Oregon biofuel study: Slow down!
Filed under: Biodiesel, Ethanol, Manufacturing/Plants, MPG, Legislation and Policy
Economists from Oregon State University released a study Monday called "Biofuel Potential in Oregon: Background and Evaluation Options." It also could have been called, "Not so fast." The Albany Democrat-Herald sifted through the report and offers these conclusions:
- Per unit of energy, corn ethanol is estimated to cost 750 percent more than gasoline
- Canola biodiesel is estimated to cost 125 percent more than petroleum diesel
- Cellulosic wood-based ethanol is nearly 200 percent higher than gasoline
- Other avenues aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions are more cost effective than a shift to biofuels
- If Oregon produced 50 million gallons each of corn and wood ethanol and 2 million gallons of canola biodiesel, net energy would be just over 1 percent of the annual consumption of oil energy.
- That same production would only reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by just one-eighth of 1 percent.
You can find the entire report here.
[Source: Albany Democrat Herald]
Paris Preview: Honda Insight concept to be new global hybrid
BREAKING: Is this the production Chevy Volt in Transformers 2?
Spy Shot: Production interior of Chevy Volt (maybe)
Pics aplenty: 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid
Paris Preview: Chevy Cruze official pics released
Honda to debut Prius-fighter concept this Thursday
New Ford EcoBoost 3.5L V6 engine smiles for the camera
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
2-01-2007 @ 10:06AM
Howard Lee Harkness said...
I suspect the "750" is a typo. 150% is probably closer, although ethanol is still a lousy fuel, and corn is definitely not the optimal feedstock. Ethanol does make a good octane booster for the vastly superior fuel, gasoline.
Maybe they were talking about hydrogen, if they really said 750%. That would be at least in the ballpark for hydrogen, although I suspect it's actually worse than that.
Too bad they didn't look at algae biodiesel. Or, for that matter, several other veggie oil feedstocks. Or even SVO. I believe that non-food veggie oil, either as SVO or biodiesel feedstock will prove to be substantially more economical than dinofuel in the long run.
Reply
2-01-2007 @ 11:42AM
Steve Savage said...
I think this assessment misses the point. Oregon is probably not going to be the right place to grow dedicated energy crops. It is a better place for the mix of high value crops it grows today. The place to grow something like Miscanthus is in the South East US where very high tonnages could be achieved on land that isn't that great for crops like corn or soy. Yes of course we should also work on conservation. Its not like one or the other
Steve Savage, PhD
Reply
2-01-2007 @ 2:24PM
Tim said...
Dr Savage- Since transport dramatically adds to inefficiency, it stands to reason that biomass energy sources need to be distributed as close to their consumption point as possible and varied to match the local growing conditions.
This is why I like GMs E-Flex idea. Range Extender choices can be dictated by the availability of locally produced biofuels and the electricity can come from local sources even as close as home PV solar and wind. Vehicle to Grid (V2G). Vehicle to Home (V2H), Rooftop to Vehicle (R2V).
Reply