terms
of efficiency in the conversion of raw materials into fuel.
The difference is that biodiesel is able to use renewable
resources in its production – soybeans and rapeseed oils, or
used frying oil and unwanted animal fats – while conventional
diesel relies on fossil fuel resources.
In fact, petroleum diesel’s life cycle yields only 0.83
units of fuel product per unit of fossil energy consumed.
|
| [1] USDA:
“The Energy Balance of Ethanol: An Update.” National
Agricultural Statistics Service, USDA. Wang, Shapouri, Duffield,
Aug 2002.
[2]
Hohmann, Neil, and C. Matthew Rendleman. Emerging
Technologies in Ethanol Production. AIB-663.
U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, January
1993.
[3] USDA: “The Energy Balance of Ethanol: An
Update.” National Agricultural Statistics Service, USDA. Wang,
Shapouri, Duffield, Aug 2002.
[4]
EESI Congressional Briefing: Michael
Wang,
Argonne
National Laboratory,
7/31/02
[5] Argonne
National Laboratory: “Effects of Fuel Ethanol Use on
Fuel-Cycle Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emissions,” Wang, Saricks,
Santini, January 1999.
[6]
EESI Congressional Briefing: Bruce Dale,
Michigan
State
University
,
7/31/02
.
[7] Colorado
School
of
Mines
, National Corn Growers Association: “A
Rebuttal to ‘Ethanol Fuels: Energy, Economics and
Environmental Impacts’ by D. Pimentel,” Graboski,
McClelland, May 2002.
[8]
EESI Congressional Briefing: John Sheehan, National
Renewable Energy Laboratory,
7/31/02
. |
|